Ammo For Sale

« « Can you believe Rod Blagojevich? | Home | There’s a form for that » »

Why Domino’s is better than Pizza Hut

Another pizza delivery guy uses a gun to defend himself. Guy appears to still have a job, unlike a Pizza Hut employee.

4 Responses to “Why Domino’s is better than Pizza Hut”

  1. Standard Mischief Says:

    Let’s hope he gets the same deal, severance pay from a delivery job and help finding other employment.

    The corporate lawyers will make them fire him, unfortunately. That’s a direct result of deep pockets of Domino’s and jury tampering ahh. Voir Dire

    I, of course, would likely hang the jury regardless of the instructions given to me by the judge if I thought the lawsuit was a blatant appeal to the uninvolved guy with the deep pockets. But they work mighty hard to keep me off of a jury in the first place.

  2. tgirsch Says:

    Gun policy aside, both have shitty pizza…

  3. Laurel Says:

    I worked ever-so-briefly for Domino’s when I was a freshman in college, and there IS a company-wide anti-self-defense policy. Not only are employees prohibited from carrying firearms, you’re not even supposed to hit back if you’re attacked. You’re supposed to restrict your actions to defensive only, and if anything you do is construed as aggressive, you’ll lose your job.

    It took about a month’s worth of delivery visits to dark apartment complexes and trailer parks for me to realize hello, idiot, you’re working for minimum wage + tips for a company that is more worried about the safety of criminals than your ability to defend yourself against theft/rape/worse. Thus, I quit.

    The good news is the whole experience helped really get me thinking about self-defense and personal responsibility and, well… here we are today!

  4. Standard Mischief Says:

    ….that is more worried about the safety of criminals than your ability to defend yourself against theft/rape/worse.

    Again, it’s not that they like to coddle criminals, it’s like they don’t ever want to appear to condone self-defense because they’re scared to death of being a defendant in a lawsuit from the guy’s mom who you had to kill in self-defense.

    If the pay is worth it, and you can carry discreetly legally, and you want to take the risk, realize that the corporate lawyers will probably make sure you are fired. In the scheme of things that’s probably going to be the least of your worries, no matter how well justified your use of force was.

    My idea was a law that maybe we should call “the defense of self-defense act”. True to form, the short name of the bill is a lie, it would do nothing to defend the defenders but would shield the corporate parent of frivolous lawsuits if they didn’t restrict their employees rights to self-defense. Since the NRA seem so much better at shielding limited liability companies from harm rather than, you know, getting our civil rights back, I thought that would be more acceptable than talking pro-RKBA Bush into repealing the sporting purposes crap.

    I made a blog post about it here