[SeaGypsy]

'Feeling safe' is arguably a state of mental health, up to the point where there is no doubt that safety is lacking, at which point fight or flight takes over- paranoia is rationally trying to pre-empt the actual requirement for instinctual action- so the question is really about that weird area of psych- the over layering of instinct with rationality- which differs in every person & in every situation- so there is no blanket answer to your specific question. The guy might end up being a great dude you missed out on meeting because of your hyper-rationality, or he just might be the 1 in a million & hack you up, ending up on death row for 20 years before a mildly botched execution.

[Outcast_Searcher]

You have a right to take another job if you don't like the kinds of customers your current job requires you to make sales calls for.

If you're going to base your perceptions of reality on horror movies, don't expect to have exactly accurate perceptions.

[SeaGypsy]

You may think this is freaky but- I have worked (&would do again) in a field called 'forensic mental health'. All clients have done very serious crimes, but have a diagnosis prohibiting prosecution. Often I have been in 1 on 1 situations from Friday night to Monday morning, with clients who on average once every few weeks do their very darnedest to damage persons or property. I could write a book about the crap that went on, but my point is more about mitigated risk.
In these situations, I had a 'safe room' with a one way locking heavy door, 3 methods of communication, authority to flee & call police at any time. We were taught to expect atrocious behaviour & hired on the basis of being able to keep cool & effectively communicate. Standard pay is over $1k AUD for a weekend, demand for experienced workers is huge. I am a person who trusts my instincts, having learned a lot in my gypsy life, but I need money & I'm OK with calculated risk. If plane tickets & rice were free I would never work for money again.

[SeaGypsy]

Therapy works good.

[Cog]

You should move to a state like Maryland or Hawaii. You won't have to worry about anyone being armed except for the criminals. That should make you feel a lot safer.

[Cog]

If it makes you feel any better, the survivalist/prepper, whose home you service, is probably more worried about you then you are of him. When I have a service technician come to my house, I generally make sure my preps and guns are well concealed.

So what does this dude do exactly that makes you feel paranoid? Does he hover around while you work or what?

[SeaGypsy]

Baha, I was referring to po.com therapy lol

[ROCKMAN]

baha - You make some valid points. But answer this: it's 2 AM and you hear someone kicking in your front door: would you rather be armed or unarmed at that point? Of course the reality is that you're much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver then a home invader. But that doesn't change the validity of my question...armed or unarmed?

At one time I used to teach firearm safety. Trust me: there are lots of folks out there, regardless of training, that shouldn't be armed. I refused to train a number of them after some profiling. Are you one of those folks who would be dangerous if armed? From what you've said probably not. But once again: if you or someone you loved had life threatened would you rather be armed or not? Likewise there are a lot of folks out there (especially those with drinking problems) that shouldn't be allowed to drive. So what would be safer for all of us: banning guns or banning bad drivers? Obviously banning bad drivers would save many more lives then banning guns, right? So setting knee jerk emotions aside which would you vote for first: banning firearms or bad drivers?

[yellowcanoe]

baha - You make some valid points. But answer this: it's 2 AM and you hear someone kicking in your front door: would you rather be armed or unarmed at that point? Of course the reality is that you're much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver then a home invader. But that doesn't change the validity of my question...armed or unarmed?

This scenario is likely the number one reason why people want to own a handgun for self defense. The gun lobby likes to project the idea that we'd all be safer if everyone was armed. All I see is the potential for a dispute between two people to escalate to an exchange of gun fire, or for someone to misread a situation and unnecessarily kill someone. Even police officers who are trained to deal with confrontational situations sometimes overreact. There's also the toll of accidental shootings related to having loaded, unsecured handguns in the home.

I'm happier living where ownership of handguns is heavily restricted. It means I can't buy a handgun for self defense, but it also means that in the unlikely event that someone breaks into my home they aren't likely to be armed either. The statistics are clearly on my side -- the incidence of gun related deaths is far lower in Canada than it is in the US.

My father-inlaw was having dinner with business colleagues in a private room in a restaurant somewhere in the US. A group of thieves came in and took all their wallets. Afterwards one of the men seated beside him pulled out a handgun and said he could have shot the thieves. My father-inlaw thought this was a ridiculous statement -- if anyone had brought out a handgun there would have been an exchange of gun fire and people would have been injured or killed. To risk injury or death made no sense because everyone could easily replace what had been stolen from them.

[C8]

You do not have a right to feel safe. Everybody has differing fears, I feel unsafe driving with people texting on the road. Feelings cannot be the basis of policy. Some fear people who sneeze.

[Lore]

Isn't that what your taxes are suppose to be going for? So, not only can you feel safe, but be safe from criminal pursuits? I mean your paying for the protection.

[Ibon]

So what would be safer for all of us: banning guns or banning bad drivers? Obviously banning bad drivers would save many more lives then banning guns, right?

Driving is a privilege. You lose it if you drink. Why is not possible to apply this to gun ownership? Owning a gun should not be enshrined in a constitutional amendment but be a privilege that is earned by the very basic set of tests; no mental illness, no felonies. Passing basic background checks, etc.

This is all about exaggerated paranoia over the government. If we allow the government to regulate fire arms this is the first step in the Federal government impinging on my 2nd amendment rights etc.

Lets bring Apneaman's comments over here from the other thread which was spot on.

What I find most amazing, is the screaming about constitutional rights and cold dead hand. Y'all just went through the last 15 years of having almost all your constitutional rights stripped away and sat on your fat asses and did nothing except mumble. Oh but when it comes to the 2nd amendment this is somehow the only one worth screaming about. You have all your guns, more than ever, but no real freedoms left to protect because I guess the game was on or some shit while they were being legislated away.

[davep]

Amen.

[GHung]

I'm a bit confused here, Baha. You say you're going to provide a service (what service?). Why would someone be a threat to someone coming to provide a service. Presumably, they either requested, or need, that service.

I worked in utility mapping and assessments which required me to follow power grids and other utilities wherever they led me; accessing rights-of-way onto private property, often unannounced. Ran into all sorts of crazy people and situations. Had to talk down an elderly lady with a shotgun who was afraid I was there to do harm or turn her power off. Walked up on booby-trapped plots of pot, even had a naked woman follow me around while I did my job. Chased by packs of wild dogs; spent most of a morning atop an elevated manhole until I threw my lunch one way and ran the other while they fought over my Bologna sandwiches. Ended up in court after witnessing (and reporting) some guy beating the shit out of his wife, and my partner found a dead guy on a pipeline right-of-way. Sometimes we had to map abandoned utilities into decrepit industrial sites and buildings. All types of scary weirdness there. After the wild dog incident I began carrying my .357, but was attacked by pet dogs on several occasions (not a good idea to shoot people's pets). I love dogs for the most part, so I began carrying treats. Of course, then they would follow me around like I was their best friend.

It was the kind of job where you learn just how many crazy and fucked-up folks there are out there, and how nice others are (and how messed up much of our infrastructure is). That said, I don't ever remember actually being afraid to do my job; too much adventure there. Needless to say, you ( Baha) wouldn't have lasted long.

""I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once." (A mantra of the City of Introspection)

[Tanada]

Baha you have the right to BE safe, however your FEELINGS are not relevant to the world outside of yourself. I would FEEL much safer of every corrupt politician were caught, convicted and thrown in prison at hard labor for some long period of time to discourage others. However so long as our current system remains in place my FEELINGS are irrelevant.

So long as this customer is not actually attacking you or overtly attempting to intimidate you into doing something immoral or illegal you are safe, and that is all that is necessary for any two humans to coexist peacefully. If your boss has given you the option of taking an assistant so that you are not alone then do so.