Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But this wasn't stealing DVD's or the latest sneakers, this was a firearm. 2 firearms. We know where these guns were headed - to the black market, to those that cannot otherwise obtain firearms legally, i.e. career criminals. I have no doubt that be stopping this criminal he prevented further crimes down the line.
No doubt the criminal knew to target Academy, i.e. the big box stores. At every local gun store that I have been into the guys behind the counter are armed.
Actually I believe he was stealing both the gun and the bullets for it at the same time. Hence my question about what if he loaded the firearm in the store.
I've bought firearms at Academy before. Obviously he wouldn't be allowed to load it or if I remember even purchase it at the counter. Likely a salesman was showing him the gun and he bolted.
Ammunition is stocked on the shelf so he could have just grabbed a box or two before or after. He would have to have broken open the ammunition box and loaded it on the run, not easy or practical.
07-13-2018, 01:03 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
Yes many places have policies surrounding this. They don’t want the liability of the employee getting hurt or getting others hurt due to their heroics. It’s not about protecting criminals, it’s about protecting the company from suits. If people didn’t sue over everything it wouldn’t be a problem, but as it is I don’t blame the employers.
Really, that makes no sense in our sue-happy culture. I could see a case where the company gets sued by family members, of deceased or injured relatives, for having such a policy and no security to prevent a deadly weapon from being ALLOWED to have been taken from a store that sells such weapons. I could see the outrage over the video of the manager just letting the guy walk out of the store with a deadly weapon and then go on to shoot his wife and kids or some other deadly incident. Why did someone not try to stop him, why was there no security, how is this safe when criminals know such a policy exists? The manager then says hey don't blame me it's the policy of the store to let criminals take deadly weapons if they want. Jeez! There are plenty of lawyers willing to take that to court.
I have worked retail and the rule is always the same. Cooperate and give the robber what they want. The store does not want a hero and especially not a dead one. In the big scheme of things they do not pay you enough for it to be worth protecting their merchandise with your life. And they have insurance...but the average retail worker does not!
Years ago I lived in walking distance of a nice local convenience store that was run by an elderly gentleman. He worked a LOT of hours and I am sure they were not paying him more than minimum wage. He was robbed one day and he pulled a gun from under the counter. The robber shot and killed him. For $12 plus change. That's all that was in the register.
Since these address my experience, I will clarify a few things.
As the security guard, my job was to deter, observe, and report. I was not to touch, restrain, detain, question, follow, confront, search, or otherwise interract with potential shoplifters. I was allowed to ask people to bring their "purchases" to the cashier. The deterrence came in the form of being visibly present as a uniformed officer. In terms of power to actively prevent stealing, I had none.
Now, some stores have the insurance and legal protection to employ inventory control officers who do have the authority from the store management to actively intervene in a shoplifting event. But most unarmed, uniformed security guards you see in retail settings are just boogey men, there to scare people into not stealing.
Had I physically grabbed the perpetrator, I would have been fired, my company would likely have lost the contract, and I could have been sued.
The most I ever did was stand directly in front of the exit, but even then the thief would only need to push past me and I would have let them go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005.
I misunderstood what you were saying they wouldn’t have liability for, thanks
But this wasn't stealing DVD's or the latest sneakers, this was a firearm. 2 firearms. We know where these guns were headed - to the black market, to those that cannot otherwise obtain firearms legally, i.e. career criminals. I have no doubt that be stopping this criminal he prevented further crimes down the line.
No doubt the criminal knew to target Academy, i.e. the big box stores. At every local gun store that I have been into the guys behind the counter are armed.
He stole two guns from a pawnshop earlier the same day. I’d think those guys would be armed I guess not.
I have a problem with trying to make retail employees responsible to try to stop potential crimes however. They don’t make enough to put that on them, they aren’t trained, and the people who are in the stores should not be put in harms way in hopes of preventing some other crime that may or may not happen later. I’d wager most retail employees like the policy and don’t want to be John Wayne for $9 an hour.
In any case, insurance companies weigh risk, and policies are designed around those risks. They’ve kept defective cars in the market because the bean counters said it’s cheaper to pay off the families of people killed than to recall and fix them all. Businesses pretty much have to do what the insurers tell them to do, as the poster ahead of me said so well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.