The Taco Bell management says they are “shocked” which I can only take to mean that they didn’t know crime existed until some people attempted to commit one, however unsuccessfully, in their store. Or maybe they are shocked that a crime was actually stopped in progress, having previously believed that criminals were generally getting their own way. Hard to say.
They may have been “shocked” that their employees were armed. If like many corporstions, they probably prefer or even forbid armed employees for “risk liability” issues. If a criminal perp or perps have their way, oh well, they can always hire someone else. I would like to hear a follow up to this story to see how Taco Bell management handles this.
As someone who used to work the night shift at a fast food place, the official company line was, if robbed, to give them whatever they wanted.
All concealed carry was illegal at the time. Carry would have been legal onsite with permission of the owner (private property) but that would not have been forthcoming, and it would have violated corporate policy.
Before everyone piles on about how terrible that is, please keep in mind that the money etc. is most likely insured already at whatever the going rate is, but if anyone gets injured in the process of defending it, that’s a (potentially very) expensive workman’s comp claim.
Concealed carry is now (sort of) legal in this state, but I still can’t carry at work. We have an armed security guard, though, so it’s all good?
There was something recently about changes to labor laws that make corps responsible for franchisees. Normally CC permission might be up to the local franchise owner, but that might interfere with it.
I don’t know if Taco Bell is franchised or directly owned.
Publius, hat might have worked fine in the “take the money and run” days, but now you give ’em what they want and like as not they’ll pop you anyway for street cred.
“As someone who used to work the night shift at a fast food place, the official company line was, if robbed, to give them whatever they wanted.” –Publius
“They” want no witnesses, so you give them your life. That’s “the official company line”. It’s much better to give them what they need, instead of what they want. But then, the company can always hire new potential witnesses.
@rickn8or, yes, you’re right, executing a victim eliminates a witness and maybe more importantly, gives a perp “street cred” which may also be a key credential for a gang membership.
“I don’t think “happy” is the appropriate word here. “well-deserved,” perhaps.”
If you were among those forced to the floor under threat of violence, wondering when the shot to the head would come and put your lights out, I’d think you’d be pretty “happy” that the perps were stopped in the act. Elated, even.
I’ve been to that Taco Bell, it’s ghetto as shit. Which by itself isn’t anything special, but the shootings are usually an east side thing. This is within spitting distance of decent areas.
Yes, lots of companies insist on being disarmed victim zones. I work for one, a high tech company headquartered in Texas. Well, sort of; an Austin suburb.
September 7th, 2017 at 5:21 pm
Is Taco Bell a disarmed victim zone, like so many other franchise businesses?
September 7th, 2017 at 6:29 pm
Three of them. Damn nice.
September 7th, 2017 at 6:31 pm
I hope the employees don’t get let go like so many bad businesses do.
September 7th, 2017 at 6:41 pm
The Taco Bell management says they are “shocked” which I can only take to mean that they didn’t know crime existed until some people attempted to commit one, however unsuccessfully, in their store. Or maybe they are shocked that a crime was actually stopped in progress, having previously believed that criminals were generally getting their own way. Hard to say.
September 7th, 2017 at 9:48 pm
They may have been “shocked” that their employees were armed. If like many corporstions, they probably prefer or even forbid armed employees for “risk liability” issues. If a criminal perp or perps have their way, oh well, they can always hire someone else. I would like to hear a follow up to this story to see how Taco Bell management handles this.
September 7th, 2017 at 11:11 pm
I don’t think “happy” is the appropriate word here. “well-deserved,” perhaps.
September 7th, 2017 at 11:19 pm
As someone who used to work the night shift at a fast food place, the official company line was, if robbed, to give them whatever they wanted.
All concealed carry was illegal at the time. Carry would have been legal onsite with permission of the owner (private property) but that would not have been forthcoming, and it would have violated corporate policy.
Before everyone piles on about how terrible that is, please keep in mind that the money etc. is most likely insured already at whatever the going rate is, but if anyone gets injured in the process of defending it, that’s a (potentially very) expensive workman’s comp claim.
Concealed carry is now (sort of) legal in this state, but I still can’t carry at work. We have an armed security guard, though, so it’s all good?
September 7th, 2017 at 11:59 pm
There was something recently about changes to labor laws that make corps responsible for franchisees. Normally CC permission might be up to the local franchise owner, but that might interfere with it.
I don’t know if Taco Bell is franchised or directly owned.
September 8th, 2017 at 12:31 am
Publius, hat might have worked fine in the “take the money and run” days, but now you give ’em what they want and like as not they’ll pop you anyway for street cred.
September 8th, 2017 at 5:50 am
I wouldn’t know, we never got robbed when I was working there.
September 8th, 2017 at 9:04 am
“As someone who used to work the night shift at a fast food place, the official company line was, if robbed, to give them whatever they wanted.” –Publius
“They” want no witnesses, so you give them your life. That’s “the official company line”. It’s much better to give them what they need, instead of what they want. But then, the company can always hire new potential witnesses.
September 8th, 2017 at 2:19 pm
Expect a boycott if Taco Bell corporate takes any action against those employee-defenders or the individual franchisee over this.
September 8th, 2017 at 4:15 pm
@rickn8or, yes, you’re right, executing a victim eliminates a witness and maybe more importantly, gives a perp “street cred” which may also be a key credential for a gang membership.
September 8th, 2017 at 6:31 pm
“I don’t think “happy” is the appropriate word here. “well-deserved,” perhaps.”
If you were among those forced to the floor under threat of violence, wondering when the shot to the head would come and put your lights out, I’d think you’d be pretty “happy” that the perps were stopped in the act. Elated, even.
September 8th, 2017 at 10:22 pm
I’ve been to that Taco Bell, it’s ghetto as shit. Which by itself isn’t anything special, but the shootings are usually an east side thing. This is within spitting distance of decent areas.
September 9th, 2017 at 10:00 am
If these fine folks worked for me I’d be buying them new guns when theirs went to the crime lab.
September 9th, 2017 at 1:00 pm
Now I’ll be humming that theme song for days…….
September 11th, 2017 at 2:30 pm
Yes, lots of companies insist on being disarmed victim zones. I work for one, a high tech company headquartered in Texas. Well, sort of; an Austin suburb.