Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14319284

Instantly, Shawn Ray and Justin Richins kicked into gear, spinning the gunman around. Lori Poulsen ripped the gun away and secured it. They all held onto the man until police arrived minutes later.

The four Layton Walmart employees felt it was mission accomplished. Police officers told them they had done everything right.

But a week later, all four were fired from their jobs. Walmart said their actions had violated company policy and put their fellow workers and shoppers at risk.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,102 Posts
Where's Layton?
Who made the decision to fire them?
The pussi-fication of America is well underway, and big stupid companies that say "surrender to criminals-- don't resist" are part of the problem.
I'll write a letter or make a phone call to the SOB who made the decision to fire them.

(I can understand the C.Y.A. rationale behind stores having such a policy, but under these circumstances it looks like an exception to the policy was warranted. Or at least this violation of store policy should have gotten the employees a reprimand. A written warning. A letter in their personnel file. Not termination.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
gunsmoker said:
Where's Layton?
Who made the decision to fire them?
The pussi-fication of America is well underway, and big stupid companies that say "surrender to criminals-- don't resist" are part of the problem.
I'll write a letter or make a phone call to the SOB who made the decision to fire them.

(I can understand the C.Y.A. rationale behind stores having such a policy, but under these circumstances it looks like an exception to the policy was warranted. Or at least this violation of store policy should have gotten the employees a reprimand. A written warning. A letter in their personnel file. Not termination.)
Looks like Utah ...

Walmart defended the firings in a statement.

"We appreciate the intentions demonstrated by our associates in this situation, but the actions taken put their safety -- and potentially the safety of our customers and other associates -- in jeopardy," Walmart spokesman Dan Fogleman said. "In their roles within the store, they were aware of our expectations regarding safety and, unfortunately, their actions have led to them no longer working for the company."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
So you can't stop a criminal, but can you be fired if you step aside and say, "Take whatever you want, man. I'm no hero."? :screwy: Did "Spiderman" teach us nothing?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,120 Posts
gunsmoker said:
pussi-fication
While some might find the term offensive, I have to admit that one made me laugh...

Perhaps you could give it a Webster like definition for future usage... :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,823 Posts
I just love that they had to bring someone in to fire them. No one at the store had the balls to do it?

"She said, 'You're fired,'" Richins recalled, of the person brought in to let him go. "You're being terminated for a violation of AP09." AP09 is Walmart's policy on dealing with shoplifters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
drtybykr said:
I just love that they had to bring someone in to fire them. No one at the store had the balls to do it?

"She said, 'You're fired,'" Richins recalled, of the person brought in to let him go. "You're being terminated for a violation of AP09." AP09 is Walmart's policy on dealing with shoplifters.
:ditto:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,447 Posts
Ehh someone got the wrong end of the stick on this one.. I personally wouldn't fire anyone who POSSIBLY SAVED lives instead of endangering them. I hope Sam Walton is rolling over in his grave right now. If this perp had killed a a bunch of people, Wal-mart would be issuing a statement saying sorry to the families and doing an investigation on why no one tried stopping him,lol. crooked @#$ world.. I swear..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,148 Posts
Archangel said:
gunsmoker said:
pussi-fication
While some might find the term offensive, I have to admit that one made me laugh...

Perhaps you could give it a Webster like definition for future usage... :lol:
The only valid complaint anyone could have is that it is sexist, implying females do not have "what it takes." Saying a male is pussified is specifically making a comparison that the male is just as ineffective at an expected male ability as a female. Any other complaint is null and void, especially a claim that it is cursing. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
I see both sides...

If things had gone bad and somebody were killed/injured from their interaction, the lawsuit would have been positively staggering.

However, I think their actions may look pretty well on a resume and think that with the news story they may stand a chance at an even better job with an employer who can respect their decision making abilities..
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,624 Posts
Well, they worked at Walmart and should have known their polices.

But, they quite possibly saved their lives and the lives of others in the store... and that is worth ANY job, especially a friggin Walmart job.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,594 Posts
What? No "Old West" allowed in the "Old West?" Say it ain't so! I hope everyone is hitting the poll in the article.

My dear mother-in-law new business very well. She didn't have any advanced education, but she spent hours every day, at the library, reading the Wall Street Journal. She rented storage space for trailers in her Omaha yard, and put every dollar into stocks. She did well investing in many businesses, especially Dollar General, but she always hated Wal-Mart. She not only was angered by their monopoly, but she insisted on calling them Marxists. She was a very sweet, and very smart lady. She would've had them pegged today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
Hock25 said:
The only valid complaint anyone could have is that it is sexist, implying females do not have "what it takes." Saying a male is pussified is specifically making a comparison that the male is just as ineffective at an expected male ability as a female. Any other complaint is null and void, especially a claim that it is cursing. :)
Using that word in that manner conveys negativity toward females.

As for Walmart, I see their side of things. If the the employees had not been successful in their attempt to disarm the gunman, they could have been shot, plus customers could have been shot. OTOH, it took a lot of guts for unarmed employees to jump a gunman and I'm sorry that they were fired.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
it's weird...all I can do is just shake my head when I read this story. I've read it 2 or 3 times to make sure I didn't miss anything....still... :-k
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,102 Posts
Melissa5 said:
Hock25 said:
The only valid complaint anyone could have is that it is sexist, implying females do not have "what it takes." Saying a male is pussified is specifically making a comparison that the male is just as ineffective at an expected male ability as a female. Any other complaint is null and void, especially a claim that it is cursing. :)
Using that word in that manner conveys negativity toward females.

As for Walmart, I see their side of things. If the the employees had not been successful in their attempt to disarm the gunman, they could have been shot, plus customers could have been shot. OTOH, it took a lot of guts for unarmed employees to jump a gunman and I'm sorry that they were fired.
Using that word in that manner recognizes that there are genetically and culturally ingrained traits that, on average, differentiate between most men and most women.
Women tend to be more nurturing, supportive, group-action-oriented, and less prone to physical violence.
But sometimes a bolder hands-approach is called for, with a determined individual showing initiative and handling a problem with a surprisingly violent application of physical force against an attacker.
That is a characteristic that men are known for. Sometimes it gets the men in trouble and that's why prisons are full of men serving hard time. Sometimes it's a very healthy and appropriate trait that saves lives-- both men's and women's lives.

When men are unreasonably expected to behave more like women and boys are taught to behave like girls, I think the term applies. Pussi-fication.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
gunsmoker said:
Melissa5 said:
Hock25 said:
The only valid complaint anyone could have is that it is sexist, implying females do not have "what it takes." Saying a male is pussified is specifically making a comparison that the male is just as ineffective at an expected male ability as a female. Any other complaint is null and void, especially a claim that it is cursing. :)
Using that word in that manner conveys negativity toward females.

As for Walmart, I see their side of things. If the the employees had not been successful in their attempt to disarm the gunman, they could have been shot, plus customers could have been shot. OTOH, it took a lot of guts for unarmed employees to jump a gunman and I'm sorry that they were fired.
Using that word in that manner recognizes that there are genetically and culturally ingrained traits that, on average, differentiate between most men and most women.
Women tend to be more nurturing, supportive, group-action-oriented, and less prone to physical violence.
But sometimes a bolder hands-approach is called for, with a determined individual showing initiative and handling a problem with a surprisingly violent application of physical force against an attacker.
That is a characteristic that men are known for. Sometimes it gets the men in trouble and that's why prisons are full of men serving hard time. Sometimes it's a very healthy and appropriate trait that saves lives-- both men's and women's lives.

When men are unreasonably expected to behave more like women and boys are taught to behave like girls, I think the term applies. Pussi-fication.
You don't get it, do you? That is offensive to women.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
I agree that the employees did the right thing morally, and I wish our courts and lawsuits weren't setup to punish them or the company they worked for in the event something went wrong.

Imagine if other Walmart employees pursued the same course of action at a later incident. The thief started firing wildly and 2 customers were killed and 1 Walmart employee was wounded. The gunmen is taken into custody alive. Later there are the civil suits by the families of the customers and the Walmart employee. The gunmen is called as a witness in all cases.

Lawyer: "Did you plan on shooting anyone that day?"
Gunman: "No, absolutely not."
Lawyer: "So you would say that the actions of the Walmart employees, acting as representatives of Walmart Inc, caused you to shoot and kill Jane Doe?"
Gunman: "Yes."
Lawyer: "Also, as these records show, Walmart Inc obviously encourages employees to recklessly engage armed criminals due to the fact that other employees involved in a Jan 13th, 2011 incident were not punished in accordance with Walmart's policies."

Wouldn't be looking good for Wal Mart at that point.

It's sad that a company has to go so far to protect itself from liability that they can't be loyal to employees who try to do the ethical thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
Melissa5 said:
Using that word in that manner conveys negativity toward females.
I'd have to disagree..... the use of the word reflects more on societal established gender traits rather than women in general. I.E. using the term "pussification" it does not mean one implies that all women have such traits, but does reflect on an established societal value, as much as one may disagree with that value. It's similar to how saying a woman has the "balls" to do something doesn't imply that all men are brave and women lack bravery.

Regardless of how one sees it, PC isn't something too many here are keen on, including myself, hah.

As for Walmart, I see their side of things. If the the employees had not been successful in their attempt to disarm the gunman, they could have been shot, plus customers could have been shot. OTOH, it took a lot of guts for unarmed employees to jump a gunman and I'm sorry that they were fired.
This should be cut and dry for Walmart...... a gun is pointed at an employee with no feasible escape route. Compliance does not guarantee one will not be shot. Potential for success or failure in the attempt to disarm is irrelevant when there is a life in immediate danger. Self-defense and defense of a life in immediate danger should take precedent. This is purely a monetary issue for Walmart, so they way they see it, they lose nothing by firing the employees and maintaining broad application of their policy. They don't want to allow for even a sliver of grey area to leave themselves open for future litigation. This places the employees in an untenable position and is very wrong in my opinion. Supporters of self-defense should be all over this, making Walmart feel the sting of their stubbornness and stupidity. However, this will never happen because the evil empire has made too many dependent on shopping there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
So, if Wal-Mart now decides that they want to fire folks for not following policies, does this now mean that every time an associate breaks policy they will be terminated? Will there not be any other form of punishment from now on except for termination?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
Metalheadisme said:
Melissa5 said:
Using that word in that manner conveys negativity toward females.
I'd have to disagree..... the use of the word reflects more on societal established gender traits rather than women in general. I.E. using the term "pussification" it does not mean one implies that all women have such traits, but does reflect on an established societal value, as much as one may disagree with that value. It's similar to how saying a woman has the "balls" to do something doesn't imply that all men are brave and women lack bravery.

Regardless of how one sees it, PC isn't something too many here are keen on, including myself, hah.
You don't seem to get it either. If you say a woman has balls, that is a positive statement. If you say a man is a pussy, that is a negative statement. Used like that, balls=good, pussy=bad. It's not being PC, it's about not being crass and offensive to women.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top