Brought to me by the same guy who sent out a bulk email to my workplace on the day the governor signed the workplace carry law (where you can legally have your gun in your car) stating that my workplace was exempt and they would keep us all safe from harm....
I get an email (again a group email) with a warning from the Chief of Police stating that some wallets have been stolen from supposedly secure locations and for everyone to check their stuff. The email was nebulous about the location(s) from which the wallets were lifted so I write and ask for some more detailed information. I get back the name of the institution. One word. Thinking that I had not made myself clear, I write and ask specifically, which locations on a very large, multi-building property, were affected. Again, I get back the same one-word answer.
SO.... I write again asking specifically, was it building A, B, C or multiple buildings since a nebulous warning really does no one any good.
The answer I got I think was worse than the one-word ones I'd gotten previously.
I'm 'informed' that more specific information was not included because they didn't want anyone to feel 'safe' since the bandit was mobile. My stance is that if we know where this kind of crap happened, then perhaps someone who maybe saw something but didn't think much of it (like folks dressed as janitorial staff going into specific offices or visitors or something) might make a connection that they might not have otherwise. But then I'm a data person and more data is better than less.
This kind of logic doesn't make me feel safer at work though!
2 years ago