The bank is in PRCA, so it's unlikely that they will allow the tellers to be armed. Bank tellers are working with money, which can be replaced, hence why they have insurance. If they are allowed to be armed, they should use the firearms only to protect life, not defend property.
In other states where CC is legal, I feel that citizens who have proper training should be able to CC on the job. Few exceptions would be if they work in areas that are "secure" or "sterile", and other citizens aren't able to carry (like the parts of airports and court houses). I do strongly feel that if ANYONE wants to carry, they should have proper training to safely handle the firearm, and so they will be aware of the law and when it's legal to use deadly force.
gf
I'd be finding a new job
I'm really surprised that all banks don't have bullet-proof glass, floor-to-ceiling if need be. I guess that would make too much sense. Another thought, does that type of glass protect against only low-velocity bullets or also against high-powered rifles or other types of explosives? (Patricia Hearst and the SLA, as well as the North Hollywood shootout, come to mind.)
Bank tellers are working with money, which can be replaced, hence why they have insurance. If they are allowed to be armed, they should use the firearms only to protect life, not defend property.
I'm really surprised that all banks don't have bullet-proof glass, floor-to-ceiling if need be. I guess that would make too much sense. Another thought, does that type of glass protect against only low-velocity bullets or also against high-powered rifles or other types of explosives? (Patricia Hearst and the SLA, as well as the North Hollywood shootout, come to mind.)
I tend to disagree. If a robber threatens life to get property I see no reason that he should not be shot. If he doesn't threaten life to get property, there is no reason to give him any property (or money). It is this, you can't shoot someone just because he is stealing your car or whatever attitude, that encourages robbery.
Now given the majority of bank tellers I have run into, I would probably not want them to be armed.
I tend to disagree. If a robber threatens life to get property I see no reason that he should not be shot. If he doesn't threaten life to get property, there is no reason to give him any property (or money). It is this, you can't shoot someone just because he is stealing your car or whatever attitude, that encourages robbery.
Now given the majority of bank tellers I have run into, I would probably not want them to be armed.
With that said, suppose a robber comes into the bank, shows no weapon, but simply slides the teller a demand note that reads something like "I have a gun, give me the money."
It would be safest to simply give the BG the money and let him go on his merry way
Thanks for the welcome.
The answer should be "I'm not authorized to do that, I'm so sorry".:girl_wacko:
Now you're challenging the BG and possibly escalating the situation. Supoose the BG does have a gun, is doped up on some substance and decides to go on a shooting spree. Now you have innocent lives in danger/lost, where handing over the cash may have been the simple solution.
Sure it's the safest thing but wouldn't stopping bank robberies be the safest thing in the long run?
Aggrivating BG into being more violent, actually firing off a few rounds when the enter the bank?
Minimizing injury/deaths are far more important IMHO.
Don't think we'll ever be able to "stop" bank robberies.
Not sure about nationwide, but I'm sure hearing a lot less about BG doing "invasion" type bank robberies.
Why would it be a publicized policy? Even if it were why do you think it would cause anyone to come in shooting if they wouldn't anyway?
I agree in the long run that has to be the goal. I'm not too sure that making that the short term goal is always the best policy.
Most all strong arm bank robberies could be stopped as I said using the system used in some European countries. A door, a space, another door. You have to be buzzed in and you have to be buzzed out. Policy is no one is buzzed out after a robbery until the police arrive.
There's still lots of bank robberies in Kalifornia. But then there is lot's of crime in Kalifornia and lot's of gun control (hmm, think there may be a connection?).
Thanks for the welcome.
The answer should be "I'm not authorized to do that, I'm so sorry".:girl_wacko:
Sure it's the safest thing but wouldn't stopping bank robberies be the safest thing in the long run?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?