Convenience store clerks ready to sho...

Convenience store clerks ready to shoot if necessary

There are 39 comments on the Free Republic story from Dec 26, 2011, titled Convenience store clerks ready to shoot if necessary. In it, Free Republic reports that:

Two robberies and a near-death experience convinced Mark Headstrong that he needed to carry a gun.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Free Republic.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
MMM

United States

#1 Dec 26, 2011
I think all states should pass the castle doctrine. Anytime someone is threatened by a criminal they should be able to use their gun to protect themselves.
Packin

Saltillo, MS

#2 Dec 26, 2011
MMM wrote:
I think all states should pass the castle doctrine. Anytime someone is threatened by a criminal they should be able to use their gun to protect themselves.
I think all government entities should abide by the second amendment. I don't need a law to tell me to defend myself. I need rid of laws that tell me I can't.

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#3 Dec 26, 2011
Packin wrote:
<quoted text> I think all government entities should abide by the second amendment. I don't need a law to tell me to defend myself. I need rid of laws that tell me I can't.
Agreed! And, apply that line of thinking to ALL situations in adult life which government has decided to invade in the name of 'protecting us from ourselves.'
.
Ron Paul 2012

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#4 Dec 27, 2011
MMM wrote:
I think all states should pass the castle doctrine. Anytime someone is threatened by a criminal they should be able to use their gun to protect themselves.
Castle doctrine doesn't apply to the toothless masses working behind the register of a convenience store making 8.65 an hour watching over the store owner's cash register. The answer is credit cards at the pump and a robotic convenice store as seen in news stories. There's no reason for a convenience store to have a minimum wage earning person inside handing out the keys to the restroom no more.
MMM

United States

#5 Jan 2, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>Castle doctrine doesn't apply to the toothless masses working behind the register of a convenience store making 8.65 an hour watching over the store owner's cash register. The answer is credit cards at the pump and a robotic convenice store as seen in news stories. There's no reason for a convenience store to have a minimum wage earning person inside handing out the keys to the restroom no more.
Castle doctrine should apply to any law abiding citizen. Don't discriminate against a person because they make less money than you. Walk a mile in their shoes first.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#6 Jan 2, 2012
MMM wrote:
<quoted text>
Castle doctrine should apply to any law abiding citizen. Don't discriminate against a person because they make less money than you. Walk a mile in their shoes first.
You misunderstand castle doctrine. If you're a clerk in my place of business, you think it's YOUR castle and we can't come to some term of agreement on rectifying your misconception, I have a right to send you back to your castle where you can collect your unemployment check.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#7 Jan 2, 2012
MMM wrote:
<quoted text>
Castle doctrine should apply to any law abiding citizen.
Wrong, castle doctrine applies to all persons in their legally occupied dwelling. There is no law abiding or citizen test for lawful firearm purchase or possession, nor is there one for concealed carry permits either.

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#8 Jan 2, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong, castle doctrine applies to all persons in their legally occupied dwelling. There is no law abiding or citizen test for lawful firearm purchase or possession, nor is there one for concealed carry permits either.
Oh, really now? Then what's that 'background check' thing?

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#9 Jan 2, 2012
Highlander wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, really now? Then what's that 'background check' thing?
That doesn't check for abiding, that checks for being caught for only specific law violations.

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#10 Jan 2, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>That doesn't check for abiding, that checks for being caught for only specific law violations.
Lawyer-speak!
.
One abides by way of faithfulness to principle.
.
RIGHT BACK AT =>YOU<=, JERKWEED!
Julia

Huntsville, AL

#11 Jan 2, 2012
I was a graveyard shift clerk for a while in the highest crime area in the city and LOTS of the customers and even some of the criminals said it was the smartest thing that I could do. The customers said that it made them feel safer and I didn't meet ONE person who had a problem with it.

The first major reality check when it came to guns was when an older black woman was across the counter telling me how a man stormed in her house with every intention of raping her and who knows what else but regardless, he broke into her house and would not leave - enough said - and she shot and killed him. She kept talking and I realized that if she had not had that gun her existence might have ended or maybe her life would have been ruined. I would have never met her or heard her story but there is also a chance I might have met her attacker.

She said she never felt bad for killing him. Never doubted her right to do so. She didn't just save her own life she probably saved many, many other people from being terrorized......even me personally. I am grateful to her for taking so much responsibility for her own life because in doing so she protected mine as well. She was a true inspiration.
Julia

Huntsville, AL

#12 Jan 2, 2012
It's funny now that I think about it how the "gangster" types which I previously referred to as "criminals" (I do so because they flaunted and were proud of their endeavors) didn't seem disappointed about my carrying a gun. These guys believed that if you left your keys in your car that you deserved to have it stolen or if I gave back too much change that they deserved to keep it and I think that they thought if a person doesn't provide the means to defend themselves that they deserve to be victimized. They never acted threatening towards me at all. It was like I was completely off limits to their design.

It's like the most simplistic example of the brutish mindset. Fascinating.

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#13 Jan 2, 2012
Julia wrote:
It's funny now that I think about it how the "gangster" types which I previously referred to as "criminals" (I do so because they flaunted and were proud of their endeavors) didn't seem disappointed about my carrying a gun. These guys believed that if you left your keys in your car that you deserved to have it stolen or if I gave back too much change that they deserved to keep it and I think that they thought if a person doesn't provide the means to defend themselves that they deserve to be victimized. They never acted threatening towards me at all. It was like I was completely off limits to their design.
It's like the most simplistic example of the brutish mindset. Fascinating.
The difference between a 'good person' and a 'bad person' is one of equanimity, fairness, and impartiality.
.
In the former, the good person leaves you alone because to do so is the right thing. In the latter, the bad person connives every reason to ~not~ leave you alone, because it inflicts the misery upon which they feed.
.
Appropriate quote:
——————————
"There are two types of people in the world,... Those who wish to be left alone and those who just won't leave them alone.”
.
~ Ernest Hancock
——————————
Julia

Huntsville, AL

#14 Jan 3, 2012
Highlander wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference between a 'good person' and a 'bad person' is one of equanimity, fairness, and impartiality.
.
In the former, the good person leaves you alone because to do so is the right thing. In the latter, the bad person connives every reason to ~not~ leave you alone, because it inflicts the misery upon which they feed.
.
Appropriate quote:
——————————
"There are two types of people in the world,... Those who wish to be left alone and those who just won't leave them alone.”
.
~ Ernest Hancock
——————————
Enlightenment is not just the acknowledgement of this hard truth (since "the latter" has many weapons to weaken others including infecting them with doubt and guilt and to convince them to be a willing victim) but to do what one has to to provide that very "reason" for those predatory types to move on.....or in some cases, considering the forum and all, to lay down.

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#15 Jan 3, 2012
Julia wrote:
<quoted text>
Enlightenment is not just the acknowledgement of this hard truth (since "the latter" has many weapons to weaken others including infecting them with doubt and guilt and to convince them to be a willing victim) but to do what one has to to provide that very "reason" for those predatory types to move on.....or in some cases, considering the forum and all, to lay down.
Aye!

“Why call 911? 1911 is faster”

Since: Feb 08

Wesley Chapel, FL

#16 Jan 3, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>Castle doctrine doesn't apply to the toothless masses working behind the register of a convenience store making 8.65 an hour watching over the store owner's cash register. The answer is credit cards at the pump and a robotic convenice store as seen in news stories. There's no reason for a convenience store to have a minimum wage earning person inside handing out the keys to the restroom no more.
According to you the amount a person earns is directly proportional to the rights they’re afforded?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#17 Jan 3, 2012
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong, castle doctrine applies to all persons in their legally occupied dwelling. There is no law abiding or citizen test for lawful firearm purchase or possession, nor is there one for concealed carry permits either.
A person hired to work behind the counter at a convenience store is "legally occupying" that dwelling. Why are they not afforded the RIGHT to defend themselves?

“Tu ne cede malis”

Since: Dec 06

Lots of different places

#18 Jan 3, 2012
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
A person hired to work behind the counter at a convenience store is "legally occupying" that dwelling. Why are they not afforded the RIGHT to defend themselves?
Allow me to interject: Because they are legally indentured.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#19 Jan 3, 2012
Highlander wrote:
<quoted text>
Allow me to interject: Because they are legally indentured.
I would have to respectfully disagree. Legally indentured would be akin to service in the U.S. military. The enlistee signs a contract of service for a specified length of time. The convenience store clerk can quick that job whenever it strikes his/her fancy.
Packin

Nettleton, MS

#20 Jan 3, 2012
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have to respectfully disagree. Legally indentured would be akin to service in the U.S. military. The enlistee signs a contract of service for a specified length of time. The convenience store clerk can quick that job whenever it strikes his/her fancy.
If the working conditions are not to your liking (life in danger, not allowed to protect yourself ect.) then don't work there. However any employer who does not allow an employee to defend themselves must also assume the responsibility of that employe's safety. As the store owner do you want that liability?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wilmington Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New Seagate Backup Plus 2TB Thin Undetectable Sun ThePacProject 1
News How to Accessorize a Room (Sep '15) May 25 Victoria 7
Looking for Robert Ellis May 22 Sundrop 3
Jenelle Evans and David Eason May 16 Anonymous 1
News Bail bondsman charged with selling steroids (Oct '10) May 9 Kate Jessup 60
Mikal Cogswell "my-kal" Apr '16 Anonymous 1
Review of Attorney Michael Kepley @ Law Group Apr '16 james g 11
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Wilmington Mortgages