Autozone Gun Issue


PDA






dbp
December 4, 2012, 12:50 PM
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/autozone-fires-worker-who-stopped-robbery.html

Anyone else like to let AutoZone know how they feel about this? I have shopped for years at Advanced Auto which is next door to the local AutoZone, so I can't boycott them.

If you enjoyed reading about "Autozone Gun Issue" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SigMic
December 4, 2012, 01:08 PM
Thanks for the heads up. Just went to their website and left a comment for them informing them I'd be bringing my business to O-Reilly Auto parts in the future.

BigHossCCF
December 4, 2012, 01:20 PM
Interesting...thanks for the heads up!

MANY other places to choose from! :neener:

bikerdoc
December 4, 2012, 01:39 PM
Hre is the email address from their wesite

https://www.autozone.com/autozone/contactus/generalComments.jsp?landingPageCategory=inOurStores&title=generalcomments

Told them I will not be using them.

2zulu1
December 4, 2012, 01:55 PM
Obviously a managerial case of terminal cranial retitus morphed with seasonal Scrooge syndrome. :)

mdauben
December 4, 2012, 02:14 PM
A travesty, but not an uncommon one. :(

sleepyone
December 4, 2012, 02:17 PM
Here is the email I just sent:

I will be taking my business elsewhere after learning that you fired Devin McLean from the York County, VA AutoZone for exercising his 2nd Amendment rights. He prevented a robbery and quite possibly prevented a double homicide. He should be presented with an award yet your response was to fire him. That is cowardly and anti-American. I will be going to O’Reilly in the future.

Kind Regards,

jon86
December 4, 2012, 02:26 PM
I used to work at an autozone and ever since, I've done my business with them. Guess I'll be shopping at Advance now.

Teachu2
December 4, 2012, 03:01 PM
Shareholders may communicate with the Board of Directors by writing to the Board, to any individual director, or to the non-management directors as a group c/o Corporate Secretary, AutoZone, Inc., 123 South Front Street, Memphis, TN 38103. All such communications will be forwarded unopened to the addressee. Communications addressed to the Board of Directors or to the non-management directors as a group will be forwarded to the chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and communications addressed to a committee of the Board will be forwarded to the chairman of that committee.

Let their Board know that they're losing your business, even if you're not a shareholder!

hso
December 4, 2012, 03:10 PM
It is important to keep the emails and letters brief and to the point while avoiding over the top rhetoric.

Tell them exactly which competitor you'll be spending your money with.
Explain that you'll continue to support that competitor until Mr. McLean is reinstated with back pay.
Tell them that the manager has credited Mr. McLean with saving his life.
Use Sheriff Diggs' quote to explain to them that AutoZone may be open to armed robbers, but it is closed as far as your concerned.

Sheriff Diggs said AutoZone has also sent an unintended message to the community.

“The company has now sent a message to every would-be robber out there – ‘Hey we’re open for business and unarmed. Come on in and take our money,’

Here's my message to them.

Until Mr. McLean is reinstated with back pay I'll be taking all my business to Advance Auto Parts.

Mr. McLean's own manager credits him with saving his life and AutoZone great expense.

As Sheriff Diggs noted that AutoZone has sent a message to the community that, “The company has now sent a message to every would-be robber out there – ‘Hey we’re open for business and unarmed. Come on in and take our money.’", my family and friends will consider AutoZone closed for business to us until Mr. McLean is reinstated with back pay.

dbp
December 4, 2012, 03:29 PM
HSO has the response down perfectly. This was a decision based on corporate policy and sending threats and testy messages will not positively influence any corporation. They will at least sit up and take notice when revenue starts to go to competitors.

This is all about perceived liability to AutoZone. I am sure that their corporate attorneys are advising them that they shouldn't listen to the objections. Their thinking is that they will give up some business to prevent a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Our real problem in this country is tort reform, but that's another topic for another day.

Centurian22
December 4, 2012, 03:52 PM
Thank you for posting this. I did like Autozone before hearing this.

HSO Well written as always.

Bovice
December 4, 2012, 04:01 PM
I haven't stepped into an autozone for 2 and a half years, because they were selling me shoddy power steering pumps. Then they wouldn't refund my money.

They know that I'm pissed already!

mgmorden
December 4, 2012, 05:00 PM
They will at least sit up and take notice when revenue starts to go to competitors.


Without those "testy messages" they will have no idea what a drop in revenue is. A boycott cannot be successful without making it public and vocal.

hso
December 4, 2012, 10:09 PM
mgmorden is correct.

You have to tell them why their revenues are going to fall off (might be the quarterly report before they see they've lost business) instead of hoping they'll understand why they had a lower quarter than expected.

Tell them you're going to pay your money to their competitors; tell them why you're going to do it; how long you're going to do it; what they can do to regain your business; and, lastly, tell them again you're sending "their" money to their competitors until they comply with your request.

Here's their Facebook page for you to post the same sentiment.
http://www.facebook.com/autozone?fref=ts

orionengnr
December 5, 2012, 12:32 AM
I don't have any use for FaceBook, but I will snail mail (or hand-deliver) a letter using HSO's guidelines to the manager of both of my local AutoZones...and will follow it up with a letter to Corporate.

And I will share this with everyone I know (nearly every one of whom are gun owners). See if some of them will follow suit.

zorro45
December 5, 2012, 01:00 AM
maybe the Sheriff can use a new deputy

Prophet
December 5, 2012, 01:06 AM
"I am a very satisfied and long-time customer of Autozone and up until this point drove the extra 15 minutes past the local NAPA to do business with them for the last three vehicles I have owned. I've always driven decades-old junk and always do my own repairs, so I'll let Autozone determine how much business they've gotten from me already and stand to lose in the future (I'm 20, so I've got most of my cars and repairs ahead of me). I hope Autozone soon realizes that they fired this Airman for doing exactly what he was obligated by oath and professionally trained to do; defend against enemies foreign and domestic. He further exercised commendable restraint in giving the criminal a chance to leave, as he was well within his legal rights to shoot him. Since Autozone has decided to make their establishments known targets for criminals who endeavor to have a gun-sterile environment in which the only weapon present will be theirs, I will be taking my business to the much closer and more convenient NAPA. Autozone can regain myself and many more of their turned-off customers by simply giving Mr. McLean his job back and paying his backpay or, in the event that he acquires another job from someone who recognizes his courage and selflessness, issue him a profuse apology and reimburse him for the work hours the firing cost him. I look forward to hearing from Autozone in regard to this matter. "

-My message to them. Posted this up to my FB and will tell everyone I know, all of whom are 2A supporters... and car owners, coincidentally. :neener:

It's a real shame, because I always got my parts from Autozone because the quality control on the parts usually seemed to be tighter and the employees at my Autozone were always super people to deal with; not that some of the folks at the NAPA aren't great people either (there's one guy who works at the one closest to me who is a know-it-all jerk, but the rest of the people who work there are great) but having the combo of quality parts and quality service is always nice.

MedWheeler
December 5, 2012, 07:43 AM
Now, does anyone know what would happen if a NAPA or Advance Auto Parts store employee did the same thing next month? (I hope they don't have to; I doubt many of us here can fabricate all our own auto parts.)

bikerdoc
December 5, 2012, 09:44 AM
^ Think about it.
It is an opportunity for one of them to get more business from a competitor.
A local bank has a big no guns signs. A smaller bank has a CCW Welcome sign. Guess who got my business.

mljdeckard
December 5, 2012, 09:45 AM
Ok, I just saw the story, and it's nonesense. This is even worse than the Pizza Hut firing. (That driver carried a gun against company policy and wound up using it to save his life, and was fired for it.) This guy left it IN HIS CAR, and only went to get it when he absolutely had a situation in the store that justified deadly force.

Using a "Zero Tolerance" policy is just a way to avoid having to make any managerial decisions.

bikerdoc
December 5, 2012, 09:54 AM
Virginia Citizens Defense League will be organizing protests at a time to be announced. I will post details as available.

To echo mljdeckard, The guys with suits and ties, who dont do the work, have no clue.
Make me warm and fuzzy to see corporate types squirm.

beatledog7
December 5, 2012, 10:25 AM
Not to get flamed here, but some perspective is called for. Has anyone considered that, whether we like it or not, it is fully within Autozone's purview to have this strict no-guns policy and to stand by it.

I'm betting Mr. McLean read and signed documents stating that he understood company policies and recognized that violation of policy could result in disciplinary action or dismissal. Such a document is nearly always part of the hiring process. Which of us would run a company without making our policies clear to employees and making sure they understand them?

In the eyes of those of us who support the RKBA, and who commend Mr. McLean's brave action, Autozone executives have committed a blunder. Many supporters of gun rights claim that the action against Mr. McLean is unjust and that their no-guns policy is wrong-headed. We may argue that Autozone executives would have been far better served to make an exception in this case and made it clear why they were doing so. But that would carry risk, setting a precedent with which they would forever be dealing. (I might have suggested, had I been a board member, that Mr. McLean could be let go as a matter of policy but also be presented--as a private citizen rather than as an employee--an award for bravery and a commensurate monetary prize.)

Our voices shouting "Boycott Autozone!" might make a little difference to Autozone's bottom line, but nothing's stopping antis from shifting all their business to Autozone in support of their anti-2A position. Our outspokenness may also give the antis another example to cite as so-called proof that gun owners are all dangerous kooks who wish to enforce their will on everyone, and that the 2A is out of step with modern, polite society. In the eyes of RKBA opponents, these same executives have rightly demonstrated the folly of thinking anyone can just use a gun to sort out life's problems.

Here in Virginia, organized protests are being set up, and that's good in principle. But imagine the press response: "Gun-toting protestors assault innocent citizen who tried to enter an Autozone..." This won't actually happen, but facts don't matter anymore to the most of what we call "the press." All it takes is one anti to make such a claim.

The fact that they're wrong doesn't change the fact that their voices get heard. Never mind the untruths; they have 1A rights just as we do.

Write your letters, but be respectful. Shop elsewhere for auto parts and supplies; I will, too. Meantime, I wonder: What are this store's other employees and other Autozone employees doing to help their new hero? Are they still showing up for work unarmed, or are they standing with Mr. McLean, forcing store shutdowns by refusing to report for work until the action is reversed? And what are we as THR members doing to directly aid of our fellows who finds himself unemployed three weeks before Christmas?

MedWheeler
December 5, 2012, 11:01 AM
Bikerdoc writes:

^ Think about it.
It is an opportunity for one of them to get more business from a competitor.

to my:

Now, does anyone know what would happen if a NAPA or Advance Auto Parts store employee did the same thing next month? (I hope they don't have to; I doubt many of us here can fabricate all our own auto parts.)

I think you missed the point. What I'm saying is that, if it should happen again at one of the businesses we all flock to, the outcome will likely be the same. Then, we'd all be pulling out of a business we just poured a larger sum of capital into and be headed off to "reward" yet another. If this incident had occurred at Advance, for instance, many of you would be flocking to AutoZone, not knowing of the existence of their identical policy.

I'm all for boycotts when they can be effective, and even more so for effective communication with the "offending" corporation.
These types of boycotts are, to me, just a little too "knee-jerk" in nature. A little more research and communication is needed regarding both the company or entity being boycotted, and the one(s) to whom you intend to gravitate.

mgmorden
December 5, 2012, 12:04 PM
Medwheeler: What you're missing is that seeing the result can affect the making of changing of policies. Even if Advance has a similar policy, Autozone has already enforced it in a silly scenario. If the other companies see an uptick in business due to such a boycott whilst Autozone sees a decrease, then they may well recognize that a number of their potential customers disagree with their policy, and with enough support they may change their policy.

Trent
December 5, 2012, 03:06 PM
Wow. Their Facebook page is LIT UP with people posting about the boycott.

I think they're getting the message loud and clear.

brnmw
December 5, 2012, 04:29 PM
Sent my E-mail. :)

Now I will say I bet if you really looked at half of the business you shop at many do not support or give a second thought to allowing guns in their stores only posting what the law requires them to (If the law even requires it). I know at my last job the owner never posted a sign for allowing or not allowing guns in his place of business... simply because it was not an issue on his mind. I carried in my car and one of the co-owners told me he was carrying his .45 Auto CCW whether the other owner liked it or not. (The other co-owner knew I carried mine in my trunk and he was fine with it, but told me to never tell anyone else just in case it got back to the other owner.That co-owner and I went together to take our CHL course 14-hrs. worth in one day! > Try sitting next to your boss in a classroom setting for 14 hrs. and see just how they might have really been in High School! :D)

I do wish more stores accepted responsible CHL holders and allowing employees who pass the necessary background checks to have access to some type of gun for protection, but in the real world it is getting harder to simply "Shop Elsewhere" (Not in all cases but a few cases where it's annoying I can't shop somewhere anymore just because of their policies that don't live up to my standards.) :banghead:

SigMic
December 5, 2012, 10:10 PM
Even if we were to be moving business to a competitor who would do the same thing, by making a big stink about stuff like this, we are discouraging other businesses from doing anti-firearms actions.

Really, we are just trying to make it not-PC to mess with peoples guns!

It would be nice if dimwits would think to themselves, "I'd like to fire this guy for getting his gun at our employment and using it on our sight, but those whiny gun people will protest. Then I'll lose a bunch of business and my facebook page will blowup. So I'll just shut up and ignore this."

Tirod
December 6, 2012, 08:34 AM
The same policy exists at O'Reilly, even after robbers shot employees in the KC area. Employees may not carry firearms. It's a corporate policy that extend thru most retail businesses. The exceptions are the minority.

We worry about how politicians may take away our rights when most Boards of Directors already have. Violate the policy and you no longer have an income. Then try to find work with that as reason you were terminated. Most major chains won't.

The larger issue is that our right is already undermined and there are no protections in the law to prevent serious financial hardship because you exercised them. This isn't a single new case, it's been going on for twenty years or more since CCW started expanding, and it's still not fixed.

Corporations have taken away your right and nobody is doing anything about it.

coloradokevin
December 6, 2012, 09:10 AM
Tirod is correct that this policy exists within many big corporations. But, in this case I'll make an effort to avoid Autozone at all costs. A message needs to be sent to businesses who don't have a reasonable response to incidents like this one.

brnmw
December 6, 2012, 09:50 AM
The same policy exists at O'Reilly, even after robbers shot employees in the KC area. Employees may not carry firearms. It's a corporate policy that extend thru most retail businesses. The exceptions are the minority.

Exactly what I was thinking... not many stores are "Pro-Gun" so many of you searching for retail chains that support Pro-2nd Amend. are going to be few and far between. Took the words right out of my keyboard. :)

MedWheeler
December 6, 2012, 05:37 PM
What you're missing is that seeing the result can affect the making of changing of policies. Even if Advance has a similar policy, Autozone has already enforced it in a silly scenario. If the other companies see an uptick in business due to such a boycott whilst Autozone sees a decrease, then they may well recognize that a number of their potential customers disagree with their policy, and with enough support they may change their policy.


As has been pointed out, this is a tort reform issue far more than it is a 2A-issue. It's not the businesses themselves that "need convincing"; it's their insurance companies, and the lawyers representing them.

blarby
December 6, 2012, 07:18 PM
As has been pointed out, this is a tort reform issue far more than it is a 2A-issue. It's not the businesses themselves that "need convincing"; it's their insurance companies, and the lawyers representing them.

Well..... yes and no.

AutoZone is far and away liquid enough to self insure.

Not all corporate policies are dictated by lawyers, and lawyers frequently aren't the last line in personnel decisions. The fact that they often happen to be the first... that does need some work.

FWIW- that FB"activism" is gaining a lot of traction !

303tom
December 6, 2012, 08:51 PM
I don`t do business with Auto Zone, never have & now never will...............

45_auto
December 6, 2012, 10:06 PM
I don`t do business with Auto Zone, never have & now never will

In that case your boycott of them over gun rights probably won't bother them much .....

Lo8080
December 6, 2012, 11:57 PM
That is a disgrace. What a slap in the face. I sent that store a comment. They lost me as a customer.

hso
December 7, 2012, 01:15 AM
Lo8080,

"that store" wasn't the problem. The article pointed out the manager considered Mr. McLean to be a hero. It is the corporation that is the problem.

Mr. McLean did not strictly violate company policy since he had his firearm in his vehicle instead of the store during operating hours. He escaped and retrieved his firearm and returned to protect his manager who was being held by the armed robber. AutoZone has misapplied their policy since the store was closed at the time and there were no customers to protect.

smalls
December 7, 2012, 04:52 AM
Corporations have taken away your right and nobody is doing anything about it.

This is silly. They also have rights on their property.

Don't like it? Don't visit it, and certainly don't work there.

HSO, do you have a link to the Autozone policy? I'd be interested in reading it before I sent anything.

FWIW, I worked for an extremely anti gun company for a few years. Policy said no weapons on the property, including your car. I usually carried at least a knife, and most times a small mouse gun at work.

Double Naught Spy
December 7, 2012, 08:44 AM
Yep, smalls, they most certainly do and on the few occasions when fired employees attempt lawsuits, they virtually never win. I say "virtually" because I can't think of a single case where an employee has won a suit for wrongful termination, or to regain his/her job, after being fired for a gun in the workplace (not speaking of guns in personal vehicles in the parking lot, but actually in the workplace).

Last year, Jeremy Hoven was fired from Walgreens and summarily filed suit. Yesterday, it was announced that he has lost.
http://www.examiner.com/article/walgreens-employee-that-shot-robbers-loses-lawsuit-to-regain-job

Since a gun is a not a protected class of item or being, employers retain the right to refuse their carriage in the workplace. Employees who go to work for such employers are made aware of the rules of employment and agree to abide by them when they agree to accept payment for coming to work and participating in the workplace. So getting fired upon discovery isn't a surprise to anyone, despite the claims of shock that are sometimes expressed.

Interesting about the notion of boycotting Autozone for their anti-gun policy. As already noted, we would have trouble doing business and getting our needs met without doing business with such companies. How ironic that we so willingly do business with other anti-gun companies that don't allow employees to carry at work which include virtually all of the national, regional, and major local chain stores. Praise is sung about various aspect of the likes of Walmart for selling AR15s and the offerings of many sporting companies that sell guns and ammo, but that don't allow employees to carry and in the case of Bass Pro, don't want you to carry a loaded gun in at least some of their stores. As with other proposed boycotts, the one here for Autozone is fairly typical. It is a mix of people who primarily either don't use the company very much anyway or proclaim that the company or product line is garbage anyway. In short, support for the boycott that is hoped to hurt the bottom line of the company is largely by folks who are either infrequent customers and/or already don't like the company.

If you want a boycott to work, it needs to be by the long standing and primary sustaining customer base, not by the ancillary patrons who pop in for the random bulb or wiper, that is, by gearheads. Autozone may make a lot of money from the pop-ins, but it is from a lot of people, at least half of whom aren't going to be gun folks and of the gun folks that do, most either don't really know about the firing, don't care, or actually understand why it had to occur, and so are not inclined to be participants. On top of that, the outrage will pass because gun owners, like most Americans, tend to have a short operational memory/functionality. When was the last time, other than with S&W, that you actually saw any long term concerted efforts by gun owners on forums such as this to make an organized effort that went beyond the run of the headlines? bikerdoc noted that the Virgnian CDL will be organizing a protest. Great. Where will the protesters be in a month when the policy hasn't changed? 2 months? 3?

Handslap ephemeral boycotts may make us feel good, but without a sustained effort involving the sustained customer base, what is actually being accomplished other than blowing off some steam? Do we really want change or just to complain for a short while and then move on to the next headline?

bikerdoc
December 7, 2012, 09:24 AM
DNS indeed makes several good points. None of which are lost on VCDL.

I do not speak for VCDL

MY focus will be a man was fired because he was complying with the policy. He was not carrying while working, he left the building, at closing, essentially off the clock, reentered and saved a possible tragedy. The zero tolerance policy is a stretch,and more that a few lawyers would love to tap the deep pockets of Autozone on his behalf.
Given the local sentiment, I think Autozone made a hasty decision that could have been a public relations success.

Just my .02.

kerreckt
December 7, 2012, 11:54 AM
This is the sort of situation where common sense should prevail. Autozones' intransigence on this matter does not suprise me as much as it angers me that someone would be punished for doing what was the right thing to do. I wonder how many people would have put themselves in harms way when it would have been much easier to just leave. I would like to think that I would but, the truth is, you never know until faced with the situation. Incidentally, I live about 2 miles from where this occurred and have been in that store many times but never again.

smalls
December 7, 2012, 12:42 PM
Again, I'd like yo read their policy, because I'd bet it has something along the lines of not having a gun in your vehicle, either.

Trueno
December 7, 2012, 08:00 PM
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/c0.0.302.302/p403x403/6385_569693389722736_1504611433_n.jpg




Devin McClean, 23yr old Air Force veteran...if you ever make it to Texas, the beer and BBQ is on me.

t

FIVETWOSEVEN
December 7, 2012, 08:22 PM
If you can find a major store chain like Autozone that does allow carry I will be surprised. It's for insurance reasons.


Using a "Zero Tolerance" policy is just a way to avoid being sued.

Fixed that for you.

I'm3rd
December 7, 2012, 11:45 PM
I just put the following message on Facebook.

"Autozone's firing of an Air Force veteran employee in VA just before Thanksgiving because of his heroic act of displaying a weapon in order to protect his fellow employee's life and Autozone's property is despicable. I and my extended family are outraged by your company's unnecessarily harsh treatment of this USAF veteran who put his life on the line in order to protect the life of his fellow employee and his employer's property. In the future patronizing Autozone is no longer an option when any member of my family needs auto parts. And furthermore, in the future we will inform all auto repair shops that we patronize that we will not accept or pay for parts purchased at Autozone."

I don't like Facebook and I have never posted anything there before, but my wife is registered there and I used her name to post my comment. I wish I could tell the Autozone executive creeps what I really think of them and their despicable mistreatment of an American military veteran just before Thanksgiving, but that would probably get my wife kicked off of Facebook.

powder
December 8, 2012, 09:46 AM
Knee-jerk reactions.

MOST employers do not allow employees to have firearms at work, by POLICY.

Those policies in place keep their insurance rates down for their corporate properties. Does that mean I agree with them? No.

Whether the AutoZone employee fired was a Mil. Veteran, LE veteran, or a retired college professor makes no difference-using nationalism to inflate a non-issue won't make this boycott any more effective for changing a policy: their insurance rate increase would be an insane cost vs. boycott cost.

The insurance industry is the culprit in these scenarios: they hold most of us silently hostage. It's the Corporate culture of pass-the-buck until the Customer doesn't know WHERE to look.

Put the NRA onto investigating the insurance industrys' fingers in this extortion till, rather than boycotting a business being held hostage by their insurance company.

Oceanbob
December 8, 2012, 09:56 AM
These no gun decisions are made by the Insurance Company that underwrites the Umbrella Liability Policy.

Could you imagine the huge lawsuit and legal problems if AutoZone said 'it's ok to bring a gun to work or store it in your car at work'..?

Then a well meaning, yet unskilled employee starts a fire-fight over stolen sparkplugs and ends up killing some innocent customers..?

Come on people..let's be realistic.

There is NO INSURANCE COMPANY that would allow a pro-carry, pro-gun policy at any retail outlet in the world.

Sure, a mom and pop store could be friendly to pro gun people like us, but a large corporation will never and can never allow $9 per hour employee's access to a gun at work.

JMO

Trueno
December 8, 2012, 12:05 PM
Knee-jerk reactions.



As to insurance co's/liability, they're more afraid of the relatives of the deceased hollerin' "ALL I KNOW IS SOMEBODY NEED TO WRITE ME A CHECK!".

Otherwise, I think the general gist of the matter is that most folks think the guy should get his job back and the atmosphere would clear very quickly.

t

Guillermo
December 8, 2012, 01:53 PM
Admittedly this is really off topic because the guy was not carrying at work therefore not violating policy.
There may be no large corporation that allows concealed carry, many do not mention it one way or another.

FIVETWOSEVEN
December 8, 2012, 03:47 PM
Admittedly this is really off topic because the guy was not carrying at work therefore not violating policy.
There may be no large corporation that allows concealed carry, many do not mention it one way or another.

How do you know he was clocked out?

By choosing to boycott AZ because of this is silly because nearly any large business has the same policy. If they kicked someone open carrying out of the store then that's one thing but this is something found almost completely across the nation. What if the same thing happens at NAPA? Are we supposed to boycott them too?

In today's lawyer filled world, this is what we have to deal with whether we like it or not.

Double Naught Spy
December 8, 2012, 03:51 PM
Admittedly this is really off topic because the guy was not carrying at work therefore not violating policy.

Sure he did. He just didn't do it all day long. He was a company employee who brought a gun into the company workplace. At that moment, he was in violation of policy.

He was not carrying while working, he left the building, at closing, essentially off the clock, reentered and saved a possible tragedy.

No, this is a fairly blatant misrepresentation. From the article cited in the OP, the store was open at the time of the robbery and McLean was working. McLean never went "essentially off the clock" anymore than he would have going outside with the store's garbage. He never even left Autozone's property.

Devin McLean and his store manager were about to close the AutoZone in York County, Va. when a gunman barged into the store.

“He pulled a gun from his waist band and demanded me and my manager go back into the office,” McLean told Fox News.

At some point, McLean was left in a restroom while the gunman made the manager open the store safe. That’s when McLean, a 23-year-old Air Force veteran, bolted through a side door and ran to his truck.

He returned through the front door holding a Glock 40 – pointed directly at the masked robber.

Or, if you wish to believe because he stepped outside of the store that he went off the clock, then the moment he stepped inside the store again, he went back on the clock. Any way you look at it, McLean, an employee of Autozone, brought a firearm into the workplace against store policy for employees and got fired for it.

Sure, he is a hero, but being a hero doesn't mean actions come without responsibilities, obligations, and consequences.

powder
December 8, 2012, 04:17 PM
As to insurance co's/liability, they're more afraid of the relatives of the deceased hollerin' "ALL I KNOW IS SOMEBODY NEED TO WRITE ME A CHECK!".

Otherwise, I think the general gist of the matter is that most folks think the guy should get his job back and the atmosphere would clear very quickly.

t

Noooo kidding.

No, "the gist of this matter" is a large group has organized a Facebook effort to boycott a company for their being held hostage by an insurance company.

You guys NEED to start thinking on your own rather than taking these NRA-like stances against an action you don't like, and see what the root-causes are of the problem; the insurance companies are anti-gun.

It's not an "Autozone gun issue". Take a look at the insurance industry, their actuary tables, and understand WHY these policies exist.

It's nice to be active in a group, but when you're in a group of misdirected people? You are no less wrong.

Trueno
December 8, 2012, 05:47 PM
No, this is a fairly blatant misrepresentation. From the article cited in the OP, the store was open at the time of the robbery and McLean was working. McLean never went "essentially off the clock" anymore than he would have going outside with the store's garbage. He never even left Autozone's property.

Or, if you wish to believe because he stepped outside of the store that he went off the clock, then the moment he stepped inside the store again, he went back on the clock. Any way you look at it, McLean, an employee of Autozone, brought a firearm into the workplace against store policy for employees and got fired for it.

Lighten up Francis, we're not stupid, AZ's policy is well known. In this conversation (thread) I would think the context of "essentially off the clock" is similar to "figure of speech". It's a figure-of-speech somewhat in the hopes that AZ would see fit to rehire the man.


Sure, he is a hero, but being a hero doesn't mean actions come without responsibilities, obligations, and consequences.

Mitigating circumstances, look it up. Me, I hope the guy finds better employment. Probably will despite how many think he's a troublemaker.

t

ps: the cup is half full :neener:

Trueno
December 8, 2012, 06:00 PM
Noooo kidding.

No, "the gist of this matter" is a large group has organized a Facebook effort to boycott a company for their being held hostage by an insurance company.

You guys NEED to start thinking on your own rather than taking these NRA-like stances against an action you don't like, and see what the root-causes are of the problem; the insurance companies are anti-gun

Concerning the FB drivel, I have know nothing of or have anything to do with the "large group" so no idea why you quoted me.



It's not an "Autozone gun issue". Take a look at the insurance industry, their actuary tables, and understand WHY these policies exist.

It's nice to be active in a group, but when you're in a group of misdirected people? You are no less wrong.

Not sure what "group" you think I'm a member of(?) I'd simply like to see AZ give Devin his job back. He might not want it back, who knows, but I'm simply expressing the thought that things would do a 180 if that were to occur.

t

Trueno
December 8, 2012, 06:01 PM
Does Autozone sponsor any NASCAR?

t

the iron horse
December 8, 2012, 07:50 PM
I will never again buy anything from AutoZone and will encourage my family
and friends to do the same.

I am getting sick of this stupidity :cuss:

Ridgerunner665
December 8, 2012, 09:34 PM
Auto Zone is taking a beating on FaceBook over this...keep piling on.

http://www.facebook.com/autozone?fref=ts

Analogkid
December 8, 2012, 10:22 PM
I give two Craps About their policy..... There should have been someone in the Background at the Corp Headquarters that should have know this was going to be a huge PR crap storm. He should have been taken into the office and thanked and then restate policy to save face.

Like Turn a BLIND FRIGGEN EYE... A Veteran........... Soon to be a New Daddy and now he doesn't have a a dang job..

Sometimes you just have to make exceptions to the rules.

I don't fault him for any of what he did, I just hope I could bring it together enough to help a Friend out that was being held at gunpoint if it ever happened...



http://www.thepetitionsite.com/146/979/031/petition-autozone-to-publicly-apologize-to-devin-mclean/

CatManDo
December 8, 2012, 10:47 PM
Autozone used to sponsor Richard Childress Racing, I don't know if they still do or not.

powder
December 9, 2012, 12:35 AM
You would be in the group that thinks a boycott on AutoZone will make a dent in their revenue, and that a boycott will make a difference in their insurance company's policy.

You would be in the group that wants to ignore the facts of the case: a major policy was broken by an employee-by right to work laws they could have fired this guy for much less without recourse. Do I like it? Nope.

Is that the way it works? Yup, on the clock and on company property with a firearm, you are subject to being fired. Insurance companies.

As the economy continues to spiral, auto. repair places like AutoZone flourish: check the stock history. Boycott all you want-until you make changes in insurance companies you patronize, nothing will change. NASCAR? It's run on insurance monies as well...



Not sure what "group" you think I'm a member of(?) I'd simply like to see AZ give Devin his job back. He might not want it back, who knows, but I'm simply expressing the thought that things would do a 180 if that were to occur.

v8stang289
December 9, 2012, 08:19 PM
I worked for Advance Auto Parts for several years as an assistant manager. The Advance employee handbook stated that possession of weapons/firearms is prohibited on company property unless allowed by state or local law. My interpretation was that my carry permit allowed me to carry via state law. Even with that I fully expect that their reaction in the event I had to draw would have been the same as Autozones was in this case. Thankfully I was never in a situation where I had to find out.

Isaac-1
December 10, 2012, 05:00 AM
As a manager at a small business the whole issue of guns in the workplace is something that to which I have given a fair amount of thought. Let me go on to say that this is a business with under 30 employees, about half are young and work for a bit over minimum wage in less than pleasant warehouse coniditons (just the nature of the job). This can sometimes lead to tempers flaring, and while we do our best to minimize such things, and have a low tolerance for it, sometimes fights have been known to break out, thankfully never anything worse. This brings up the great delima, would it be better to allow carry in the work place and have a hothead with a gun lose his temper when a gun was handy and not in his car a couple of hundred feet away vs. the concern that the same hothead might go to his car to get a gun and come back in with a gun and everyone else was unarmed. This is all before the topic of insurance, etc. comes up.

To me as a buisness manager in an ideal world I would like to see employees have the option to carry at work, but ONLY after passing a training course that is a lot more in depth than the standard CCW class, lots of shoot / no shoot training as well as gun safety, and maybe even some profiling for mental stability. (I know the local sheriff's department requies such stability profiling for all their job applicatants, and they have well over a 50% rejection rate on it)

smalls
December 10, 2012, 05:12 AM
would it be better to allow carry in the work place and have a hothead with a gun lose his temper when a gun was handy and not in his car a couple of hundred feet away vs. the concern that the same hothead might go to his car to get a gun and come back in with a gun and everyone else was unarmed

People are going to hurt each other regardless of some stupid policy. Wouldn't a good option be to allow the victims to protect themselves?

bikerdoc
December 10, 2012, 09:30 AM
The Advance employee handbook stated that possession of weapons/firearms is prohibited on company property unless allowed by state or local law.

Thank You.

Double Naught Spy
December 10, 2012, 10:00 AM
Lighten up Francis, we're not stupid, AZ's policy is well known. In this conversation (thread) I would think the context of "essentially off the clock" is similar to "figure of speech". It's a figure-of-speech somewhat in the hopes that AZ would see fit to rehire the man.

Sorry Francis, but being 'off the clock' was being used to justify that the employee was not on the clock and hence not covered by comapny rules, but that isn't how it works. He wasn't off the clock, essentially or otherwise, regardless of the 'hopes.' Hope doesn't change the facts.

Mitigating circumstances, look it up.

Well Francis, I don't have to look it up. Your argument would be with AZ who is holding fast to their zero tolenerance policy. Zero tolerance - look it up.

Ryanxia
December 10, 2012, 11:33 AM
Sent my e-mail.

Analogkid
December 11, 2012, 10:43 AM
Looks like the Boycott is working. Their stocks have dropped it looks like, and a few stores around St Louis have had extremely dismal sales according to few sources. I think they have given up on posting anything new on their Facebook page. They have got barked at pretty good on it since the news broke.

I hear there have actually been some other Autozone robberies as well since this happend. That's not good, but they practically sent a invite out for that.

Guillermo
December 11, 2012, 03:51 PM
They have this little thing called "right and wrong"

I wonder how you folks that are fine with the "letter of the law" being followed, and the man fire would feel the same way were if it were an elementary school.

If a gunman were taken down by a parent that went into the school would you be calling for the parent's prosecution?

A man's life was saved.

A company that fires a hero deserves to go out of business...company policy or not.

smalls
December 14, 2012, 01:45 AM
When you break the law, or company policy, you need to be aware if the consequences, and need to deal with them if you are busted. Doesn't matter if you believe you are right or wrong.

In an earlier post I stated that I carried to a job that had a strict no weapons policy. I fully expected to get fired if I had needed to use my gun. I would not have expected a phone call back, or even a good reference.

Double Naught Spy
December 14, 2012, 08:30 AM
Looks like the Boycott is working. Their stocks have dropped it looks like,

Stock volatility is a poor guage of a company's performance or impact of boycotts, especially when the boycotts are unknown to the general public. The changing of stock price you see corresponds with normal AZO volatility and also with their 4 Dec quarterly report. Sorry, but your boycott theory doesn't flew.

BTW, you posted on the 11th and the stock price went up on the 11th, 12th, and 13th. Again, this is normal volatility for AZO. If the boycott is working as you claim and this effective work is supposed to be reflected in the price of the stock, then it isn't working to the point of affecting the price outside of the normal volatility and expected normal performance in response of things like quarterly reports.

and a few stores around St Louis have had extremely dismal sales according to few sources.

And what sources would those be?

I hear there have actually been some other Autozone robberies as well since this happend. That's not good, but they practically sent a invite out for that.

Well of course there are. Stores get robbed all the time. Autozone has some 4376 stores. Like any other 'convenient' business with a very high number of stores, they are going to get robbed. The question is, can you show that they are somehow getting robbed more frequently now or are you once again talking about that which is part of the normal pattern?

I wonder how you folks that are fine with the "letter of the law" being followed, and the man fire would feel the same way were if it were an elementary school.

If a gunman were taken down by a parent that went into the school would you be calling for the parent's prosecution?

Hmm, the letter of the law in our state allows for emergency circumstances, but we aren't talking about law. We are talking about a business and its rules and a contractual agreement of employment that doesn't allow for such. There is a vast difference between business rules, contracts, and local, state, and federal laws. The guy broke the rules. You may not like it, but the company has a right to fire him.

That somebody's life was saved is only an opinion. The manager felt like it, but the bandit was not trying to kill the manager at the time of the robbery. It was just a robbery and the manager thought he might die. That is a wholly typical belief that may or may not be reality.

Analogkid
December 14, 2012, 09:15 AM
Sources being 3 friends that work at 3 seperate stores.

Autozone is clearly taking heat for this as shown by the Boycott and the daily hate being thrown at them on the internet and their own Facebook page.

Again the company has the right to fire him but we have the right to let them know what fool idiots they are for doing so.

Trueno
December 14, 2012, 09:54 AM
Sorry Francis, but being 'off the clock' was being used to justify that the employee was not on the clock and hence not covered by comapny rules, but that isn't how it works. He wasn't off the clock, essentially or otherwise, regardless of the 'hopes.' Hope doesn't change the facts.

Nobody said it did, so your point is moot.

t


ps: water is wet.

Trueno
December 14, 2012, 10:00 AM
They have this little thing called "right and wrong"

I wonder how you folks that are fine with the "letter of the law" being followed, and the man fire would feel the same way were if it were an elementary school.

If a gunman were taken down by a parent that went into the school would you be calling for the parent's prosecution?

A man's life was saved.

A company that fires a hero deserves to go out of business...company policy or not.

Careful, the Judge Dredds in this thread will be along shortly. :D

Guillermo
December 14, 2012, 10:09 AM
the Judge Dredds in this thread will be along shortly

sorry, I do not understand the reference

Trueno
December 14, 2012, 10:10 AM
That somebody's life was saved is only an opinion. The manager felt like it, but the bandit was not trying to kill the manager at the time of the robbery.

Yeah, uh huh...the gun probably wasn't even loaded.





It was just a robbery and the manager thought he might die. That is a wholly typical belief that may or may not be reality.

Do you leave your doors unlocked at night?

t

Trueno
December 14, 2012, 10:15 AM
sorry, I do not understand the reference

The ones here with the "zero tolerance" mentality just because the book says so. ie: It's the law, it is the absolute because it says so right here, etc etc etc". The ones googling every little speck of info so they can say SEE, SEE, I"M RIGHT!!eleven!

t

Guillermo
December 14, 2012, 10:57 AM
The ones here with the "zero tolerance" mentality just because the book says so

thank you

company policy can change with the wind.

If the guy saved was the CEO's nephew the hero would be an area manager by now.

the bottom line is this...it is wrong to fire the guy. There were extraordinary circumstances that lead to the "violation of policy".

powder
December 15, 2012, 07:35 AM
No, the bottom line is a company has liability concerns, pertaining to firearms on their properties: the ambulance chasing lawyers line up for this kind of stuff around the block-employee kills someone, lawsuits begin.

Employee acts on free will against company policy (gun at work), company is no longer liable for employee's actions.

I do not agree with the AZ policy, or the firing, but it's AZ's freedom of choice for their business. If you want to dictate what everyone creates for their policy, you are one step closer to Communism in China or North Korea. Freedoms and Liberties are a double-edged sword and you might not like how it always cuts.

guyfromohio
December 15, 2012, 07:40 AM
Government influence of policy drives us towards "communism". Market pressures influencing policy drives us towards freedom.

Guillermo
December 16, 2012, 12:08 AM
We are so concerned with "cost" rather than being honorable. These days "honor" is steamrolled by "liability".

The men that landed on Omaha Beach, that crossed the Potomac, that signed the Declaration of Independence did not think about "liability". They were men...good men...brave men.


“Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.”
― Leo Tolstoy

smalls
December 16, 2012, 04:18 PM
Invalid point. Back then they didn't have the laws or type of lawyers we have today. It's a different time, with different laws and rules that we must follow.

mitzip
December 16, 2012, 04:29 PM
This is a spectacular thread with awesome quotes, both original and quoted, in almost every post.

I'd like to point out this auto zone policy is shared by Walmart, most banks and some armored car companies. Those are the one's I'm aware of.

--------------------
Sent from my tablet. Please excuse my brevity, spelling and grammar.

powder
December 16, 2012, 06:18 PM
I'd like to point out this auto zone policy is shared by Walmart, most banks and some armored car companies. Those are the one's I'm aware of.


Absolutely, and the US Postal Service as well as UPS and FedEx, and on and on...

Wishing for a time of ago does not change the perspective of liabilities, or choices to be made by a business.

As a firearms Instructor do you think I enjoy buying liability insurance every year, and turning down certain groups because my coverage does not include their venue for the school they want me to teach? Nope, but that's the way of the gun today: gunslinger or legal beagles each...

Double Naught Spy
December 16, 2012, 07:01 PM
We are so concerned with "cost" rather than being honorable. These days "honor" is steamrolled by "liability".

The men that landed on Omaha Beach, that crossed the Potomac, that signed the Declaration of Independence did not think about "liability". They were men...good men...brave men.

While your appeal to emotion is well intended, as noted, it is invalid. Nearly every for profit business is not in business for the purpose of promoting honor. They are in business to make money - plain and simple. That's why they are called "busiensses" and not called "honors."

You see, "honor" doesn't pay the bills. Honor doesn't pay employees, many of whom happen to be veterans as well.

It is nice when people are honored, but the same military that you referred to in your post is and always has been serious about punishing those who break the rules and have been known to bust war heroes as well.

Maybe when you run a business, you can find a way to make it run on honor and not be susceptible to the burdens of insurance, liability, and other financial concerns. When you do, please share with the rest of us.

Guillermo
December 16, 2012, 09:40 PM
DNS,

First off, it has been a LONG time since I worked for someone else but even when I did, I was running their business. This is to say that I am quite familiar with running businesses as I have done so for decades.

Any concept or idea is easily tested by taking it to an extreme. (to anyone following, this is a fictitious scenario and any resemblance to anyone living or dead is purely coincidental, including Penn State.)

Let us say that there was a business that had, for the point of conversation, a convicted child molester who was the top salesman with the largest volume clients. Without his sales the company, teetering on solvency, would be out of business. If you fire him, he takes those clients to another company.

Using your theory, the owner should ignore the heinousness of the employee. After all, he has payrolls to meet. People depend on the business. And the horrible deed can't be undone.

Sorry dude. I can't go along with that.

Yes, I have lost money doing the right thing and I will surely do it again.

I am okay with that.

mitzip
December 16, 2012, 11:04 PM
Guillermo, I'm with you.

Powder, DNS, you know just as well as I, just because everyone's doing or thinkin' it doesn't make it right.

Funny thing is, if all the people that thought like myself, guillermo, and a lot of other people who have voiced their opinions on this thread, had always put their money where their mouth is, you guys would be on our side, because 'emotional' (read honorable) business is what would be selling.

Instead we've rewarded unsporting and dishonorable conduct. Now, a lot of those companies have grown large enough to create gov funded monopolies and no longer need our support to act as badly as they wish.

Walmart and banks for instance. :-(

Also, you can't blame all the smaller companies that have crappy policies. They hire people to make their policies who have been fed this load of BS at school. Some of the BS is created to stifle competition (by requiring artificial overhead capital to enter a market), and of course the lawyers love scaring you to death too.
--------------------
Sent from my tablet. Please excuse my brevity, spelling and grammar.

Double Naught Spy
December 17, 2012, 12:58 AM
First off, it has been a LONG time since I worked for someone else but even when I did, I was running their business. This is to say that I am quite familiar with running businesses as I have done so for decades.

Good, then you understand how ludicris it is for outsiders to tell you your business and how you should operate your business the way that they see fit over what you think is right or appropriate. I am sure you didn't or don't bend to the will of strangers to change policies you believe to be appropriate and right to suit their views with which you don't agree, do you?

Yet you want Autozone to do exactly that. Funny how that works.

Guillermo
December 17, 2012, 01:20 AM
You are right.

I do expect businesses and people to do the right thing.

When they do not I am at the very least, disappointed.

In cases such as this, I change my buying habits and call them the jerks they are.

BTW, I am willing to take any criticism for how I run my business and/or live my life.

A lot of times they are right and I can improve.

Jethro1200
December 17, 2012, 08:03 PM
mitzip said it well. The right thing is the right thing no matter what. I was in Yorktown Va. at the first protest or whatever you want to call it. It was the right thing for myself and about forty other people. The man in question was there, he did what he thought was right then and before. Do we have a chance at changing a policy that is so wrong, probably not but we did not just stand around and watch evil win with no opposition. What do you people want your children to see you do? How do you want them to act?

45_auto
December 18, 2012, 02:21 PM
We are so concerned with "cost" rather than being honorable. These days "honor" is steamrolled by "liability".

The men that landed on Omaha Beach, that crossed the Potomac, that signed the Declaration of Independence did not think about "liability". They were men...good men...brave men.

The men who died at Chosin Reservoir, or during the Tet Offensive, or during Desert Shield, or going up into the World Trade Centers to rescue people, or during Desert Storm, or in Iraq or Afghanistan within the last 10 years to defend your right to say crap like that above were not good or brave men?

I've sworn oaths and voluntarily put my life on the line in both military service and civilian law enforcement. When is the last time you risked your life or livelihood in defense of your country or community?

Trueno
December 18, 2012, 02:29 PM
The men that landed on Omaha Beach, that crossed the Potomac, that signed the Declaration of Independence did not think about "liability". They were men...good men...brave men.

The men who died at Chosin Reservoir, or during the Tet Offensive, or during Desert Shield, or going up into the World Trade Centers to rescue people, or during Desert Storm, or in Iraq or Afghanistan within the last 10 years to defend your right to say crap like that above were not good or brave men?

No earthly idea how you got the idea that guillermo doesn't/wouldn't think the men you mentioned aren't on the same par as the ones he listed.

:confused:

Guillermo
December 18, 2012, 03:27 PM
defend your right to say crap like that above were not good or brave men?

Did I say that?

Please cut and paste for if I even suggested it I would like to retract.

When is the last time you risked your life or livelihood in defense of your country or community?

risked my life?
It has been a couple of decades.

Risked my livelihood?
Fairly often although I consider the risk minimal and certainly worth it.

45_auto
December 18, 2012, 04:38 PM
We are so concerned with "cost" rather than being honorable. These days "honor" is steamrolled by "liability".

The men that landed on Omaha Beach, that crossed the Potomac, that signed the Declaration of Independence did not think about "liability". They were men...good men...brave men.

I read it as "These days honor is steamrolled by liability". The second statement implied that the days with the good brave men, when honor was not steamrolled by liability, ended after WW2.

rem44m
December 18, 2012, 05:31 PM
Government influence of policy drives us towards "communism". Market pressures influencing policy drives us towards freedom.

AMEN!

Guillermo
December 18, 2012, 05:32 PM
Certainly it was not my intent to suggest that honor died in WWII.

I apologize for any miscommunication.

powder
December 19, 2012, 08:16 PM
Do the right thing: do not be a draft dodger, and serve your country honorably. Yet, we have thousands of NRA members who will defend Ted Nugent's draft dodging Viet Nam and excessive pot smoking.

Businesses like AutoZone, General Electric, or Exxon Mobil do not confer with me/you on their policies and never will. Carry on with the boycott...

Double Naught Spy
December 19, 2012, 09:07 PM
2A boycotts of major corporations never succeed in changing the corporation's policies or practices.

Even if Autozone hires this guy back, they aren't going to change their policy.

Guillermo
December 20, 2012, 01:14 PM
excessive pot smoking.

please stay within the facts

Nuge dodged the draft but has never been a druggie

(not that smoking dope has anything to do with honor...this is just a correction. You made your point)

Sebastian the Ibis
December 22, 2012, 12:05 PM
There is an Advanced Autoparts down the road from me where the clerk open carries. They get my business.

powder
December 22, 2012, 08:11 PM
"please stay within the facts

Nuge dodged the draft but has never been a druggie

(not that smoking dope has anything to do with honor...this is just a correction. You made your point)"

I am within the facts: the article wherein Nugent admitted to being a draft dodger was in High Times magazine, where he also admitted to be a huge weed user and advocate.

Even though you do not like that history, it cannot be re-written.

Again, AutoZone is no different of an employer than ANY other: most have a no gun on property by employees policy, for insurance and liability reasons.

Trying to eliminate their freedoms and choices of how they run THEIR business, is more commie-think than I have seen in a long time here.

Like the Instructors said: you don't have to like it, just do it. Wanna make a change in American 2A battlefield? Attack the Insurance companies which impose these no-brainer decisions on company owners.

Guillermo
December 22, 2012, 09:53 PM
Powder

Nugent has been a anti-drug, anti-drinking evangelist since the 60s. I have never been a High Times reader so I will take your word that he was a druggie.

While previously mentioned, I will say again, you made your point with his lack of military service. Ted absolutely dodged the draft and is now pro military. And many follow his every word. Point made. People can be hypocrites. (or forgiving)

As to the insurance companies, you are right. There are a lot of anti 2nd Amendment organizations. And any one of them, that does not say "extenuating circumstances" in a case like this, has no honor. The guy saved an employee's life. That they will punish him for that is truly nauseating.

The "he should be fired because of the employee handbook" attitude reminds me of the Ford Pinto debacle. Ford knew they had a problem. They decided that it would be cheaper to have to pay off a few families of victims that burned to death than to fix the problem on the cars they already built.

It is another example of ignoring the right thing. The difference is that they were scum because of words on a memo instead of words in a handbook.

powder
December 25, 2012, 05:35 PM
Nugent has been a anti-drug, anti-drinking evangelist since the 60s. I have never been a High Times reader so I will take your word that he was a druggie.

I've never read High Times either, but Google is your friend.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ted+nugent+1977+high+times+interview&rlz=1C1ZMDB_enUS502&aq=2&oq=Ted+Nugent+%2B+High+times+interview+&sugexp=chrome,mod=9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&tbo=d&rlz=1C1ZMDB_enUS502&q=ted+nugent+draft+dodger+high+times&revid=1012397845&sa=X&ei=7RraUIyfN8SbqgHZ3oCwBw&ved=0CJMBENUCKAA4Cg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=6eb1946313ccd7d2&bpcl=40096503&biw=1024&bih=655

There's also information on recently skirting child support, until ordered to pay in 2005!

The High Times interview was in '77.

Guillermo
December 25, 2012, 05:50 PM
I have said, repeatedly, that your point was made.

Apparently you have more interest in arguing a peripheral point.

One more time.

You made your point with his lack of military service. Ted unquestionably dodged the draft and is now pro military. And many follow his every word. Point made. People can be hypocrites. (or forgiving)

Master Blaster
December 26, 2012, 09:14 AM
You are So right Powder, smoking pot Not serving in the military, boy that sounds just like Bill Clinton, and Barak Obama.

I am calling on our current President Barak Obama to resign, as he certainly did smoke a lot of pot when he was in High School and College, and did not ever serve in the Military. Do you want to start the petition or should I??? :)

:eek:

If you enjoyed reading about "Autozone Gun Issue" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!