Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yet the consequences do not deter a heck of a lot of people from attending to " personal business" while on the clock.
Oranges.
We are permitted a bit of time to attend to personal business. That isn't what my link was talking about, unless you simply consider surfing porn at work personal business.
We are permitted a bit of time to attend to personal business. That isn't what my link was talking about, unless you simply consider surfing porn at work personal business.
Sue spends considerable time shopping online while at work.
Bill spends considerable time posting on online forums while at work.
Sandra spends considerable time on an online dating site while at work.
Tom looks at porn while at work.
What's the difference? There's nothing illegal about any of these activities.
Employees who would not consider stealing from their employer rationalize theft of employer time regardless if their employer is public or private.
Actually there is. A business could get sued for porn at work. Government agencies can get sued.
Again, quit changing the subject.
A business can get sued for anything. What would be the basis of the lawsuit? How would someone prove they were harmed? Is looking at ( adult) porn more harmful than say, shopping on HSN or QVC? Both are personal business on company time.
We have both gone way off topic. Maybe you want to start a new thread?
The biggest irony of all these security breaches is that if someone HAD managed to assassinate President Obama it would immediately become a huge conspiracy because that level of incompetance can't just occur in the government?
OK, so she's not actually taking responsibility. It's actually the patriarchy here, male privilege. All you guys on this board are the reason she no longer is the director.
Some may recall about a year ago, a woman tried to force her car through a WH security fence and while doing so, hit a SS agent. She backed up and sped away with Capital Police in pursuit for 12 blocks She was killed by 5 bullets. Later it was determined her baby was in the back seat of her car and she was unarmed. There was immediate outrage about excessive force.
The family filed a $75 million wrongful death suit and claimed she was lost and did not mean to plow into the fence or hit anyone. Not clear how the family knew she was lost or her intentions, given she was dead.
Her BF ( baby dad?) disclosed that she thought Obama was monitoring her. Reportedly, she had prescriptions for medications to stabilize depression, schizophrenia and a bipolar disorder.
The internet is chock full of online stories defending this woman and condemning the SS and Capital Police for an over reaction.
I can appreciate that there might be some sensitivity about blowing away an intruder who appeared unarmed, as he crossed the white house lawn.
There seems to be a tendency to blame government instead of the people committing crimes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
