Walgreen's Pharmacist fired for defending himself and coworkers


Walgreen's can kiss my money goodbye. It would appear the pharmacist's life was imperil and responded in a reasonable manner. Hope he cleans their clock in court.
 
Gun carry rules imposed by employer's on law abiding employees is unreasonable and risky - especially in high risk retail establishments like pharmacy's. I can understand the arguments on the side of the employer, I just don't agree that 'they have insurance to cover robberies' as a reason to keep someone from being allowed to protect their life or the lives of co-workers. Insurance covers the monetary loss, but there is no amount of insurance payment that can cover a needless loss of life. Walgreens can kiss my wallet good-bye!
 
No corporation or church should have rights above the individual. That is the root problem,of "policy" attempting to selectively per building undermine carry rights, leaving our gun in the car to arm a thief. We need to stress to our legislators NO CORPORATE OR CHURCH RIGHTS OVER AN INDIVIDUALS.
 
Personally, I think any business has the right to restrict what people do on their property. If you don't like it, you take your money elsewhere. Did they have the right to fire him? If their corporate policies say he can't bring a weapon in, yes.

Was it a bright idea to fire him? Not at all. Now the robbers know that the employees aren't armed. I bet this place gets robbed again within a year.

On a positive note, nearly every comment I've seen so far on The Consumerist is pro-pharmacist.
 
I worked for walgreens years ago. Their policy for employees was not to fight or argue with bg. Give them money or anything else they want. The origional article I read stated he was let go for for violating this policy. The fact he used a gun in violating this policy was a side note. I personally don't shop at walgreens anyway.
 
The good news is that this man is a Pharmacist and will be able to find employment again, and I suspect, soon. the bad news is that if you willingly violate your employers policies you will face discipline. No matter how wrong headed the policy is. That is just how the world works. If I don't like my employers policies, I'm free to leave at anytime.
 
I love how incidents like this point out easy targets to criminals. It begs the question of how man more workers lives are endangered by there corporate policies. A pharmacy is already a target, no need to roll out a red carpet. As stated earlier, clearly Walgreens does not need my business either.
 
To me, there is a big difference between "not fighting back"/"not escalating", and "shooting back after a criminal has pulled the trigger at you." The instant that criminal pulled the trigger, all companies policies are off. I don't care if they have a "don't shoot" policy, I wouldn't hesitate, either.
 
Boycott Walgreen's

Be Advised this is a NATIONAL WALGREEN'S POLICY, just like that of Pizza Hut and Godfathers's Pizza Under "Herman Cain"

Personally, WALGREEN's is now on my personal boycott list... with the rest of those business that prefer their employees remain defenseless...

I encourage others to do the same and to contact Walgreen's and their CEO
Start here:
Customer service | Contact Us | Walgreens.com
AND Here:
toll-free at 1-877-250-5823

Tell them to give the Pharmacist his job back, with a bonus and a public, televised apology...

As I have stated many times, IMHO LIFE trumps property and business rights...

How have we let it come to pass that we have less of a right to defend our lives, and that of our friends family and neighbors; when we are at work or are patronizing a particular place of business?

Have we not yet learned the EPIC FAILURE OF SO-CALLED GUN-FREE-ZONES?

The Second Amendment does not state "Shall Not Be Infringed" ... Except...
IF your zip-code is X, your standing or sitting at Y, OR the type or class of weapon you desire to carry is Z...
OR if you wish to carry said weapon openly or concealed...
OR if you have passed whatever legislation was passed this week by the federal, state or other municipality to allow you to actually exercise your fundamental, per-existing right protected by the Second Amendment; to protect yourself, your friends, family, neighbors, etc., from all enemies foreign and domestic using equal or greater force than may be brought against you...

Please keep that in mind when you are doing your due diligence research of all political candidates and incumbents actual records vs. their rhetoric and media spin...

That goes double for business that you patronize and those you choose to boycott based on the result of said due diligence research...

Sooner or later we are going to get these folks attention and hit em where it hurts their wallets!

No Rinos, No Liberals, NoBama 2012
 
Walgreen's issued a corporate response indicating that their employees are trained to comply with the demands of a robber. How do you "comply" when a robber jumps over a counter and starts shooting at you? I'd like to see how the corporate morons would comply in the same situation.
 
Did anyone read the responses to the article that was below the video? Walgreen's insures its employees against accidental death. That way, when the employees don't escalate and get killed, Walgreen's PROFITS $250,000 per employee killed. This means that it is not PROFITABLE to change the policy to allow employees to defend themselves.

How is that for a corporate policy that makes you want to vomit? Doesn't quite make you want to follow their policy for the "sake of customer safety" does it? They disarm every employee, even in hazardous neighborhoods, don't provide armed security, and then collect a quarter of a million on each employee terminated...nice.

Now we know what their "Reach Out to Disadvantaged Neighborhoods" was all about...PROFIT!
 
Did anyone read the responses to the article that was below the video? Walgreen's insures its employees against accidental death. That way, when the employees don't escalate and get killed, Walgreen's PROFITS $250,000 per employee killed. This means that it is not PROFITABLE to change the policy to allow employees to defend themselves.

How is that for a corporate policy that makes you want to vomit? Doesn't quite make you want to follow their policy for the "sake of customer safety" does it? They disarm every employee, even in hazardous neighborhoods, don't provide armed security, and then collect a quarter of a million on each employee terminated...nice.

Now we know what their "Reach Out to Disadvantaged Neighborhoods" was all about...PROFIT!
Since when is getting shot by a robber an accident?
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,255
Members
74,961
Latest member
Shodan
Back
Top