Walgreens

[crazymailman]

I don't think this has been discussed before, and thought this might interest you. Evidently Walgreens isn't a fan of the 2nd.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fired-walgreens-gun-toting-michigan-pharmacist-filled-robbers/story?id=13705438

[beatlesfan]

I think that was posted on here. Wallgreens would prefer that all the employees were killed. Cuts down on labor costs...

Sent from Tapatalk

[crazymailman]

Must have just missed it. Sorry for any double posts.

[BuckeyeBlast]

Personally, I think any company not ran by an individual or partnership should be forbidden to have policies which take away employees rights to CCW or self defense. I know many will disagree, but those are my feelings. Anti-weapons policies are put into company handbooks not as a statement against weapons, but as a barrier against lawsuits should someone act irresponsibly or an employee 'go postal.' I think that companies should have legal backing in not taking away people's rights, and should instead be held responsible should someone 'go postal' and employees are hurt who have been forbidden from defending themselves. Just my controversial opinion.

[beatlesfan]

Personally, I think any company not ran by an individual or partnership should be forbidden to have policies which take away employees rights to CCW or self defense. I know many will disagree, but those are my feelings. Anti-weapons policies are put into company handbooks not as a statement against weapons, but as a barrier against lawsuits should someone act irresponsibly or an employee 'go postal.' I think that companies should have legal backing in not taking away people's rights, and should instead be held responsible should someone 'go postal' and employees are hurt who have been forbidden from defending themselves. Just my controversial opinion.

Controversial maybe, but I agree.