Talk:Going postal

Excerpt of the transcript of the Seinfeld sitcom episode The Old Man (1993)
George Costanza : Let me ask you something. What do you do for a living, Newman?

Newman : I'm a United States postal worker.

George Costanza : Aren't those the guys that always go crazy and come back with a gun and shoot everybody?

Newman : Sometimes.

Jerry Seinfeld : Why is that?

Newman : Because the mail never stops! It just keeps coming and coming and coming. There's never a letup, it's relentless. Every day it piles up more and more and more, and you gotta get it out, but the more you get it out, the more it keeps coming in! And then the bar code reader breaks! And then, it's Publisher's Clearinghouse Day...!

Jerry Seinfeld : All right, all right, all right!

Source - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0697742/characters/nm0001431 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.72.221 (talk) 18:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Rephrase?
"Going postal, in American English slang, means becoming extremely and uncontrollably angry, often to the point of shooting people dead."

Is it wrong that I bursted out laughing when I read this sentence? Had to check the link to make sure I wasn't on Uncyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.61.129.41 (talk) 10:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Untitled
I deleted a section. Mike Hunt? Obviously a fake name. Katanas? I'll beleive it when someone else than rotten.com says it.

I read many years ago that one of the reasons there was a higher incidence of workplace shootings at the USPO was that being a governmental agency, they had instituted a policy of giving war veterans preference when hiring and that a number of those hires suffered from Post-traumatic Stress Syndrome, and that this was one of the reasons they would flip out and kill like that. Urban legend, myth? I have no idea. Of course one way to verify that would be to check if most of the killers were in fact war veterans. Progman3K 08:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The USPS does give preference to veterans. Whether or not PTSS is the cause of shootings would have to be studied. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.215.123.164 (talk) 02:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Not that prevalent
While it is popular think that workplace violence is more prevalent among Postal workers, take a look at the numbers. The USPS employs 700,000 people. Among all of these employees, there are a couple homocides per year on average. However, in the US there are over 1,000 work place deaths per year. Can someone show there is a real relationship here? 69.106.245.242 23:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I wanted to bring this point up but in reverse. The section critical of the amount of postal workers going postal shows that only a very few postal workers die each year compared to a larger amount of taxi drives. But taxi drivers are presumably more likely to be killed by their customers, and so that statistic has nothing to do with 'going postal' which is of course the process of an employee or ex-employee committing homicide on their fellow employees. You say above that there are over 1,000 work place deaths per year but they don't necessarily have a relationship to 'going postal'. they may be the result of accidents, or murder by customers and clients. Anyway, to get to my point, I think the reference citing the amount of deaths per thousand in postal worker, retail, and taxi drivers should be removed because it doesn't actually shed any light on the process of 'going postal'. Maybe other people have taken responsibility for this page, so I will let them decide whether my advice should be taken or not. 195.92.67.71 18:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The phrase "going postal" refers to postal workers 'killing people,' not the likihood of being killed on the job. Saying "postal workers are less likely to be killed" does not support the claim "postal workers are less likely to multiple homicides." I smell a PR job by someone (the USPO?) being mindlessly repeated. None of the supposed 'refutations' that I've read actually refute the assertion in question. --Ryan Wise 07:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with the two comments above that the statistics in the section titled "Analysis" is not appropriate for this article. Most likely the retail clerks or taxi drivers were killed during robbery attempts, the police officers were killed in the line of duty etc.  So the section "Analysis" can only tell you how likely you will get killed, not how likely you will "go postal" based on where you work.  Those numbers only show the stats w.r.t. to the victims, not the killers.  The title of this article is all about the state of mind of the killers.  Unless the victims in those stats were killed during a "going postal" incident, those stats does not fit this context.  On the other hand, it would be informative to adjust these stats to show "coworker killings" in different kinds of workplaces. I have a feeling that "Post Office" would surface to the top or else the term "Going Postal" would be really misleading. To me, this analysis section actually becomes a red herring because now no one will really research into why there were so many shootings in Post Offices. Kowloonese 00:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I am the writer of the comment farther to the top of this page about "Going Postal is surprisingly biased..." I finally registered. Anyways I only came back to this page because I am amazed that only weeks after my above posting about the awful state of the USPS employee situation, ANOTHER "going postal" incident has happened in Goleta, California! To all those contributing to this section of Wiki taking a contrary position to mine: what can I say but (with much remorse and sadness for the victims and their families in Goleta) 'I told you so'. Not going to say anything else out of respect for the dead and wounded from this last USPS massacre. Clearly there is something terribly wrong with USPS and the way it handles it's employees. Period.


 * Don't know about generalities myself, maybe there is a systemic issue at USPS, but Thomas McIlvane had some serious problems of his own, according to Errol Morris' interview on the subject in his interview series "First Person" (episode titled "the Stalker")... apparently McIlvane was kicked out of the Marines for threatening a superior, and had threatened the life of his manager at USPS repeatedly in the months leading up to the shootings. His manager had filed several police reports but nothing was done due to lack of evidence, until after the shootings... so maybe the work environment contributed, but there was more to it than that. -Fennel 05:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your input. All of the postal workers that I meet at the post office or on the street seem to be very friendly and well balanced.  Having said that, I'd like to mention another factor that might be coming into play.  Perhaps some of the people who are attracted to postal service employment are those who are highly intelligent but lacking in "people skills".  This could be a problem if they worked as managers as well. Just a theory.  Steve Dufour 01:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a theory, but some researchers really have to explore further to prove it. In many workplaces, the working condition is not necessarily ideal.  People think about leaving for a better and more stable job, or some may be laid off when financial condition of the company changes. These people don't have a strong attachment to their jobs either they don't like the job or the job have never offered any security to begin with.  However, the situtation for the Postal workers is the opposite. The Post Office is an ideal workplace for many people. Good benefit, stable job and relatively less demanding in term of skills.  Some people want to spend their whole life in such dream workplace and become very attached.  Regardless of how ideal the workplace is, inter-personal relations are hard to control.  What if you want to work there till you retire, but your boss is a jerk and he tortures you everyday or threaten to fire your?  Or what if you are a little crazy to begin with and your fellow workers are scared of you but yet they want to keep their dream jobs so they start to ignore and isolate you and that drives you crazier?  The fear of losing a dream job can be extremely stressful and may explain why these people return with a gun to deal with those who jeapardized their job. The same state of mind can be found in all industry, but the fact that some people feel more "attached" to their jobs make the stress strong enough to push over the edge. Kowloonese 00:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

language
what, not one mention of the word disgruntled? &mdash;Tamfang 16:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * There is one now, whew. —Tamfang (talk) 02:27, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Reaganomics
A recent article on AlterNet claimed that Reaganomics helped cause these shootings. -- LGagnon 20:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Video Game
Anyone feel like adding a bit on the video game, Postal?
 * It's in the 'Depictions in popular culture' section which is enough.--Anxiety35 (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I wonder why the "Depictions in popular culture" has been removed. I can understand if some people are offended by the "popular" use of this expression, but, hey, that's the whole point of this article, isn't it? it's about the expression, more than about the "action" in my opinion. Am I wrong? 82.216.114.184 (talk) 21:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I don't think that section should have been taken out without any discussion. Many articles have popular culture sections. Part of the reason this phrase is so widely known is because of those depictions. --Anxiety35 (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Konvix?
Is the section about the members of the rap group killing 300 police officers anything other than garbage?

I can't find anything to back up the existence of such a group.

delete Montclair 1995?
This is about a robbery, not a postal worker flipping out. Is there any reason to keep it? KarlM 05:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think so, better remove it. Muad 10:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Son of Sam
According to this from Time.com - Son of Sam was a Postal worker - surely this deserves a mention - even if just to debunk a connection??--Macca7174 14:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I just want to let anyone who reads this know that as the daughter of a postal employee who was involved in the Royal Oak Post Office shooting that the term "going postal" is a very ignorant and hurtful word to refer to any Postal worker as. These are people who work for the government and every day work their asses off for the citizens of this country making sure you get your damn mail on time. It may not seem like a big job to people and too many people are disrespectful of this job. "Going postal" is just extremely disrespectful and IGNORANT, this word should not be in any search as far as I'm concerned.

2 Stupid Dogs (90s cartoon)
I don't remember the exact episode, but there was one scene where a postal worker threatens to blow up a post office with an a-bomb.

USPS shooters: veterans?
I am thinking that the USPS Postal Service gives preferential slection toward hiring military veterans (and I am also here acknowledging that these "going postal" employees are an extremely small percentage of the overall USPS workforce) --- do any of the bios of these postal shooters reveal any information about veterans status?15:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

First postal shooting...
According to this article the first shooting occurred in 1983. As well as a second that same year and a third the year after. That accounts for THREE shootings prior to the ones listed in this Wikipedia article. 71.114.75.194 05:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Patricksherrill.jpg
File:Patricksherrill.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

vandalism
the phrase "of course he could have been framed by the cia" or something to that effect seems like vandalism...anyone wannna remove it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.67.41 (talk) 17:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The causes of "going postal"?
I noticed that there is little information in this article about the reasons that contribute to "going postal" I ran across a paper, Postal Workers and Stress, and other sources says that "management strategies" to more speedily reduce the postal work force created stress, new machines that did not perform as promised created even more stress, and requiring remaining workers to compensated through more work to make up for production shortfalls lead to workplace stress problems. I think this would be a good section to add.Septagram (talk) 04:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

T Pratchett: Book
Going postal is not listed as the 33rd novel - in the inside cover of the UK edition of Going Postal it is preceded by 28 titles under the category 'The Discworld series' ≈≈≈≈ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.57.95 (talk) 06:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The phrase "The title of the 2004 book Going Postal by Terry Pratchett makes reference the contents of the novel, but in future novels of the Discworld universe characters use the term "going postal" in the common sense, apparently referring to the events of Going Postal." makes very little sense, IMHO.

The novel "Going Postal" is about the Discworld Postal Service, an old government agency (with all that comes with the term "old government") being revolutionized and made into a kind of "high-tech" (for a medieval setting such as that of Discworld) efficient and modern public service. Pratchett thus takes the term "going postal", which in part is related to "going crazy" (public employees shooting up people) and creates a new meaning (public employees being efficient and contributing to society more than any capitalist would have thought).

I would rephrase "The 2004 book Going Postal by Terry Pratchett takes the term from popular culture. In the book, the run-down government postal service is revamped and ends up competing against the seemingly more efficient telegraph company. Later novels of of the Discworld universe use the term "going postal" in this sense, effectively changing its meaning.193.145.201.52 (talk) 07:48, 3 August 2016 (UTC)HGadling193.145.201.52 (talk) 07:48, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Sacramento in 2009?
Should this section really be here? It's just about some disgruntled and troubled employees which is a far cry from a workplace shooting.--Anxiety35 (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree! Where's the citation for this suspicious-looking section? -Anonymous user —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.140.69 (talk) 00:57, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Ridgewood, NJ post office shooting text removed (Copyright violation)
This section was lifted directly from the History Channel website (http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-former-postal-worker-commits-mass-murder). The text has been removed. The section needs to be re-written without infringing copyright. Jersey emt (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Intro
"often to the point of shooting people to death, usually in a workplace environment."

Does anyone else think this could be worded much better? Rayne117 (talk) 04:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Spree killers?
In the Wikipedia spree killers page, it says that the technical definition of a spree killing involves two more more distinct locations, which most of these incidents do not, being confined to a single office or worksite.

I propose that the reference to "spree killer" be changed to "irate employees or former employees" or similar language. TychaBrahe (talk) 04:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. As no one seems opposed to the change in language, I've gone ahead and edited it to 'current or former employees.' Bordwall (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The actual first postal shooting
The first shooting took place in Bloomington, IL post office on January 7, 1981. The victims name was Leonard D. Carson he was a casual employee and was in the wrong place at the wrong time. As Paisley, the gunman waved his weapon shooting he shot Leonard through the back of a flat case killing him. He also shot another co worker Dave Hopper in the stomach at the time clock and told him he was sorry. Paisley had been teased and bullied by several co workers and came in with a list of names. Elwin Schau the acting postmaster and several others subdued Paisley and got the gun. Paisley died in prison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pooky2657 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Analysis of why this happebed?
it says -"Researchers have found that the homicide rates at postal facilities were lower than at other workplaces. In major industries, the highest rate of 2.10 homicides per 100,000 workers per year was in retail." sexond-"

Never explained why postal workers kils — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey Woropaew (talk • contribs) 09:58, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Going postal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040224034608/http://hematite.com/dragon/usps.html to http://hematite.com/dragon/usps.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326104240/http://www.postalreporter.com/chapter-11-beyond-going-postal.pdf to http://www.postalreporter.com/chapter-11-beyond-going-postal.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:39, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Bruce Baum
I'm removing this claim:


 * A possible earlier attestation of the phrase was in the late 1980's by the comic Bruce Baum, who used it in a 1989 "Laughing Out Loud" special with Norm Macdonald and Chris Rock.

based on the following:


 * The referenced "Laughing Out Loud" special is a compilation published in 1994 per the end titles (a copy is available here, with Bruce's segment appearing at ~16:04)
 * Bruce's segment is from An Evening at the Improv Season 13 Episode 11, also dated 1994 (a copy is available here, with Bruce's same segment appearing at ~37:00)
 * While his opening bit references postal workers, he does not actually use the phrase "going postal" (verbatim: "what's all this business about all these postal workers going berserk?")

Ruyn (talk) 05:01, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Falling Down
The movie should be added in the “Culturar Impact” Section, the movie didnt mention the term but the main characters actions were the same as those of the Post office workera MotoMottor (talk) 21:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)


 * i will add it tomorrow probably MotoMottor (talk) 21:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Unless you have a reliable source that ties the concept of "going postal" to the film, you should probably avoid making such a change. Otherwise, you're probably injecting original research. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Pbritti Would stuff like this do?
 * Article
 * IMDB Review MotoMottor (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * An IMDB review is not an reliable source and a single article's idiomatic reference is insufficient. There's not a connection between the subjects. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * alr
 * @Pbritti MotoMottor (talk) 14:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)