Gixxus Christ! Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Horse hockey! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopLeft Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Negative spin: long time friend was terminated for something similar (but not as engaging). To this day he has trouble securing a job as it's well known (media search, Google, etc) his actions. He believes the companies view him as a "dangerous policy breaker" but he can't prove anything. Interviews go well until the background check then all sorts of reasons for not hiring. Having said that, it's a shame AutoZone doesn't recognize this mans moral fiber and courage for another life in jeopardy. I could understand if it was his response for cash or property, but another human being?! Very pathetic on the company's part.I wonder if the company has armed security at corporate headquarters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cOoTeR Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 The cash part should have no basis in it these companies have insurance for crap like this. Their computer system/register track the money that is in the drawers so they can prove that. Which is why most stores say to just give the robber what they want. Now the man being forced into a back room would give him reason to believe the other guy intended on harming his boss. If he did nothing to help 1. He'd have to live with it the rest of his life. 2. The company would probably ask him why he didn't use his training to help further adding to his conscience.I think its bullshit that they'd fire him over it but the people that make these decisions don't live in the real world. They live in a scewed reality that all people are good and guns are bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopLeft Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 The cash part should have no basis in it these companies have insurance for crap like this. Their computer system/register track the money that is in the drawers so they can prove that. Which is why most stores say to just give the robber what they want. Now the man being forced into a back room would give him reason to believe the other guy intended on harming his boss. If he did nothing to help 1. He'd have to live with it the rest of his life. 2. The company would probably ask him why he didn't use his training to help further adding to his conscience.I think its bullshit that they'd fire him over it but the people that make these decisions don't live in the real world. They live in a scewed reality that all people are good and guns are bad.Sad to say, but very likely true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conn-e-rot Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Now the man being forced into a back room would give him reason to believe the other guy intended on harming his boss. If he did nothing to help 1. He'd have to live with it the rest of his life. 2. The company would probably ask him why he didn't use his training to help further adding to his conscience.This is why you should have no conscience Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 I will no longer be getting into the Zone.......Advance or O' Reilly for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDBGoalie Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) A few things wrong with this situation.1. What kind of half assed thief lets employees leave a robbery?2. How does the thief escape if he is cornered by the employee with a weapon in the back office?3. The line on lethal intent is really fuzzy here and I personally would have chose to protect someone unable to defend themselves and the rules be damned.4. Autozone did what they had to do. If they did not adhere to policy, people would no longer respect that policy. In their eyes the loss of petty cash is better than a gunfight breaking out and potential loss of life or limb along with bad PR.Advanced, O'Reily's, NAPA.... all will have the same policy and would have the same response. Corporate policy and insurance demand it.I understand the liability and other reasons that require companies to have policies like this. However, I disagree wholeheartedly with them. When I worked in the automotive industry, I might have violated company rules every day I had to close the store. Counting a wad of cash and then taking it to the bank while people expect you to have lots of cash is a recipe for disaster. I was always ready to defend myself if necessary.I also understood and expected to lose my job if I was caught or I had to use my weapon to defend myself or others. Those policies were clearly defined as a automatic firing. Shitty, but that's life, and I'd rather keep living and get another job than get killed while being robbed. Edited December 6, 2012 by BDBGoalie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDBGoalie Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 We have a no gun policy at OSU too - not even allowed to keep it in our cars, which leaves everyone completely defenseless all the time, even on their way home, which as I understand is an OSU rule that is against Ohio law. There's a group that is preparing to sue OSU over it right now too, because their rule basically says 'I don't care what ohio law is, this is our rule" .... I haven't educated myself on the topic yet, but here's their fb page if anyone is interested: Students for CCWOSU law violates Ohio CHL law. We are allowed to lock the weapon in our vehicles in a secure location in situations like that. It can never leave the vehicle, and it is a very grey line. Kind of like Easton's stupid Gun buster signs on their garages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2talltim Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Actually, I believe they can not do anything about that, as the vehicle is personal property along with everything in it. I know when I took my course, I was still in college and was told as long as the gun was in the truck it was still legal. ? I've also been told that as long as the weapon doesn't leave the vehicle it's legal by the local sherrif back home. Is this incorrect?As far as the law goes, no they cant stop me if they find a firearm in a employees car they can not sue them or file any charges...BUT they can terminate on the grounds of braking company policy. Same goes for telling your boss to go fuck himself, not illegal but you may be fired.Another fucked up policy our company has is they can search you car when ever it is on company property, its uder our substance abuse poicy, and we had to sign paper to say we give consent to this, if you dont sign the paper you are no longer employed. Edited December 6, 2012 by 2talltim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limenine9r Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Should have 'thrown some elbows' and he'd still have his job...I like O'Reilly's better anyway,this just confirmed it:nono:Agreed, O'Reilly's has been a welcomed convience - Autozone service is unacceptable in my area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CephasGT Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Do they even bother with the ASE farce anymore? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottb Posted December 7, 2012 Report Share Posted December 7, 2012 Actually, I believe they can not do anything about that, as the vehicle is personal property along with everything in it. I know when I took my course, I was still in college and was told as long as the gun was in the truck it was still legal. ? I've also been told that as long as the weapon doesn't leave the vehicle it's legal by the local sherrif back home. Is this incorrect?I am not a lawyer or anything even close, but I think line is if there is a sign stating "no guns on property" compared to "no guns in the building"I would look at a source such as a lawyer or even BuckeyeFireams.org for the rules / laws as they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaNick Posted December 8, 2012 Report Share Posted December 8, 2012 He's better off, they pay fast food pay anyway I heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.