Author Topic: Store clerk fired for defending himself  (Read 1465 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DangeRuss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 916
    • MCRGO
  • Location: Northwest Lower Michigan, Traverse City Area.
Store clerk fired for defending himself
« on: January 04, 2012, 04:50:09 AM »
I guess store policy is to get shot execution style instead of defending yourself.
 
Russ
 
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1361293810001/store-clerk-fired-for-defending-himself
"In God we trust All others pay cash"
Member of
NRA
GOA
MCRGO
SAF
Member ACLDN

LEJoe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2567
  • Location: Parrish, Florida
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2012, 05:35:58 AM »
Circle K has to come up with a policy better than that. That is nowhere near being right.
Hopefully someone saw the show and will give him a better job.

hogcowboy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
    • Rock Hill Ranch
  • Location: Between Fort Worth and Wichita Falls Texas
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2012, 09:44:31 AM »
And I thought Florida was a gun friendly state.  It should be against the law to fire someone for defending themselves. Well hopefully he'll get another job offer soon.  That's just WRONG!

Coastie

  • Guest
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2012, 09:54:42 AM »
I worked for Circle K once....am quite surprised that
they're still functioning...

MilProGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 292
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2012, 11:14:55 PM »
He's better off not working for a company that values their employees so little.
Proud Veteran of the U.S. Army / Army Reserve

Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired

Robert Harvey

  • Rharvey
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4995
    • The computer guy
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2012, 08:32:48 AM »
He should sue them for the policy. "You do not have the right to defend your self."
maybe get it changed for some one else.
maybe get some money from it to hold him over till he gets a new job.

robert
Time will tell.

mustang125

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2012, 08:15:08 PM »
A lot of business have similar policy's  because they think it limits there liability. I have a hard time believing this is true. Is the world that far gone? If I am at work and some wacko comes in guns a blazing and I am not allowed to defend my self and co-workers you can bet I am going to sue them for their policy. Our company lawyers are in Cali so they think guns are bad. Wow they are wrong! Some people are bad but a gun is nether good or bad. I have been battling this mentality for a year now.

SARGeek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1622
  • Location: Colorado
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2012, 08:27:06 PM »
From this story it appears Circle K values political correctness and victimhood more than their employees lives. After all with unemployment so high there are always more where they came from right?

What a garbage company! Even most companies that don't allow you to bring weapons to work don't go so far as to refuse your right of self defense.
SARGeek

Leonidas

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Location: Northern California
Re: Store clerk fired for defending himself
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2012, 11:20:27 PM »
This issue has recently arisen for me in a professional context, and it seems to flow from the duty of an employer to provide a safe place of employment, plus the recognition that fired employees going postal, or a work altercation turning violent, is believed to be reasonably forseeable.  Therfore, comp carriers will usaully recommend that the employer establsih a no guns policy in order to protect its employees and others who come on the premises.  the origin from what I've read, is not the fear or threat of criminal actions by some BG (e.g. robbery) but workplace violence.  And yes, there is a stron thread of anti-gun bias in the recommendations, which seems to me to suggest that it is not based on good statistics but nstead the perception of mass killings erupting from a firing/termination or workplace altercation.  I think Lott should look into the underlying assumptions of these protocols.