It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Mark Beverly, an overnight shift supervisor at a SuperAmerica in Roseville, Minn., was fired in March after he jumped on a masked robber who he believed was attacking a fellow employee.
SuperAmerica said he violated company policy when he came to his colleague's aid in the early morning of March 26. So instead of accolades, Beverly got the boot.
(visit the link for the full news article)
It's called COA (covering your ass.)
Let me explain.
I was on the safety committee at my company for a few years. Most employees don't know this but the company policy on fighting a fire is don't. If there is a fire you are to leave the building immediately.
If an employee comes across a fire and fights it and is hurt, he violated company policy and they can't be held responsible.
It's wrong, but it's just another way corporate America shields itself from being sued.
The employee fought off a robber. If he had been hurt the company would have had to pay his medical bills, Their insurance would have gone up, they would have lost a few thousand dollars rather than just losing the life of some employee.
He had to be fired, to show the rest of the employees that a human life is not to be put before company profit.
America is now a Fascist state, whether you want to believe that or not.
NOTHING comes before the profits of the corporations. Not even human life.
Get used to it.
Well, here is their Contact Us page. This is one situation where we can do something more than comment on it.
Interfering in a robbery is one thing, but coming to the aid of a co-worker is another.
Originally posted by jasonjnelson
So why are we being reprogramed to depend on authority figures to right obvious wrongs?
Excerpted from: "A Nation of Cowards" was published in the Fall, '93 issue of The Public Interest, a quarterly journal of opinion published by National Affairs, Inc.
...And yet, while people are encouraged to revel in their individuality and incalculable self-worth, the media and the law enforcement establishment continually advise us that, when confronted with the threat of lethal violence, we should not resist, but simply give the attacker what he wants. If the crime under consideration is rape, there is some notable waffling on this point, and the discussion quickly moves to how the woman can change her behavior to minimize the risk of rape, and the various ridiculous, non-lethal weapons she may acceptably carry, such as whistles, keys, mace or, that weapon which really sends shivers down a rapist's spine, the portable cellular phone...
...The assumption, of course, is that there is no inconsistency. The advice not to resist a criminal assault and simply hand over the goods is founded on the notion that one's life is of incalculable value, and that no amount of property is worth it...
...For years, feminists have labored to educate people that rape is not about sex, but about domination, degradation, and control. Evidently, someone needs to inform the law enforcement establishment and the media that kidnapping, robbery, carjacking, and assault are not about property.
Crime is not only a complete disavowal of the social contract, but also a commandeering of the victim's person and liberty. If the individual's dignity lies in the fact that he is a moral agent engaging in actions of his own will, in free exchange with others, then crime always violates the victim's dignity...
...Although difficult for modern man to fathom, it was once widely believed that life was a gift from God, that to not defend that life when offered violence was to hold God's gift in contempt, to be a coward and to breach one's duty to one's community. A sermon given in Philadelphia in 1747 unequivocally equated the failure to defend oneself with suicide:
"He that suffers his life to be taken from him by one that hath no authority for that purpose, when he might preserve it by defense, incurs the Guilt of self murder since God hath enjoined him to seek the continuance of his life, and Nature itself teaches every creature to defend itself."...
...It is impossible to address the problem of rampant crime without talking about the moral responsibility of the intended victim. Crime is rampant because the law-abiding, each of us, condone it, excuse it, permit it, submit to it. We permit and encourage it because we do not fight back, immediately, then and there, where it happens. Crime is not rampant because we do not have enough prisons, because judges and prosecutors are too soft, because the police are hamstrung with absurd technicalities. The defect is there, in our character...
...In 1991, when then-Attorney General Richard Thornburgh released the FBI's annual crime statistics, he noted that it is now more likely that a person will be the victim of a violent crime than that he will be in an auto accident. Despite this, most people readily believe that the existence of the police relieves them of the responsibility to take full measures to protect themselves. The police, however, are not personal bodyguards...
...Insofar as the police deter by their presence, they are very, very good. Criminals take great pains not to commit a crime in front of them. Unfortunately, the corollary is that you can pretty much bet your life (and you are) that they won't be there at the moment you actually need them. Should you ever be the victim of an assault, a robbery, or a rape, you will find it very difficult to call the police while the act is in progress, even if you are carrying a portable cellular phone...
...The idea that protection is a service people can call to have delivered and expect to receive in a timely fashion is often mocked by gun owners, who love to recite the challenge, "Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first."...
To whom it may concern,
I am deeply disturbed that an employee of yours was fired for what he believed to be a justifiable defense of a fellow coworker. I wish that all of my coworkers had the heart to decide that the safety and health of their fellow man to be a priority. I understand your policy of handing money over in a robbery is an attempt to avoid escalation. However the "computer training" that your employee received can in no way prepare someone for every contingency. His actions were heroic in the least, if he truly saw his coworker in danger and believed her to be under assault.
Tell me, would you have paid his psychiatric bills had he instead watched an employee bludgeoned to death?
Jason J Nelson