Taser fails, clerk resorts to gun (or, fired for breaking company policies?)

[Thernlund]

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/05/05/20080505abrk-MesaMart0505.html

Clerk shoots man trying to rob store
by Alex Whitlatch - May. 5, 2008 09:55 AM
The Arizona Republic

A 30-year-old man trying to rob a convenience store Sunday morning was shot several times by the clerk, police said.

According to a report, the man walked into the Arco Mesa Mart store in the 1500 block of South Country Club Drive about 7:30 a.m., hit the clerk on the head with a blunt object and demanded money.

Police said the clerk fought back and attempted to deploy a Taser, but was not successful. Then the clerk grabbed a gun and shot the man several times.

The man, who has not been identified, was taken to a hospital where he was in critical condition, police said. The clerk was treated and released at a hospital.

I wonder what Arco will do. Fire him? Hmmmm...


-T.

 

[TAB]

If he broke company policy, he should be fired.

 

[romma]

If he broke company policy, he should be fired.

If he broke company policy and gets fired, I hope people boycott Arco. granted it may be their company policy, but if so, it is a stupid one.

 

[murph50]

At least he's alive and therefore capable of being fired.
Kudos to the clerk--it sounds like quick thinking may have saved his life

 

[shdwfx]

If he broke company policy, he should be fired.

He protected company property and possibly saved someones life (his own), and that deserves firing even in the face of a poor company policy?

Is company policy a moral imperative?

 

[TAB]

If he broke company policy and gets fired, I hope people boycott Arco. granted it may be their company policy, but if so, it is a stupid one.

how is a policy that might keep them in biz a stupid one?

For example, My Comp ins for my employees states that if they are using power tools they MUST wear, eye protection. If one of them was not wearing said protection and lost thier vesion... guess who would be footing the bill? Me, I can tell you with out a doubt, if my corp got a big medical bill and a law suit, its going under. No maybe about it, it would be gone, all of its assets would be sold off( work truck, most of my tools) If that were to happen, I would be skrewed as I would not be able to work.

 

[Thernlund]

Are you suggesting that NOT having a gun would be safer?


-T.

 

[TAB]

I never said that, all I said was if he broke company policy he should be fired.

 

[ArmedBear]

The man, who has not been identified, was taken to a hospital where he was in critical condition

Damn, I knew there had to be a little bit of bad news in there.

Seriously, though, I just haven't ever been able to wrap my head around someone who would hit someone over the head for the contents of a cash register.

I mean, I guess I can understand a robber who deludes himself into thinking that nobody will get hurt. He just threatens someone, and they hand over the money, in his fantasy anyway.

But to just go and hit someone in a way that could kill him, or leave him brain-damaged for life? What sort of human being does this?

 

[Cosmoline]

If he broke company policy, he should be fired.

If there actually is fear of a lawsuit, firing the employee may be the last thing the company should do. Not every violation of company policy leads or should lead to termination, and by acting like a fool the company heads would simultaneously open themselves to a wrongful discharge suit and make the defense of a wrongful death or PI suit much more difficult. "Zero tolerance" policies and inflexible thinking costs companies billions. I've seen it personally. In this case the company would almost certainly be better off keeping a unified front against possible suit and admitting to no wrongdoing. The only time an employee should be cut loose is if their conduct was indefensible or otherwise well outside the scope of employment. In this case the man was fighting for his life and lawfully used deadly force. A smart company would keep him in pocket with the same counsel and work together to shut down any suit from the criminal. A stupid company would cut him loose, exposing him to side deals with plaintiff's counsel where his own admissions could open the company up to enormous losses.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Company policy doesn't trump my right to defend my life against predators.

I'm whole-heartedly in favor of respecting property rights, but two factors need to be considered:

1.) Is the property open to the public? If so, it's not truly private any more.

2.) Is my life my property? If so, life trumps mere material property.

 

[shdwfx]

The right to self defense is one with intrinsic and self-evident qualities.
It supersedes a ridiculous - arguably immoral - company policy.

No, he does not "deserve" to be fired.

 

[TexasRifleman]

If he broke company policy, he should be fired.

Whose side are you on again?

 

[Thernlund]

I never said that, all I said was if he broke company policy he should be fired.

Sure. And I would have generally agreed with you until you said...

For example, My Comp ins for my employees states that if they are using power tools they MUST wear, eye protection. If one of them was not wearing said protection and lost their vision... guess who would be footing the bill?

Seems to me this would be a more accurate comparison if you said your company had a policy AGAINST eye protection for some reason, then you got fired for wearing eye protection. Should you be fired? Maybe. You broke policy. But you only did so out of concern for your own safety. Eh?


-T.

 

[TAB]

no that would be diffrent, with a policy of eye protection means my comp will cover the claim. if I had a policy of no eye protection counter to what my INS company says, that would be foolish.

I don't see the diffrence between breaking the policy of no gun and say cussing in front of custmers. you still broke policy.

 

[ArmedBear]

Uh, because forcing a convenience store or gas station clerk to work unarmed is a lot like having a policy against fire extinguishers and smoke detectors, or safety glasses?

Morally, anyway...

Note that this happened in Arizona, where one can legally carry around a loaded firearm pretty much wherever he wants.

I mean, sure, you can make whatever company policy you want. But I won't automatically be your cheerleader for it.

 

[TAB]

do you have any stats to back up that claim? I can see where drawing a gun at the wrong time could turn things ugly fast.

Having worked in gas stations in college and working for them now doing other things( mainly remodels) Every single one I have ever talked to has always said, let them have what ever they want, its not worth your life.

 

[shdwfx]

I think the "insurance" angle is misguided from a moral perspective and possibly irrelevant from a practical one since we don't know Arco's insurance policy.

 

[Thernlund]

Uh, because forcing a convenience store or gas station clerk to work unarmed is a lot like having a policy against fire extinguishers and smoke detectors, or safety glasses?

That's right.

Note that this happened in Arizona, where one can legally carry around a loaded firearm pretty much wherever he wants.

No places with a liquior license. Everywhere else though.


-T.

 

[romeo212000]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[ArmedBear]

This guy didn't threaten the clerk. He attacked him.

Every single one I have ever talked to has always said, let them have what ever they want, its not worth your life.

They're making a lot of assumptions about the temperament and mental processes of armed robbers. Does that sound like a safe bet?

You do whatever you want.

 

[romeo212000]

Thats assuming they are simply content with your wallet or car keys. Had a manager when I worked at Sonic who was robbed and shot. My manager did exactly as he was instructed and gave the money to the bad guy and said look I won't call the cops, you have your money, I cant even see your face. The Bad guy shot him anyways.

 

[For Freedom]

I never said that, all I said was if he broke company policy he should be fired.

Good thing it ain't up to you.

 

[misANTHrope]

Does he deserve to get fired? Eh, I'm so-so on that.
Should he expect to get fired? Yes.
(assuming, of course, that he violated policy)

I've got no issue with an employer putting these policies in place. That said, I'll make my own decision what risk is greater, the risk of getting unemployed or the risk of getting dead. You'd better believe that if I ever got a job working a c-store, I'd be carrying at work, policy be damned.

 

[The Tourist]

You have to put yourself in the guy's place. Do you think that anyone, in the process of being beaten, should have to worry about his safety or his job?

Suppose the perp had hold of you and I tossed you a stiletto.

Would you seriously toss it back and reply, "Sorry, Tourist, but I'm up for a promotion next month..."