discuss

jennlin

http://en.terra.com/latin-in-america/news/walgreens_employee_fired_for_pulling_out_weapon_on_gunman/HOF16452

jennlin

i think the worker was full within his right to bring out his gun and pull the trigger. the bad guys pulled the trigger on him, why can't he defend himself? given that he was legally carrying a gun and his employer allowed so. some companies don't allow employees to carry weapons. if it was against company policy, i suppose he was wrong in that sense, but legally, he was definitely within his right to fire back.

i think his employer did not do the right thing by firing him, even if it was against company policy. the employee not only protected himself, but he protected the product the company was trying to sell as well.

uwhuskygirl

i didnt read the article, but i saw a clip on the today  show yesterday. 

if having a gun on his person and at the store wasnt against company policy then its fine.

 however, if it was then the firing was justified. companies have policys like that to protect themselves. if i remember right, the company said he signed something saying he wouldnt have a gun, but the dudes lawyer said he never did. it would be interesting to see if they can produce that document. 

kinmir30

No they just said that employees receive "comprehensive training" on how to respond to a potential robbery situation, and his lawyer said he did not receive that.

 

IMO, that was not a "potential" robbery situation. That was a serious ARMED robbery with the intent of harming the employees, obviously. That was much different than robberies that you normally see where the suspects use the gun just to get what they want, but don't actually shoot anyone. They just take what they want and go. 

 In this situation, the suspects came in with guns already firing! The man only had like 2 seconds to figure out what to do because he was being shot at! So, he grabbed his gun and shot back. I definitely think what he did was justified. 

 

Like pp said, I think if there was a policy against employees carrying weapons, then firing is justified and there is probably nothing he can do about it. Is this hurting his chances for another job? If not, I would have just taken the loss and went on with it. I wouldn't want to work for a company that took my safety at such a minimal regard...especially when he started carrying the gun after the store was robbed prior. 

Dana86

I didnt read it but i heard qbout this yesterday. I feel as though if the company didn't have anything saying he was not allowed to carry then he should be in the clear. I think that if he was just a customer in the store that was using his gun to protect the store would be thanking and praising him for being brave to stand up and protect. But with him being an employee they are afraid of bad press by customers who may not feel comfortable knowing an employee carries and therefore might not shop there anymore.

MiniSteph

I agree with PP, if he had signed a document saying he wouldn't carry a gun in the store then I can see why he was fired.

At the same time, if there was a robbery that happened before, where the heck is the security? Did the article mention that?

uwhuskygirl

kinmir30:

No they just said that employees receive "comprehensive training" on how to respond to a potential robbery situation, and his lawyer said he did not receive that.

 

ahh thanks for clarifying, I knew there was something, but I couldn't remember what

kinmir30

no mention of security.....just that he started carrying the gun after a prior robbery.