I've seen a lot of stores in the last few years that have gone to a "hands off policy" when it comes to shoplifters. They'd rather lose merchandise than be involved in a lawsuit. Though, things coulda gone really bad for the employees if he'd have gotten access to that weapon to "effect his escape". It's a fine line between stopping an incident and creating one.

 

I assume they would rather had him shoot the place up and injure/kill shoppers and store employees? Sounds like they dealt with the situation pretty well. What a jacked up policy. It would be hard to think they would lose a lawsuit.

 

I assume they would rather had him shoot the place up and injure/kill shoppers and store employees? Sounds like they dealt with the situation pretty well. What a jacked up policy. It would be hard to think they would lose a lawsuit.

You never know in this day and age. Currently you could shoot an intruder in your house and be sued civilly.

 

With all due respect (if it's due), Dan Fogelman and the Wal-Mart policy makers have their collective heads up their Wal-Mart ass. It's just one more reason to avoid Wally World like the plague.

I'm sure glad to know there's other sheepdogs when I hafta go.

Edit: Here's my feedback to Wally World.

"To: Mr. Dan Fogleman, Walmart Spokesperson
Walmart Corporate Policy Committee
Walmart Loss Prevention
Walmart Corporate Management

Re: The Layton, Utah Four

Mr. Fogelman, et al:

I heartily applaud the loss prevention team members and assistant manager in Layton, Utah who unselfishly risked their own lives to protect the many lives of other Walmart employees and customers in the store during the attempted shoplifting. Those four individuals truly understand the meaning "of the greater good" and "one nation, indivisible". I thank them for allowing everyone to return home safely.

With all due respect, if any respect is actually, due, I strongly denounce your and Walmart Corporate's decision that these loyal employees be fired for what...failing to comply with some vauge policy generated from some conference-room committee of corporate suits pulling in 6-figure incomes with no clue how the "real world" functions. Puh-leeze. I've seen how corporate senior management works - somebody said 'hey, what if this happens', using a 5-whys or similar analysis methodology. It's obvious to me that you collectively expect your own employees to cower, becoming sheep in a potentially violent situation. Walmart has zero tolerance for employees to make immediate decisions based on the actual situations at hand. If that's your attitude, why have loss prevention at all? Simply write off all shoplifting losses as unpreventable business expenses.

Before you scoff at my comments: I worked in a chemical manufacturing facility as the site Environmental, Health & Safety Manager, a member of the site's management team. I have lead and been involved in 5-why and other investigations. I have implemented corporate policy, sound or otherwise. I have also challenged corporate policies when those policies were just too inane or ridiculous for the site.

Also, I am an American citizen, proud of America's founding fathers and founding principles. In step with many others nationwide, I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and lawfully participate in my state's concealed carry program. I am very happy and relieved to know the few times I walk through the doors of the local Walmart, there are other law-abiding citizens participating in the concealed carry program.

Thanks to the quick, brave actions of the Utah Four, you were not forced to issue any condolence statements. Instead, you and Walmart elected to issue pink slips. How very sad...and yet one more reason for me to avoid Walmart like the plague."

 

He produced a weapon and grabbed someone. To me it is clear, he had intent to commit serious harm no matter what came out of his mouth. The employees did what they had to do to protect their lives and possibly those of others in and around the store. I really hope they get a lawyer and go after WM. No company should be able to limit or deny you the RIGHT to protect yourself.

 

I went back and re-read the article. I skimmed it the first time and missed several key facts plus I hadn't watched the video, so I apologize for jumping to conclusions. They didn't do anything wrong IMO.
I keep going back and forth on use of force. I personally applaud people who react valiantly in these situations, but at the same time I professionally shy away from encouraging action for fear of getting innocents hurt through well intentioned but poorly executed action. At the same time, I can't help but to remember the heroic actions of the people on Flight 93 and wish that the other airline passengers that day would have acted the same.
I agree that it's wrong of Walmart to have fired these guys. I think that they're just thinking about "how much is this settlement gonna cost us?"

 

I gotta tell ya, if some BG has hold of me and a gun in my side, I'm gonna react, and not pleasantly. These were Stop Loss Personnel, presumably trained to some extent. They were in a small room, they could not disengage the BG without continued danger to themselves. Then, when they DO disengage, they release a loaded-gun carrying multiple felon loose to walk through the store to the outside door?!?!?! WTF??????? I don't think so, Scooter.

My thanks and congratulations to those 4 dedicated employees. Not dedicated to preventing Wally World from losing a laptop, but dedicated to preventing personal injury in the commission of a crime.

Fire'em, Hell! Promote'em!

 

I believe they did the right thing. A felon running thru a store with a loaded weapon i'm sure would have cause more problems for WM then what they did. If he ran into a customer he could have taking it as them trying to stop him and once he pulled the trigger he would not have stopped. Just my 2 cents. It was a prevenitive measure to keeep all employee's and customers safe.

 

Wal-Mart isn't worried about loss, they're just going to jack up the prices for the rest of us.

Second, it's cheaper to pay life insurance premiums than pay out on a lawsuit.

 

Over the years, I have greatly reduced the shopping I do at Walmart..mainly becasue of more stories like this. I go there only as a last resort and try my best not to spend money there.


Regards,

MD

 

Once again punishing the good guy for doing the RIGHT thing. I dont shop at Walmart even if I could save a little money. I would rather pay a dollar or two more than support companies like them.

 

let's look at the balance here:

Lose a notebook (maximum retail value maybe $1000?)
vs
Possibly getting 1 or more employees and customers shot (and potentially killed)

just let the notebook go.

is your life (or, for that matter, anyone's life) worth a notebook computer?

It's a Walmart policy, as a Walmart employee you agree to abide by those policies - whether they involve shoplifting, dress code whatever. Violate those policies at your own peril (and I am confident that the LP folks are well trained on that aspect of the policy manual).

Of course, after releasing the BG, could he have turned and gunned them all down? We can speculate on that part until the cows come home.

What really got me going (and it should have gotten you going too) was this:

Longton pleaded guilty Monday to two charges: robbery, a second-degree felony; and the purchase, transfer, possession or use of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person, a class A misdemeanor. In exchange for his plea, three other charges were dismissed, including threatening or using a dangerous weapon in a fight or quarrel.

this kind of plea bargain, specifically on the gun charge, does nothing to deter criminals and just adds more fuel for anti-gun proponents to throw on their fire.

Use a gun in a crime? you go a-w-a-y and you stay away for a long time. A Class A misdemeanor in Utah nets maximum jail time of 1 year - - not a whole lot of deterrent there.

 

let's look at the balance here:

Lose a notebook (maximum retail value maybe $1000?)
vs
Possibly getting 1 or more employees and customers shot (and potentially killed)

just let the notebook go.

is your life (or, for that matter, anyone's life) worth a notebook computer?

It's a Walmart policy, as a Walmart employee you agree to abide by those policies - whether they involve shoplifting, dress code whatever. Violate those policies at your own peril (and I am confident that the LP folks are well trained on that aspect of the policy manual).

I agree with the second part of your post but I disagree with the above. First, there is a difference between rights and privileges. Its your privilege to have a job with a company, its your right to defend yourself. No policy can change that. As for the computer, I don't think it had anything to do with the situation aside from starting the process. Once he had a weapon on one of the four it became a different situation entirely.

 

He produced a weapon and grabbed someone. To me it is clear, he had intent to commit serious harm no matter what came out of his mouth. The employees did what they had to do to protect their lives and possibly those of others in and around the store. I really hope they get a lawyer and go after WM. No company should be able to limit or deny you the RIGHT to protect yourself.

I understand when it comes to merchandise, it is a thing it can be replaced. According to the post it was the loss prevention team appearing to follow protocol, they were in a small room and a gun to anybodys back is serious business. I know WM has a league of lawyers that will make this hell for them but I hope at least they get some of the WM $$!

 

let's look at the balance here:

Lose a notebook (maximum retail value maybe $1000?)
vs
Possibly getting 1 or more employees and customers shot (and potentially killed)

just let the notebook go.

is your life (or, for that matter, anyone's life) worth a notebook computer?

It's a Walmart policy, as a Walmart employee you agree to abide by those policies - whether they involve shoplifting, dress code whatever. Violate those policies at your own peril (and I am confident that the LP folks are well trained on that aspect of the policy manual).

Of course, after releasing the BG, could he have turned and gunned them all down? We can speculate on that part until the cows come home.

What really got me going (and it should have gotten you going too) was this:

Longton pleaded guilty Monday to two charges: robbery, a second-degree felony; and the purchase, transfer, possession or use of a dangerous weapon by a restricted person, a class A misdemeanor. In exchange for his plea, three other charges were dismissed, including threatening or using a dangerous weapon in a fight or quarrel.

this kind of plea bargain, specifically on the gun charge, does nothing to deter criminals and just adds more fuel for anti-gun proponents to throw on their fire.

Use a gun in a crime? you go a-w-a-y and you stay away for a long time. A Class A misdemeanor in Utah nets maximum jail time of 1 year - - not a whole lot of deterrent there.

I believe you misread the plea bargain.
He plead guilty to charges of two counts of robbery and one count of possession, and they dropped three OTHER charges, such as threatening or using a dangerous weapon...

 

Over the years, I have greatly reduced the shopping I do at Walmart..mainly becasue of more stories like this. I go there only as a last resort and try my best not to spend money there.

Regards,

MD

This is no different a situation than one at a Domino's, Pizza Hut or probably most grocery stores for that matter of fact. Singling out one company for this is just asinine. If you dont shop at one because of this there is a whole host of others you could stop shopping at too.

Bottom line, the guys did what they had to do. They should not have been fired. I have great respect for these people that took action to try and prevent a crime from happening.
If we would hold people accountable for their actions maybe our society would have less crime.

 

Evil should be confronted and stopped, not allowed to walk and exist another day. We're becoming a nation of cowards. Par for the course because lawyers essentially run the country now.

 

I think his point was that this is just one more reason that he has not to shop at wal-mart. Personally, that's what this event is for me. It's convenient to me but I don't like their business practices and this is just one more straw to prevent me from shopping there.

As for the other businesses, there's a difference between having a store policy against confrontation/contact and firing an employee for potentially saving lifes. The policy protects your corporate ass but to fire someone for acting in self defense is BS and I will happily take other companies that do so off my list of businesses that get my money.

Allowing a thief to just walk out of the store and escape is doing nothing but rewarding their behavior. If they are not punished they will continue to rob, cheat, and steal. The companies dont want to wind up in a lawsuit bc the security people "assault" the thief when they catch him, which leads to the next problem.

Par for the course because lawyers essentially run the country now.

Tort reform is an immediate necessity if this country is ever going to pull it together. Lawyers should NOT be allowed to serve in a political office bc they have spent their law career manipulating facts to fall in their favor. Politics are no different. Lawyers allow people to file some of these outrageous lawsuits knowing good and well that it was the victims fault. Just like the woman who fell in the fountain at the mall bc she was texting and not paying attention. She is suing the mall bc she is not capable of walking without getting hurt and that is somehow the malls' fault....And some corrupt lawyer is glad to represent her bc he sees dollar signs instead of ethics.

 

I shall finally email Corporate and spend my money elsewhere. This is too much for them. Can't believe they did this to these four.

 

It's late and I lack the energy to be more creative. LOL. I sent this email:

Due to the firing of the Layton Four, I shall be ceasing all purchases at Walmart. I shall continue to keep a watch on this situation and hope they will get their day in court. Being in my 30's, this will be a loss of more than $150,000 to Walmart in my lifetime alone. Of course, I will spread the word until this is rectified. If only 20 of my family and friends follow my lead, this will be a loss of $3,000,000 I hope Walmart takes this seriously.

 

I can actually understand the no-resistance policies for employees when confronted with an armed person coming from big corporations like that. But once he grabbed the employee and held the weapon on him, it was no longer a confrontation but a kidnapping or an imminent murder. At that point resistance is the most likely way to survive.

 

These individuals did a very good thing. Wish there were more in the world like them instead of all the pant pissers out there. Walmart should be thankful that things did not turnout different and they had to clean Mr. Longton's brains from their wall.

 

One more reason why I will not shop at Walmart

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/1...2/16/wal-mart-employees-fired-helping-capture-alleged-criminal/?test=latestnews

I already cannot stand the 'big box' stores, but this is absolute garbage.

 

Yep this is already being discussed. Its a shame that companies won't punish criminals

http://carolinashootersforum.com/showthread.php?t=95105

 

I rely think that there is more to the story that we aren't hearing about. I've been In the loss prevention business for a long time (not with Walmart, a different retailer), and I just don't believe we are hearing the whole story.