We've got an update to the convenience store clerk in Ohio who fired several shots at multiple armed robbers after they crashed a stolen minivan through the front of the store where he was working, and unfortunately it's not a good one.
As we reported last week, the clerk wasn't charged with any kind of crime, but his employer Circle K has a strict "no weapons at work" policy. I found evidence of other employees who'd be disciplined for acting in self-defense, including a Colorado woman who was allegedly fired just for trying to fend of a knife-wielding attacker with her bare hands.
I was concerned that the Ohio man who fired at the smash-and-grab robbers would face similar disciplinary action, and according to the employee himself, he actually did see his hours cut to zero, at least temporarily.
He says he received a text from his boss the following Monday telling him not to come to work and that he had been taken off the schedule.
[Kendrick] Watson says he initially believed the decision was temporary. But after two more days without work or an update, he thought he had been fired.
He says he was later told he could return to work, but he questioned how that would work given Circle K's policy against weapons.
After six years at the store, Watson says he has decided not to return.
Watson hopes others take the incident as a reminder to be prepared to protect themselves if they ever find themselves in a similar situation.
Now, if I were Watson I probably would have gone back to work and continued to quietly violate Circle K policy, as he'd apparently done for at least some of the last six years. What are they going to do, after all? Fire him?
Hopefully Watson has another job lined up, and one where there is no policy that demands he be disarmed while on the job.
When I first wrote about Watson's terrifying experience, I acknowledged that I understand why a company would tell employees not to confront shoplifters or chase after thieves. No amount of merchandise is worth losing your life.
But there's a big difference between running after someone over a candy bar that was swiped and having a gun to protect yourself from armed robbers or irate customers. On Tuesday of this week a convenience store clerk in Atlanta was shot and killed, and last week a 66-year-old woman working behind the counter at a convenience store in Hawaii was stabbed to death, allegedly by a customer.
Those are just two recent examples of the dangers that convenience store employees can face, particularly those working late at night or in the early morning hours. And while having a gun is no guarantee that you'll survive a violent attack, being forcibly disarmed by your employer does not improve your odds.
Circle K can adopt whatever policies it wants, but that doesn't mean those policies are reasonable or that they deserve to be followed. The company is essentially demanding that its employees surrender their ability to defend themselves with a firearm as a condition of employment, even when they're working alone in the middle of the night and might have only seconds to respond to a deadly threat.
Watson was fortunate enough to have a gun when four masked criminals came crashing through the front of his store. Honestly, his employer should be grateful that he and his coworker survived the encounter instead of treating his decision to defend himself as a violation of company policy.
Circle K may believe its employees are safer without guns. Its employees might disagree, and if I were one of them I'd be quietly carrying every shift. If I get fired for acting in self-defense, so be it. It's possible to find another job, but we only get one life.