• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Another easy target for the bad guys

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

HardChrome wrote:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-20033sy0sep09,0,5742545.story?coll=hr_tab01_layout

Yet another easy hit for the bad guys since most buysinesses will not allow their employees to be armed with anything more than a phone that can dial 911.

I like carrying my revolver but things like this make me want to start carrying my hi-capacity Browning more. Grrrr.


As a business owner myself.... I would not trust my employees to be armed and shoot criminals.They aretoo inexperienced and lack the training to make those decisions.

The legal ramifications could bankrupt my company if I were to be sued. We all know that thefamily of a dead bad guy can sue even if he was committing a crime. The law needs to change on this!!

I am in business to make money.... Armed employees can scare away customers. Accidental discharges can scare away morecustomers and get you sued.

If my business is likely to be robbed.. I will hire a guard.

If the employee wants to be armed... He can find employment elsewhere.


EDIT: I am all for the people being armed... But when something you do can hurt me financially... I have to draw the line.
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

I don't blame you. Good points. Way back when, I was working at a local camera store. I packed every night. Nobody knew it. I had one customer almost come over the counter at me one night. Weapon not needed. He never even had a clue. But I would have been prepared, not to mention having to walk out to my car every night after closing, often escorting any female employees who were leaving late as well.

Of course the problem with a guard is that most are not armed and those that are will surely be taken out of commission first. But it will probably deter the crime a little to those who want one less in their body count should they make it before a judge.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

HardChrome wrote:
I don't blame you. Good points. Way back when, I was working at a local camera store. I packed every night. Nobody knew it. I had one customer almost come over the counter at me one night. Weapon not needed. He never even had a clue. But I would have been prepared, not to mention having to walk out to my car every night after closing, often escorting any female employees who were leaving late as well.

Of course the problem with a guard is that most are not armed and those that are will surely be taken out of commission first. But it will probably deter the crime a little to those who want one less in their body count should they make it before a judge.
My wife will often close and lock the money in the safe. I stop by at the end of my shift and pick it up to take home. being armed and daylight... rather safe for me.

Armed guards only... What is the point in having an unarmed guard unless he is watching a building. ;)

Stores often have them stand at the entry door. Makes them visible when criminals enter. Snatch 'em up when they try to walk out with store goods. But makes it easy for criminals to take down right away. I like the idea of having them elsewhere.
 

yankees98a

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
144
Location
, ,
imported post

Leo229,

I find your comments not relating to the situation

One comment assumes the owner would have his employees armed to defend the business. That could results in lawsuits but not related to the original poster's message

The second is if a business doesn't disallow their employees from carrying. Letting their employee ccw on premise for their self defense is a seperate issue

Why should their be able to live depend on the quality of the guard you hired. BTW:If you hired someone not up to the task, the employees families would be able to sue you.

Also you seem to think an employee CCWing would scare your customers. If it's really concealed, they wouldn't know.




LEO 229 wrote:
HardChrome wrote:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-20033sy0sep09,0,5742545.story?coll=hr_tab01_layout

Yet another easy hit for the bad guys since most buysinesses will not allow their employees to be armed with anything more than a phone that can dial 911.

I like carrying my revolver but things like this make me want to start carrying my hi-capacity Browning more. Grrrr.


As a business owner myself.... I would not trust my employees to be armed and shoot criminals.They aretoo inexperienced and lack the training to make those decisions.

The legal ramifications could bankrupt my company if I were to be sued. We all know that thefamily of a dead bad guy can sue even if he was committing a crime. The law needs to change on this!!

I am in business to make money.... Armed employees can scare away customers. Accidental discharges can scare away morecustomers and get you sued.

If my business is likely to be robbed.. I will hire a guard.

If the employee wants to be armed... He can find employment elsewhere.


EDIT: I am all for the people being armed... But when something you do can hurt me financially... I have to draw the line.
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

I doubt that he was referring to concealed carry. No one would be frightened by that for sure. But as we know, some would inherently pull out their weapons to show to others for example which would invite trouble of all sorts. No owner could be guarateed that his armed employees would keep their hands off their weapons while they are working. I'd be willing to be that accidental discharges would be rampant. But chances are, the only ones who would carry would be the likes of us who are probably pretty well versed at carrying and using and not likely to play show and tell.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

HardChrome wrote:
I doubt that he was referring to concealed carry. No one would be frightened by that for sure. But as we know, some would inherently pull out their weapons to show to others for example which would invite trouble of all sorts. No owner could be guarateed that his armed employees would keep their hands off their weapons while they are working. I'd be willing to be that accidental discharges would be rampant. But chances are, the only ones who would carry would be the likes of us who are probably pretty well versed at carrying and using and not likely to play show and tell.
Exactly... If they CC and I did not know.. that is different than if I knew and allowed it. Therefore... I, as a business owner.. having full knowledge that they were armed on duty, can be held fully responsible for any act they take with their gun. Many business owners do not want this held over their heads.

To allow an employee to be openly armed my turn some customers away. This is evident with citizens when they see others who OC.

------

Yankee... Let me ask one one question...... Do YOU own a business?

If you answer "No" then I do not expect you to fully understand since you have nothing to lose and see things only as a self defense necessity.

I see it as... an employeefighting off an attacker. The employeepulls out a gun and kills him when he could have ran away. Now the store is liable and after the attorney fees and the successful law suit.... the business goes under.

I know it is heartless..... but I think most businesses see it like this....

If an employee is injured or killed... there are many more people out there to fill his shoes. Better to lose an employee than to lose the entirebusiness.

So my employees are taught.... do not fight for the store.... give the bad guy what he wants!!
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

I agree. The legal system is not fair. It's a matter of which attorney wins. If a thug get's shot by someone at Circuit City or a Hardee's for example, don't you think the family is going to see a gold mine in litigation? It doesn't matter if the shooting was justified. It's probably going to be cheaper for the business to settle a civil suit out of court for a sizeable amount than to see it in court.

It's no longer about right or wrong but about how big the pockets are of those even loosely conected. Forget about the person who pulled the trigger. It's no longer about that. Wrongful death cuts a very wide path through the courts. Probably not difficult to prove some responsibility in order to win including insifficient training of the person carrying the weapon or lack of a sign at the door indicating that thugs may become part of the flooring.
 

Neplusultra

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
2,224
Location
Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

LEO you may know more about this than I do. What does the law say about someone sueing someone else and losing? Does the one sued have a right to collect reasonable legal fees? And by that I mean from the one filing the suit "and" the lawyer who should have known better. After all the lawyer stood to gain from winning and is equally guilty of bringing these suits that "are cheaper to settle than fight".
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

HardChrome wrote:
I agree. The legal system is not fair. It's a matter of which attorney wins. If a thug get's shot by someone at Circuit City or a Hardee's for example, don't you think the family is going to see a gold mine in litigation? It doesn't matter if the shooting was justified. It's probably going to be cheaper for the business to settle a civil suit out of court for a sizeable amount than to see it in court.

It's no longer about right or wrong but about how big the pockets are of those even loosely conected. Forget about the person who pulled the trigger. It's no longer about that. Wrongful death cuts a very wide path through the courts. Probably not difficult to prove some responsibility in order to win including insifficient training of the person carrying the weapon or lack of a sign at the door indicating that thugs may become part of the flooring.
Ya... Classic case of how the system has been exploited.

Just like the Judge who sued the dry cleaners over his lost pants. They tried to settle for more than $10,000 but he did not bite. Judge lost his case but the dry cleaner lawyer fees totaled.... $100,000!!
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Neplusultra wrote:
LEO you may know more about this than I do. What does the law say about someone sueing someone else and losing? Does the one sued have a right to collect reasonable legal fees? And by that I mean from the one filing the suit "and" the lawyer who should have known better. After all the lawyer stood to gain from winning and is equally guilty of bringing these suits that "are cheaper to settle than fight".

I thought that it was that way... at least.. it should be!!

I cannot say for sure. Not my area of expertise.
 

SIGguy229

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
349
Location
Stafford, VA, , Afghanistan
imported post

LEO...from a business owner perspective, I agree with your premise "don't fight for the store, give them what they want"...but would you allow your employees to carry to defend themselves only?



If, after they give the BG what they want (money, merchandise, etc.), what if the BG doesn't want to leave witnesses and decides to take their life?



I'm curious how you would address from this perspective. Would your opinion change if/when VA were to get a castle doctrine-type law?



v/r
 

vtme_grad98

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
385
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, ,
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
So my employees are taught.... do not fight for the store.... give the bad guy what he wants!!
Sadly, there are too many criminals these days that want more than just money. Being cooperative doesn't help much if it turns out that the crook wanted you to look more scared than you did, and kills you for not meeting his expectations. To be honest, I highly doubt that 47 year old unarmed woman did anything other than try to give the thugs what they wanted.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

SIGguy229 wrote:
LEO...from a business owner perspective, I agree with your premise "don't fight for the store, give them what they want"...but would you allow your employees to carry to defend themselves only?


If, after they give the BG what they want (money, merchandise, etc.), what if the BG doesn't want to leave witnesses and decides to take their life?


I'm curious how you would address from this perspective. Would your opinion change if/when VA were to get a castle doctrine-type law?

v/r
When your being sued.. The lawyer will question the fact that the employee is on the clock and packing a gun.

Even if he was protecting his self against a person "a customer" who enters the store.... he is still connected to the store itself. If he walked up and punched a old lady in the face because he did not like her son... it falls back on the store.

Now if my business cannot be held liable for my employee shooting someone while on the clock... I may be more open to the idea of them packing a heater.
 

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
imported post

:cuss:
smile_angel.gif
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

I assume you mean liable in a civil sense as opposed to a criminal sense. I think civil cases are a lot easier to win which is wht they are so prevalent. Again, it's all about the money rather than right or wrong.
 

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

I seem to remember a conversation on here aboutbusinesses taking out life insurance policies on their employees, and then not letting them carry to protect themselves (I think Pizza Hut was the business).

From an EMPLOYEE's point of view, I'm not going to ask about a gun policy and, if I happen to see or hear about one, I may just pretend I didn't. I would rather save my own life and risk getting fired than the other way around.

Off the employee thing, and back to the OP, it's really too bad that there weren't any armed patrons there to take those guys out. Lord knows I'd have my hand on my gun if I saw two guys wearing all black with bandana's on their faces walk into the resturant I'm eating at. All of you VA carriers should spend more time in Newport News lol.
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

That's what bugs me the most about people asking why I carry. The surely won't be asking anymore if something like this happens and one of us is around. If I only carry when I think I might need it, what are the chances that I'm going to have it on me?

When I'm out with my daughter, taking her to the beach, I don't think, "I need to stop by Wal-Mart so I better go home first and get my gun. But after Wal-mart I need to go to the library so I had better go home and put it away since I'll never need it there."
 

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

When I'm out with my daughter, taking her to the beach, I don't think, "I need to stop by Wal-Mart so I better go home first and get my gun. But after Wal-mart I need to go to the library so I had better go home and put it away since I'll never need it there."
Exactly. In fact, there are a lot of times I go out and realize that carrying is going to be a nuisance, but in the end I do what I have to, remembering that the one time I don't have it is the time I'll need it.
 

HardChrome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
236
Location
Newport News, VA, ,
imported post

I got a lesson on exactly that about a year ago. I decided I didn't need to carry at all on a short errand from home. I went to the drug store just as a robbery was taking place. I had no idea even after I had left the store until I saw two store employees come running out and a guy jump out of a taxi that was parked at the store. They chased him around the rear of the store. Being unarmed, I was a little afraid to go see what was going on but I felt I needed to offer assistance if possible.

I drove around the rear and saw the employees struggling with the suspect, I mean thug. They had him in control for the most part as I called 911 and relayed the events to the dispatcher until the police arrived. I just wish I had had my pistol with me. I would/might have had it out and pointed in a safe direction just in case but in any event I would have felt safer had I had it with me.

The guy was caught. He had been riding in this one taxi (unknown to the driver), stopping in Walgreens stores and robbing them (claiming to have a gun) and then riding in the taxi to the next one. What a kook!
 
Top