Ammo For Sale

« « The TSA at work | Home | Handi-Racker » »

Don’t shop at AutoZone

Employee goes to car, gets gun and stops a robbery. His manager was thankful. But the corporate policy is zero tolerance for guns. He was fired.

10 Responses to “Don’t shop at AutoZone”

  1. Dannytheman Says:

    Easy enough to not shop there. And I am placing this out my entire distribution.

  2. Randy Says:

    Thanks for letting us know about this. I have emailed Autozone’s corporate office to let them know that they are on my boycott list of anti-gun companies. Also, all this has been posted on Facebook to help spread the word.

  3. Mr Evilwrench Says:

    So Autozone would rather have a robbery, and their employees threatened, maybe killed. I can kind of see how that makes sense. Or wait, something like sense, what was it? Oh, that’s right, no sense whatsoever. That’s something like sense isn’t it? The word sense is there, right? So, how do our other auto parts stores measure up?

  4. Standard Mischief Says:

    Allow me to plug my “Defense of Self Defense Act” again. Should be an easy pass for the GOP too, because it actually doesn’t give humans any additional rights back.

    Instead, if an employee uses a gun in self-defense or defense of others on their own initiative, regardless of the outcome, the multinational or LLC is completely immune from any lawsuit that arises from that defensive usage, but only if they don’t have a BS policy that limits one’s right to self-defense.

    While I’d really like to see AutoZone issue a presser saying that Devin McClean will get up to 6 months of wages and help finding another retail job, I don’t have any illusions that the same policy is already in effect over at Advanced Auto Parts too.

    It’s pretty much a universal clause in service jobs paying $#!t fifty per hour because the corporation has deep pockets and doesn’t want to get sued by the robber or sued by the deceased bad guy’s living relatives.

    You can boycott all you want, but the LLC’s are always going to value the guy making $#!t fifty far far less than the possibility that they’ll have to pay out a few million.

  5. Ted N Says:

    I guess I’m going across the street to O’Reilly’s, unless they change the policies. God I hate gutless lawyers.

  6. Frank Says:

    Banning Rotto Zone was easy-chinzy, cheap, Chinese parts.
    Thia is the cherry on top. I’ll be sending a letter as well.

  7. Geodkyt Says:

    Satndard Mischief —

    I have a similar idea.

    A. If business, on premises generally freely open to the public, wishes to ban otherwise lawful carry, they MUST either provide statutorily adequate AND reasonable physical security, or they must assume ALL civil liability for any accident or criminal use of a friearm on their property, regardless of the business’s actual culpability. (I.e., strip me of the ABILITY to protect myself, and you assume the responsibility for ensuring I don’t need protection.)

    B. If a business does NOT ban the otherwise lawful carry of firearms, they are immune to ANY civil liability for any accidental or criminal use of a firearm on their property, UNLESS actual culpability or negligence on the business’s part is proven. However, as a matter fo safety, any business can specify weapons must remain holstered when not in actual use, and as a matter of dress code, any business may specify “discrete carry only”. (I.e., if you KNOWINGLY allow meth-heads to wave their gats around while engaging drinking contest, yeah, you’re liable.)

    C. “Reasonable” security to claim safe harbor with a firearms ban shall include, at a minimum: CONTROLLED ACCESS, SAFE AND SECURE STORAGE (includes a theft/damage bond) for law abiding carriers who disarm to comply, SAFE UNLOADING/RELOADING setups (like a proper loading barrel) for lawful carriers as they disarm entering and rearm leaving, and REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE (guards and metal detectors or equivalent at all access points). (I.e., if you want to CLAIM you are a “sensitive area” where firearms can be banned, then, by GOD, TREAT it as a sensitive area.)

    Note the ability to ban firearms by private property owners (including businesses) would remain unaffected, for bans on the general public applying ONLY to those areas NOT normally accessible to the general public. (By and large, you can’t run “Whites Only” lunch counters, either, if your restaurant is open to the general public, nor can your policy prohibit the hiring of people based solely on the color of their skin. Discrimination in violation of ennumerated rights ought to be treated no differently than discrimination in violation of ennumerated Constitutional protections.)

  8. Rob K Says:

    I bet anybody a dollar that every single auto parts store you can name has the exact same policy. So you boycott Autozone and go to O’Reilly. When the same thing happens at O’Reilly, you’ll switch to yet another one, and the same thing will happen there, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Until companies with this policy are held liable for injuries sustained on their premises, and those who do not have this policy are given immunity for same, these policies will not change. They’re driven by the insurance companies.

  9. Constitutional Right Says:

    Here is where you can send a note letting them know you are boycotting until they repeal their policy punishing workers for defending themselves against killers and burglars:

  10. Huck Says:

    I stopped shopping at Autozone a few years ago when I saw that everything was labeled in spanish as well as english.