308win
Member
Whomever is administering the test for Auto Zone has determined that shooting equates to risky behavior would be my guess.
Strange gun question on a job application!?
- Thread starter Axman
- Start date
- Status
armoredman
Member
Hmm, they never get me quite right.
If it is left blank it is assumed your answer is "yes" so you should probaly answer honestly if looking for work. It is not against the law and I am sure it is not an afirmative action question because it does not deal with race. Have some fun with it: "why yes, especially when what I am shooting at is running", or "depends on what I am shooting at" or "Why, you have somthin that needs killin". At least you will find out who is reading your apps.
Kinda of like the sex question, why put M or F when you can put "as often as possible".
Cmon lighten up.
Kinda of like the sex question, why put M or F when you can put "as often as possible".
Cmon lighten up.
kd7nqb
Member
I had to do an online integrity test when I joined my current security company and I was actually there when they reviewed the results. It did make a recommonedation on my propencity for violence, dependebility and many other things BUT it also told them which questions contributed to that determination. One of them was a basic BS gun question and the HR guy said "God if we disqualed all the gun nuts we would not have any employee's". So sometimes managers do use common sense. I am sure that being in the security industry our rates of "Gun Guy" are higher than average and that may contribute to the awarness by HR (who are all current or former LEO anyway). Frankly I feared my sit down "personality profile" more knowing that everybody in the room but we had been an LEO.
PAshooter
Member
Law Enforcement Officer
Interesting that someone mentioned a fascination with weapons is a precursor to...workplace shootings?!?! LOL. My co-workers have got to be mortified...in 3 years flat i've gone from not knowing anything about guns to owning 6 of them, shooting every week, and trying to convince EVERYONE HERE to come with me every single weekend. Woops.
A few years back
I took a risk assessment questionaire as part of my company physical. There were no questions about guns on it at all. It did ask about driving the speed limit, wearing your seatbelt, drinking, smoking, have you been in a fight in the last ....etc. having no reason not to, I answered honestly.
Now, here's the kicker, when they returnd the results, under the heading of "things you can do to reduce your health risks", among other things was the advice to "avoid handguns".
I went to my boss and pitched a fit. Since there was clear evidence of bias (and the boss agreed), and since the company is a govt. contractor who naturally wishes to avoid any appearance of unfairness or discrimination, they took it seriously. The next year, the used a different company for their risk assement!
I took a risk assessment questionaire as part of my company physical. There were no questions about guns on it at all. It did ask about driving the speed limit, wearing your seatbelt, drinking, smoking, have you been in a fight in the last ....etc. having no reason not to, I answered honestly.
Now, here's the kicker, when they returnd the results, under the heading of "things you can do to reduce your health risks", among other things was the advice to "avoid handguns".
I went to my boss and pitched a fit. Since there was clear evidence of bias (and the boss agreed), and since the company is a govt. contractor who naturally wishes to avoid any appearance of unfairness or discrimination, they took it seriously. The next year, the used a different company for their risk assement!
yhtomit
Member
Personality read-back
Doc Zinn wrote:
Perhaps so; the tests should be good for *something* at least. (And I don't know what level of detail you were treated to.) But there's something to consider about the problem of reading into such things, which is that even "detailed' reports (if sufficiently plausible) can be interpreted by many people as fitting them to a tee -- no matter that the people themselves are very different.
Here's a very interesting short(ish) article on Cold Reading techniques; in particular, I think the section on C.R. Snyder and horoscopes is especially applicable, though. (Starts with the graf which begins "There are two major aspects of Barnum descriptions which affect the the degree of acceptance by subjects. ...")
EDIT: Here's the story, which I somehow forgot to add in when I first typed this!
http://www.denisdutton.com/cold_reading.htm
And remember, that's about horoscopes -- when analysis a) is based on questions the subject has actually supplied (truthfully and honestly, or at least pretty close) and comes from a "scientific" source, I bet it seems even more convincing and accurate -- and of course, hopefully it *is* even more accurate, I'm not saying otherwise
The rest of that paper also makes for good reading ...
WRT to the particular question that started the test, though, I wonder how people who don't shoot guns should answer it! It's a non sequitur to someone who doesn't find guns fun to shoot if the reason for that is that he doesn't shoot guns at all. It's like asking whether you bike to the store when you visit Tunisia. The answer No isn't quite the whole story! (The answer Yes could be, if you in fact bike when you visit Tunisia.) All in all, it seems like a question that doesn't yield much info, since I bet most people (city dwellers especially) have *never* fired a gun. (Though that's a number I'd be curious about, too.)
timothy
p.s. I enjoy taking (less now than several years ago) personality assessment tests, mostly because I'm vain, and the results are usually phrased in positive terms And my first real employer out of college required (and posted on a bulletin board for all) that employees take Meyers-Briggs evals. My fellow copyeditor and I had identical or perhaps one-factor-different results, whatever that's worth.
Doc Zinn wrote:
Perhaps so; the tests should be good for *something* at least. (And I don't know what level of detail you were treated to.) But there's something to consider about the problem of reading into such things, which is that even "detailed' reports (if sufficiently plausible) can be interpreted by many people as fitting them to a tee -- no matter that the people themselves are very different.
Here's a very interesting short(ish) article on Cold Reading techniques; in particular, I think the section on C.R. Snyder and horoscopes is especially applicable, though. (Starts with the graf which begins "There are two major aspects of Barnum descriptions which affect the the degree of acceptance by subjects. ...")
EDIT: Here's the story, which I somehow forgot to add in when I first typed this!
http://www.denisdutton.com/cold_reading.htm
And remember, that's about horoscopes -- when analysis a) is based on questions the subject has actually supplied (truthfully and honestly, or at least pretty close) and comes from a "scientific" source, I bet it seems even more convincing and accurate -- and of course, hopefully it *is* even more accurate, I'm not saying otherwise
The rest of that paper also makes for good reading ...
WRT to the particular question that started the test, though, I wonder how people who don't shoot guns should answer it! It's a non sequitur to someone who doesn't find guns fun to shoot if the reason for that is that he doesn't shoot guns at all. It's like asking whether you bike to the store when you visit Tunisia. The answer No isn't quite the whole story! (The answer Yes could be, if you in fact bike when you visit Tunisia.) All in all, it seems like a question that doesn't yield much info, since I bet most people (city dwellers especially) have *never* fired a gun. (Though that's a number I'd be curious about, too.)
timothy
p.s. I enjoy taking (less now than several years ago) personality assessment tests, mostly because I'm vain, and the results are usually phrased in positive terms
And my first real employer out of college required (and posted on a bulletin board for all) that employees take Meyers-Briggs evals. My fellow copyeditor and I had identical or perhaps one-factor-different results, whatever that's worth.
Last edited:
skinnyguy
Member
I work with a man who used to work for Auto Zone, so he most likely took that test. I know for a fact that he currently owns several MilSurp rifles, several handguns, and what the MSM would call a "huge stockpile" of ammunition. So, I would guess that he answered "HELL-O YES!!!!" on that particular question, it obviously didn't deter Auto Zone from hiring him.
I "failed" one of those personality tests once. My thoughts on certain things are; Thievery is for those who are too lazy to earn something, lying is for people who are scared of the truth, standing up and saying "I screwed up" is easier than hiding the truth or placing blame where it doesn't belong. I failed because the results said "he is TOO HONEST".
I "failed" one of those personality tests once. My thoughts on certain things are; Thievery is for those who are too lazy to earn something, lying is for people who are scared of the truth, standing up and saying "I screwed up" is easier than hiding the truth or placing blame where it doesn't belong. I failed because the results said "he is TOO HONEST".
Neo-Luddite
Member
Interesting that someone mentioned a fascination with weapons is a precursor to...workplace shootings?!?! LOL.
It was in the employee handbook (probably still is) for a company I was at for some time in the fast printing/shipping industry. I was an operations manager and was very open about being a gun nut if anyone cared to talk about the subject or in small talk, etc. I'm a firm believer in keeping my public self as close to my private (or 'true') self as possible; Veneers are for cabinets and woodwork.
Anyway, like most HR authored items, the 'warning signs' list was useless except that it gave HR something to do before they nocked off early to go shop at Nordstrom's. As far as I've seen, HR writes the boilerplate that legal signs off on. I suppose if you made the mistake of hiring someone who INDEED had an unhealthy fascination with weapons (yes, there could be--imagine gomer pile and charlene in 'FMJ') you'd have policy grounds to dump him off. Pretty unlikely that there wouldn't be multiple reasons anyway.
It was in the employee handbook (probably still is) for a company I was at for some time in the fast printing/shipping industry. I was an operations manager and was very open about being a gun nut if anyone cared to talk about the subject or in small talk, etc. I'm a firm believer in keeping my public self as close to my private (or 'true') self as possible; Veneers are for cabinets and woodwork.
Anyway, like most HR authored items, the 'warning signs' list was useless except that it gave HR something to do before they nocked off early to go shop at Nordstrom's. As far as I've seen, HR writes the boilerplate that legal signs off on. I suppose if you made the mistake of hiring someone who INDEED had an unhealthy fascination with weapons (yes, there could be--imagine gomer pile and charlene in 'FMJ') you'd have policy grounds to dump him off. Pretty unlikely that there wouldn't be multiple reasons anyway.
I would suspect the gun question at the doctor has nothing to do with assessing lead poisoning risk and more to do with possible endangerment to children or domestic violence. I have read articles about the AMA and many doctors on the bandwagon that gun violence is a social disease/epidemic (sounds like West Side Story -- see below for fun). They may well try to pursue any connection they can to "at risk" children.
I think either a blank or none of your business is better than a yes. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a future Shild Protection action..."
GEE, OFFICER KRUPKE
ACTION
Dear kindly Sergeant Krupke,
You gotta understand,
It's just our bringin' up-ke
That gets us out of hand.
Our mothers all are junkies,
Our fathers all are drunks.
Golly Moses, natcherly we're punks!
ACTION AND JETS
Gee, Officer Krupke, we're very upset;
We never had the love that ev'ry child oughta get.
We ain't no delinquents,
We're misunderstood.
Deep down inside us there is good!
ACTION
There is good!
ALL
There is good, there is good,
There is untapped good!
Like inside, the worst of us is good!
SNOWBOY: (Spoken) That's a touchin' good story.
ACTION: (Spoken) Lemme tell it to the world!
SNOWBOY: Just tell it to the judge.
ACTION
Dear kindly Judge, your Honor,
My parents treat me rough.
With all their marijuana,
They won't give me a puff.
They didn't wanna have me,
But somehow I was had.
Leapin' lizards! That's why I'm so bad!
DIESEL: (As Judge) Right!
Officer Krupke, you're really a square;
This boy don't need a judge, he needs an analyst's care!
It's just his neurosis that oughta be curbed.
He's psychologic'ly disturbed!
ACTION
I'm disturbed!
JETS
We're disturbed, we're disturbed,
We're the most disturbed,
Like we're psychologic'ly disturbed.
DIESEL: (Spoken, as Judge) In the opinion on this court, this child is depraved on account he ain't had a normal home.
ACTION: (Spoken) Hey, I'm depraved on account I'm deprived.
DIESEL: So take him to a headshrinker.
ACTION (Sings)
My father is a bastard,
My ma's an S.O.B.
My grandpa's always plastered,
My grandma pushes tea.
My sister wears a mustache,
My brother wears a dress.
Goodness gracious, that's why I'm a mess!
A-RAB: (As Psychiatrist) Yes!
Officer Krupke, you're really a slob.
This boy don't need a doctor, just a good honest job.
Society's played him a terrible trick,
And sociologic'ly he's sick!
ACTION
I am sick!
ALL
We are sick, we are sick,
We are sick, sick, sick,
Like we're sociologically sick!
A-RAB: In my opinion, this child don't need to have his head shrunk at all. Juvenile delinquency is purely a social disease!
ACTION: Hey, I got a social disease!
A-RAB: So take him to a social worker!
ACTION
Dear kindly social worker,
They say go earn a buck.
Like be a soda jerker,
Which means like be a schumck.
It's not I'm anti-social,
I'm only anti-work.
Gloryosky! That's why I'm a jerk!
BABY JOHN: (As Female Social Worker)
Eek!
Officer Krupke, you've done it again.
This boy don't need a job, he needs a year in the pen.
It ain't just a question of misunderstood;
Deep down inside him, he's no good!
ACTION
I'm no good!
ALL
We're no good, we're no good!
We're no earthly good,
Like the best of us is no damn good!
DIESEL (As Judge)
The trouble is he's crazy.
A-RAB (As Psychiatrist)
The trouble is he drinks.
BABY JOHN (As Female Social Worker)
The trouble is he's lazy.
DIESEL
The trouble is he stinks.
A-RAB
The trouble is he's growing.
BABY JOHN
The trouble is he's grown.
ALL
Krupke, we got troubles of our own!
Gee, Officer Krupke,
We're down on our knees,
'Cause no one wants a fellow with a social disease.
Gee, Officer Krupke,
What are we to do?
Gee, Officer Krupke,
Krup you!
I think either a blank or none of your business is better than a yes. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a future Shild Protection action..."
GEE, OFFICER KRUPKE
ACTION
Dear kindly Sergeant Krupke,
You gotta understand,
It's just our bringin' up-ke
That gets us out of hand.
Our mothers all are junkies,
Our fathers all are drunks.
Golly Moses, natcherly we're punks!
ACTION AND JETS
Gee, Officer Krupke, we're very upset;
We never had the love that ev'ry child oughta get.
We ain't no delinquents,
We're misunderstood.
Deep down inside us there is good!
ACTION
There is good!
ALL
There is good, there is good,
There is untapped good!
Like inside, the worst of us is good!
SNOWBOY: (Spoken) That's a touchin' good story.
ACTION: (Spoken) Lemme tell it to the world!
SNOWBOY: Just tell it to the judge.
ACTION
Dear kindly Judge, your Honor,
My parents treat me rough.
With all their marijuana,
They won't give me a puff.
They didn't wanna have me,
But somehow I was had.
Leapin' lizards! That's why I'm so bad!
DIESEL: (As Judge) Right!
Officer Krupke, you're really a square;
This boy don't need a judge, he needs an analyst's care!
It's just his neurosis that oughta be curbed.
He's psychologic'ly disturbed!
ACTION
I'm disturbed!
JETS
We're disturbed, we're disturbed,
We're the most disturbed,
Like we're psychologic'ly disturbed.
DIESEL: (Spoken, as Judge) In the opinion on this court, this child is depraved on account he ain't had a normal home.
ACTION: (Spoken) Hey, I'm depraved on account I'm deprived.
DIESEL: So take him to a headshrinker.
ACTION (Sings)
My father is a bastard,
My ma's an S.O.B.
My grandpa's always plastered,
My grandma pushes tea.
My sister wears a mustache,
My brother wears a dress.
Goodness gracious, that's why I'm a mess!
A-RAB: (As Psychiatrist) Yes!
Officer Krupke, you're really a slob.
This boy don't need a doctor, just a good honest job.
Society's played him a terrible trick,
And sociologic'ly he's sick!
ACTION
I am sick!
ALL
We are sick, we are sick,
We are sick, sick, sick,
Like we're sociologically sick!
A-RAB: In my opinion, this child don't need to have his head shrunk at all. Juvenile delinquency is purely a social disease!
ACTION: Hey, I got a social disease!
A-RAB: So take him to a social worker!
ACTION
Dear kindly social worker,
They say go earn a buck.
Like be a soda jerker,
Which means like be a schumck.
It's not I'm anti-social,
I'm only anti-work.
Gloryosky! That's why I'm a jerk!
BABY JOHN: (As Female Social Worker)
Eek!
Officer Krupke, you've done it again.
This boy don't need a job, he needs a year in the pen.
It ain't just a question of misunderstood;
Deep down inside him, he's no good!
ACTION
I'm no good!
ALL
We're no good, we're no good!
We're no earthly good,
Like the best of us is no damn good!
DIESEL (As Judge)
The trouble is he's crazy.
A-RAB (As Psychiatrist)
The trouble is he drinks.
BABY JOHN (As Female Social Worker)
The trouble is he's lazy.
DIESEL
The trouble is he stinks.
A-RAB
The trouble is he's growing.
BABY JOHN
The trouble is he's grown.
ALL
Krupke, we got troubles of our own!
Gee, Officer Krupke,
We're down on our knees,
'Cause no one wants a fellow with a social disease.
Gee, Officer Krupke,
What are we to do?
Gee, Officer Krupke,
Krup you!
bogie
Member
I wonder if I'm gonna get in trouble...
On my Jury Duty form (end of the month!), I wrote "Human" where it asked for "race."
Almost wrote "Nascar."
On my Jury Duty form (end of the month!), I wrote "Human" where it asked for "race."
Almost wrote "Nascar."
Eleven Mike
Member
Show tunes!
I told you guys there would be trouble if we allowed the Pink Pistols in here.
I told you guys there would be trouble if we allowed the Pink Pistols in here.
DRZinn
Member
That occurred to me, but trust me, this was very precise, and very accurate.
yhtomit
Member
Perhaps it was a hot read, then
DrZinn:
I guess I'll always lean toward skepticism on psychologists' conclusions, esp. when based on standardized tests. Maybe that's just me being irrational!
But if the test matched your own perceptions of yourself, I sure can't contradict that
By the way, I mentioned a paper in the above post, but actually forgot to link to it -- fixed in an edit.
Cheers,
timothy
p.s. Guns, guns, guns.
DrZinn:
I guess I'll always lean toward skepticism on psychologists' conclusions, esp. when based on standardized tests. Maybe that's just me being irrational!
But if the test matched your own perceptions of yourself, I sure can't contradict that
By the way, I mentioned a paper in the above post, but actually forgot to link to it -- fixed in an edit.
Cheers,
timothy
p.s. Guns, guns, guns.
Last edited:
DRZinn
Member
Not only did it match my most honest perceptions of myself, it even told me that I'm a little more A, but I try to seem a little more B.
230RN
2A was "political" when it was first adopted.
Gee, I'm not looking for a job, but just for the heck of it, I think I'll pick up an app from Auto Zone and see what happens.
sb350hp asks about wanting a List Of Acronyms. You can open up another copy of your browser, hit Google, and paste in the acronym. Ninety-nine percent of the time the definition for the acronym will be clear from one of the first pop-up blurbs for the hits, without your even actually going to any of the sites. Then you can click back to the original site you were on.
There are LOAs out there, too, but this method is slicker, quicker, and easier.
{And "LOA" is the accepted acronym for "Length Over All," usually of a loaded cartridge in a firearms/THR context.)
Basically, I hate acronyms. I dealt with a snake pit full of them once when I was fulfilling a dot-gov requirement. HCYHNIHCTCB.
("Holy Cow You Have No Idea How Complicated That Can Be.")
I was tempted to write my analysis using nothing but acronyms . But the money was too good.
sb350hp asks about wanting a List Of Acronyms. You can open up another copy of your browser, hit Google, and paste in the acronym. Ninety-nine percent of the time the definition for the acronym will be clear from one of the first pop-up blurbs for the hits, without your even actually going to any of the sites. Then you can click back to the original site you were on.
There are LOAs out there, too, but this method is slicker, quicker, and easier.
{And "LOA" is the accepted acronym for "Length Over All," usually of a loaded cartridge in a firearms/THR context.)
Basically, I hate acronyms. I dealt with a snake pit full of them once when I was fulfilling a dot-gov requirement. HCYHNIHCTCB.
("Holy Cow You Have No Idea How Complicated That Can Be.")
I was tempted to write my analysis using nothing but acronyms . But the money was too good.
You think the alphabet soup is bad here at THR? Spend a few minutes over at marineocs.com
If you've got military experience you know what i'm talking about.
Kinda funny though... when I read stuff like that I don't think twice, but if someone is looking over my shoulder they think "***."
If you've got military experience you know what i'm talking about.
Kinda funny though... when I read stuff like that I don't think twice, but if someone is looking over my shoulder they think "***."
Deanimator
Member
I've taken the Minnesota Mult-Phasic Personality Index (MMPI) a couple of times, when applying for government jobs.
One question which appears MULTIPLE times in the MMPI is, "I have always been fascinated by fire." It then appears in various formulations, AT LEAST twice more through the test, "Fire has always fascinated me", "Of all of my fascinations, fire is the greatest", etc., etc., etc. The CIA can't seem to keep spies out, but I think they're relatively safe from [stupid] pyromaniacs...
PS - I'm also fairly amused by, "In the past, I've done some things so awful that I could never tell anyone about them."
One question which appears MULTIPLE times in the MMPI is, "I have always been fascinated by fire." It then appears in various formulations, AT LEAST twice more through the test, "Fire has always fascinated me", "Of all of my fascinations, fire is the greatest", etc., etc., etc. The CIA can't seem to keep spies out, but I think they're relatively safe from [stupid] pyromaniacs...
PS - I'm also fairly amused by, "In the past, I've done some things so awful that I could never tell anyone about them."
busy_squirrel
Member
Sounds like a question to double-check your honesty. I don't know any shooters who hate it, and I don't know any haters who shoot, so maybe they just wanna see if your story is congruent.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
