Concealed Carry Concealed Carry 
Bank teller stops alleged robber, loses job Bank teller stops alleged robber, loses job:
Bank teller stops alleged robber, loses job - CNN.com
We need to write these pukes and express our outrage over their actions...
https://www.key.com/index.html
KeyBank
1329 4th Ave
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 447-5767
If you have an account I would recommend closing it and making sure they document why...
| |  |
It does suck that he lost his job, a suspension would have been appropriate. But he did know the bank policy. And the rational behind the policy is sound.
Coffee the elixir of life!
What part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" do you not understand?Originally Posted by truckie011
"The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke
The right to bear arms does not include the right to use a weapon in violation of one's employment restrictions.
Thus, a prohibition on the use of weapons while on an employer's premises does not infringe the right to bear arms in any way shape or form.
We know you don't like the fact that you don't get to interpret the constitution as you see fit.
"We the People" is a collective description rather than "everyman a law unto himself."
What part of "We the People" don't you understand?
Parts Maker
So you think there was like what, a copy of the 2nd Amendment endorsement addendum on the guy's paperwork he filled out in the HR office after accepting the job?
Maybe he should have applied to one of those banks with the affirmative 2a policy, instead of the one with the no guns policy.
I didnt read any part in the story in which the teller used a weapon, so no 2nd amendment right was violated. Secondly, I agree although you have the right to bear arms, unless your life is in immediate danger, or you feel as though it may be, you shouldnt draw a weapon, which again, wasnt a part of this story.
All the teller did was chase the would be robber down, and pinned him until the police arrived. I agree a suspension would have been necessary in this situation, but obviously wasnt the outcome.
I guess we win some and lose some dont we? Cant win them all otherwise wed all get too cocky.
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier....One died for your soul; the other for your freedom.
Way overboard on the dismissal. The fact that people don't fight back is what gives the BG the upper hand.
It's unfortunate but you'll never be able to have a bank account as this is the policy at most banks.
I can tell you from many years in banking, bank prohibit employees from engaging a holdup man. Just give them the cash, why because it's insured and the banks are covered for it. What is not covered is the lawsuit from the employee the bank will get if he gets shot.
I like their policy. What was their address again?
You can run... but you'll just die tired. 3%
santa
to comply or not to comply, this is the question. this particular case IS NOT a 2nd amendment issue. however the bank is private property and the owner(s) have the right to forbid firearms on their property. i can vote with my feet and use a different bank. but most banks and some businesses have the same policy. what has happened is the bad guys have come to realize that the "comply" policy guarantees that they have little risk in holding up a bank or business. it seems at times we have become a nation of sheep. one could spend years contemplating various senarios on what they would or could do if armed in a similar situation. i think that the banks reaction is WAY TOO HARSH perhaps a suspension would be better. such is the crazy mixed up world we live in. scotty beam me up as there is no intelligent life down here.
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
