Back in May, Walgreens pharmacist Jeremy Hoven was working the graveyard shift at the Benton Harbor, Michigan store with three other employees when two masked gunmen ran into the store and attempted a stick-up. As Hoven was dialing 911, one of the gunmen hopped the counter, aimed his piece at him, and, according to Hoven, began "jerking the gun's trigger."

As it turned out, Hoven was packing himself, having procured a concealed-weapon permit after the same store was robbed when he was working there in 2007. So he blasted off several shots, and the failed drugstore cowboys vamoosed right quick.

You would think the company would applaud Hoven for protecting the contents of the cash register, but no. For his troubles, Hoven was terminated a week later for violating Walgreens' "non-escalation policy," as well as company policy that forbids employees from carrying weapons at work.

So now Hoven is suing Walgreens for wrongful termination, arguing that, among other things, his constitutional right to bear arms is being violated. And why should he be a defenseless sitting duck when robbers point weapons at him while he's trying to make an honest living? Argued Walgreens spokeswoman Tiffani Washington, "Our policies in this area are created to maintain maximum safety for our customers and employees. Our employees receive very comprehensive training on what to do in the event of this kind of situation... Compliance is safer than confrontation."

It's a tricky situation. Suppose Hoven hadn't had a gun that night and had been shot dead. Does that mean Walgreens would have honored him for obeying company policy by picking up the costs of his funeral? I know I personally would rather be alive and unemployed, than a dead Walgreens martyr. As Hoven's attorney, Dan Swanson, put it, "Companies that do not allow employees to defend themselves put the employee in a position of simply submitting, possibly being killed or if they react in self-defense, being fired. That's a Hobson's Choice that no employee should be placed in."

In their official response to the lawsuit, Walgreens lawyers actually tried to deny that there was even an armed robbery in progress. Judging by the video which Hoven's attorneys released in response, the Walgreens lawyers may have to rethink that argument.

Commentarium (99 Comments)

Sep 09 11 - 3:21pm
mp

While I think Walgreen's policy is sound, their commonsense (and choice of lawyers) leave a bit to be desired.

Sep 19 11 - 8:01pm
Paul Smith

wow, what a hero, he shoudl be given employee of the year, loved how those cowards ran like scared little children like they are. Some actions like this, and maybe crooks will think twice when running into a store waving a gun. Does anybody in here have a concealed gun? Hmm, feel lucky punk lol. www.frontlinedefenseusa.com

Sep 20 11 - 9:20pm
yoadrian balboa

What an attitude by the Walgreens! Instead, let Walgreens protect their own property so next time a burglar comes in and wants to ron the place just step aside and let Walgreens security take care of it, why should you get killed when Walgreens won't even back you up for putting your life on the line for protecting their property? F 'em

Sep 09 11 - 4:01pm
duh

it would be terrible if employees were allowed to carry guns to work for protection. the chances of mistakenly firing a gun into a customer or fellow employee are extremely high. what's more, i'm pretty sure the non-confrontation policy includes handing over the cash instead of dialing 911, which is what got the trigger "jerked" at Hoven in the first place.

having said all that, outright firing Hoven in that way is a bit much.

Sep 09 11 - 7:38pm
Agreed.

The chances of this turning out as well as it did are probably not as good as the chances of this situation resulting in several dead people. Hence the policy.

Sep 09 11 - 11:02pm
Jack

There's not much risk of mistakenly firing into someone else. Most states require formal training in order to get a concealed weapon permit. I had to take a class, pass a proficiency test and a month's worth of background checks to get my permit. Permit-holders don't tend to have accidental discharged. The people who are accidentally shooting other people tend to be the idiots who buy a handgun on a whim, never learn how to use it, and stick it in a bedside drawer without knowing what they are doing. The people who bother to get the CC permits aren't the ones you have to worry about.

Also, I have to say that any store policy that prohibits an employee from calling 911 when someone is running around in a ski mask pointing guns at people is morally bankrupt. The idea of a policy requiring that employees trust their lives to the good will of a lunatic in a ski mask waving a gun around is absurd. Once someone is pointing a gun in a hostile way at another human being, the escalation has already happened and its a life or death situation. Of course he did the right thing to call 911 and when that didn't work he did the right thing by drawing his weapon. Walgreens is treating their employees as though their lives aren't worth more than a pack of gum in a shoplifter's pocket.

Sep 10 11 - 6:29pm
ChrisM

"There's not much risk of mistakenly firing into someone else. Most states require formal training in order to get a concealed weapon permit."

Um, wrong. Most states require formal training in order to get a drivers license, too, yet there are plenty of fatal car accidents. Your logic is highly flawed.

Sep 10 11 - 6:37pm
Arthur

Well, then I think it's high time that automobiles are banned. They kill way more people than handguns do.

Sep 10 11 - 6:46pm
Sammy B

Chris, your logic is highly flawed. You can't compare the two. My family all have concealed weapons permits. We have been trained and we shoot regularly.

I was also a "old time" Walgreen manager. My life was threatened by a person high on crack. He chased me and my employees in the store and kept screaming he was going to kill me and my entire family. He was throwing glass containers at employees and destroyed the front of my store. If he had a gun, someone would have been killed, more than likely me.

Don't comment if you have never been in the situation where your life is threatened. A gun works faster than 911 if your life is in danager.

Sep 10 11 - 7:02pm
Sammy Beyotch

"Someone was yelling and throwing things at me. I thought the best thing to do was to shoot him. It was my gut reaction because I can't think logically when under pressure."

Sep 10 11 - 10:38pm
Tp

I don't often agree with gun nuts, but this time... I gotta say - Screw Walgreen's and their policy. Dude did the right thing...

Sep 10 11 - 11:17pm
ChrisM

@Sammy B
"Chris, your logic is highly flawed. You can't compare the two. My family all have concealed weapons permits. We have been trained and we shoot regularly."

Just because your family all has concealed weapons permits and shoots regularly doesn't mean your firearm won't accidentally kill an innocent person. My logic is not flawed; yours is. Trained and licensed drivers also drive every day (much more often then you and your family have shooting practice I would bet) and yet accidents on the roadways can and do happen to anybody. And I shouldn't comment unless my life has been in danger? You're being ridiculous! Grow up! The best course of action for this pharmacist, when faced with a gunman was to cooperate first (so as to put the safety of the customers first) and then to call 911. Having armed citizens open fire will lead to a confusing melee reminiscent of the O.K. Coral which will result in the harming or killing of innocent bystanders. Guns are not the answer.

Sep 11 11 - 1:32am
The Nitwon

@ChrisM

"As Hoven was dialing 911, one of the gunmen hopped the counter, aimed his piece at him, and, according to Hoven, began 'jerking the gun's trigger.'"

He did dial 911. That didn't help the fact that the thug was about to blow his brains out. His only choice was to shoot or be shot.

Sep 11 11 - 6:50pm
Reever

What all of you fail to comprehend is that he DID do the wrong thing by dialing 911. Doing that escalted the situation. Wal-Greens policy was for him to hand them all the cash he had access to, and guess what? If he had done that they are almost guaranteed to have left without a shot ever being fired.

Sep 12 11 - 12:07pm
Jonathon

No, statistically, the chances are very high that at that point the gunman would have murdered the store employees to prevent leaving a witness who could identify him.

Sep 12 11 - 1:07pm
Redleg

Reever, you are a sheep and that is the sad downfall of our society. The fact that you even thought that is distrurbing. What would you have said if you were shopping at a drug store and a guy high on painkillers came in to rob the place. He was handed everything he asked for, but was concerned that someone, somewhere had called 911 and started shooting. Hell a guy a week ago shot up an IHOP for no reason. After the shooting you had been shot but survived, but lost a family member. Now you find out that an employee had a gun and could have prevented the shooting, but followed company policy. You are one of those people whose only hope of survival in this world is at the handsof people stronger than you.

Sep 12 11 - 5:55pm
Andy

"What all of you fail to comprehend is that he DID do the wrong thing by dialing 911. Doing that escalted the situation. Wal-Greens policy was for him to hand them all the cash he had access to, and guess what? If he had done that they are almost guaranteed to have left without a shot ever being fired."

How can you almost guarantee they wouldn't have fired a shot? Were you one of the robbers? Are you a mind reader? Are you a doctor of criminal psychology?

Fact: The robbers left the store after being fired upon and no one was hurt.

You can argue "might have beens" and "almost guarantees" back and forth but that's what happened.

Sep 12 11 - 10:46pm
Carolynfe

Comparing firearms to driver's licenses is absurd.

The pharmacist did exactly the right thing by defending himself - HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

Reever, I hope you have some innocent and armed citizens around you if something like this is ever to happen to you. I would hate to hear on the news that "Reever" died at gunpoint while handing over cash.

I assume, from the words you typed, that you know little to nothing when it comes to firearms. I hope you consider taking some firearm safety and shooting classes. Education is key and it never hurts to learn something new. If your opinion is still the same afterwards, at least you would be able to say you actually had some first hand knowledge to base your opinion.

Sep 12 11 - 10:51pm
Reever

and yet Carolynfe, he got lucky in this case as the robbers fled. What if they started shooting back? Can YOU guarantee that THEY are properly trained and would hit nobody but their intended target? He got lucky that they chickened out and ran.

Oct 08 11 - 7:20pm
Anti Cowardice

I can tell you what I believe - I believe that the occurence rate would have been much lower if people regularly pulled guns out to defend against robberies. Bad guys would think twice. As for the death tolls - I'd rather have 2 out of every 4 robberies end in violence, if only 4 robberies occur, than 4 out of every 16 occurring if 16 occurred.

Sep 09 11 - 4:43pm
some dude

i am not into guns, i don't own one, don't plan on ever owning one - but this is ridiculous - compliance over confrontation??? the guy possibly saved anyone who may have been in the store at the time - he acted in a brave manner that not many people would and I think he's awesome for that. a nationwide chain of pharmacies with a compliance over confrontation strategy... if I were a criminal, knowing that was the policy, I think I am going to go knock off a few walgreens now...

Sep 11 11 - 6:52pm
Reever

Wal-Greens policy is for him to hand them the cash and let them leave. THAT would have saved everyone and resulted in nobody being shot. I dont see how possibly starting a firing match will save anybody's life.

Sep 13 11 - 8:46pm
e

criminals can be violent and do not like witnesses reever

Sep 14 11 - 9:55am
D.M.

Reever, please post your address publicly so the police know not to pull a weapon to protect you or your family in the event you are ever robbed or attacked.

Oct 08 11 - 7:22pm
Anti Cowardice

You don't know that it would have saved ANYBODY.

Sep 09 11 - 7:48pm
ggg

No one can say he saved a life. These were robbers and nothing more from the moment they entered until they fled. I am not sure on the facts, but I willing to assume that most armed robberies rarely end in the killing of those robbed.

Sep 10 11 - 1:52am
Huh

So what if 'most' rarely end in a killing. The only one that matters, is the one you yourself are subject to, and that may be one that doesn't end so prettily UNLESS you're prepared. He can arguably be said to have saved his own life that otherwise WOULD have been taken - there's nothing concrete to say otherwise.

Sep 11 11 - 1:17am
common sense

ggg is a retard. Once a gun is drawn one MUST assume an intent of fatal injury. People that are robbing pharmacies are not in their right state of mind due to drug addiction. The fact that one is doing an armed robbery says that a person is not in a sane state of mind. ggg is "willing to assume that most armed robberies don't end in a fatality." The nice thing is that he's willing to stake somebody ELSE's life on it. What a moron. Walgreen's employee that shot back is a hero.

Sep 09 11 - 9:27pm
ER

I worked as a retail manager for a while. Every old timer manager I know has been robbed. Most at least once at gunpoint. None have been injured. I would not expect the same success rate if every one had pulled and opened fire.

Secondly, its selfish. Fellow employees go from a situation of trying to keep any guns from being fired, to one of being stuck in a crossfire.

Sep 09 11 - 11:06pm
Jack

ER, I want to point out that you don't tend to meet the old-timer managers who *did* have the trigger pulled on them. Dead employees aren't hanging around to tell you stories. Those who get shot and live usually find another line of work. I might as well say that cancer isn't that bad a disease because none of the survivors I know were killed by it.

Sep 09 11 - 11:39pm
Misfired

Hoven is going to have a lot of trouble finding another job after this.

Sep 12 11 - 9:26am
Observer

If I were looking for a pharmacist, I'd fire him.

Sep 12 11 - 9:56pm
umm...

nope. independents have a general rule of keeping weapons behind the counter.. when you're not a blood- sucking corp, you actually try to protect your individuals and profits.

Oct 08 11 - 7:24pm
Anti Cowardice

I'm from the area. There are still a few independents around, and he has a lot of local support. I doubt he'll have trouble finding another job.

Sep 10 11 - 12:40am
WhatAcowboy

I don't think this man will be job searching for very long. He needs to go apply and become a Sheriff

Sep 11 11 - 6:56pm
Reever

They wouldn't hire him. He doesn't know the first thing about how to handle a situation. Do you see cops opening fire the second they know guns are involved(assuming actual shots have not been fired yet)? No, first they try to get them to put them down and avoid a fire-fight all together because guess what, everyone's chance of survival is 100% if no shots are fired, innocents and gun-wielders alike can be killed if people start firing.

Sep 12 11 - 12:13pm
Jonathon

Reever, again, you're a fucking moron who likes to talk shit about things you obviously know nothing about. Why don't you shut the fuck up and go back to your play station fantasy world?

Sep 12 11 - 10:52pm
Reever

Oh you're so right Jonathon. Lets tell our police to fire first even if they don't believe a person will shoot, but JUST because he has a gun. Lets see how well that goes over.

Sep 14 11 - 10:01am
D.M.

Reever, you're a mentally defective person. Let me guess, you also believe we should sit down and "talk" to radical muselims who have attacked, will attack, and plan to attack innocent Americans? If anyone pulls a gun on an officer, you can bet your ass they are going to get shot. There is no time to "try to get them to put them down and avoid a fire-fight".
I pity you.

Oct 08 11 - 7:26pm
Anti Cowardice

Reever, you sound like a corporate shill. Did Walgreens hire you to soften the PR blow?

Sep 10 11 - 12:50pm
bob

Good for that guy for defending himself. If I was the other employee, I would sue Walgreens just because they are claiming there was no robbery. Idiots. If I worked the graveyard shift I would carry a weapon too. So what if 99.9% of the time I wouldn't need it? Its the .01% that matters. If he shot them he would have been doing society a favor. Think about it. What if they go rob someone else and shoot/kill them? They still can. You don't know what they did in the past or what they will do, but you do know that they are pointing guns at your face running around like idiots and I am sure they were yelling. Lucky they didn't get shot themselves.

Sep 11 11 - 1:18am
common sense

Thank you for your voice of reason amongst so many voices of idiots.

Sep 10 11 - 6:48pm
Bob

Your employer shouldn't be allowed to dictate how you are allowed to act when someone starts waving guns around. Their lives aren't on the line, yours is. Only you have the right and responsibility to determine how you are going to stay alive. You shouldn't have to worry about consequences from your employer. You should be allowed to do the right thing, whatever that might be for the situation, without impediment.

I agree with Walgreens non-escalation policy. It's a good policy. But like any other policy, you have to be able to adapt. Policies generally assume that all parties act in a predictable manner, and as soon that doesn't happen, you have to start ignoring policy and thinking on your feet.

Sep 11 11 - 6:58pm
Reever

I do agree with your opinion on this situation. If it's obvious that things are not going by what should be predictable then yes, he should be allowed to think on his feet. This guy however dialed 911 when they pulled a gun. WTF do you think a robber is going to do with his gun if you try and get him caught? He will shoot your ass, then take the money for himself. You give them the money and let them go THEN call 911.

Sep 12 11 - 12:10pm
Jonathon

Reever, you're an idiot who just loves to pontificate about armed criminals when it's obvious you know nothing of the criminal mindset.What grade of junior high are you in?

Sep 12 11 - 10:55pm
Carolynfe

Reever - it is people like you that is destroying this society.

Jonathan, I agree whole-heartedly with your comments, though there is nothing that we can say to a person of Reever's mentality to pursuade common sense.

Sep 10 11 - 7:03pm
thomas

his right to defend his self supersedes all their phony baloney policies .ccw carriers have a better gunhandling rate than the police meaning hiting their intended target without hitting innocents or misses

Sep 20 11 - 9:32pm
yoadrian balboa

Why should the pharmacist defend Walgreens property, apparently if someone walks in with a gun the employee should just step back and let the robber take whatever they want. OK, next time there is a robbery, just let the robber take whatever they want and if Walgreens wants to provide their own security to protect their property, then let them. You are just an employee so why put your life on the line for people like this? Let them take whatever they want next time!

Sep 10 11 - 7:50pm
Pok Noo

Dont you just hate corporations and their silly policies? What a joke. Dude prolly saved some lives that night and these idiot corporate hob nobs only care about their stupid policies. Dude is a HERO plain and simple, I would LOVE to be on that jury.

www.privacy-web.edu.tc

Sep 10 11 - 9:58pm
Same

That would be such an easy choice. Not guilty. NEXT!

Sep 14 11 - 1:07am
Martha

I also vote Not Guilty.Pharmacist did right by defending himself.....Walgreens should have gave him a raise!!!!

Sep 10 11 - 10:00pm
disinterested observ

Once Hoven's lawyers put the subject of "Dead Peasant Insurance" and the fact that Walgreens made $6M from it last year (e.g. betting on their employees dying and profiting from it), I think Walgreens will be settling in a hurry. For even if they win this lawsuit, they're going to get DECIMATED publicly.

The side-effect of a "non-escalation policy" could be argued to be "we don't care if our employees get killed because we make tax-free money off of them."

Can't wait for that legal argument.

Sep 11 11 - 1:09am
Jp

Fuck the mentality here. To have the fear in my head that the possibility of such an event even happening makes me want to book a one way flight to France. Criminals have all the rights, the weapons, and they care less about the consequences. The violence here is abominable and the need for weapons is necessary bc of these violent monkeys that this country breeds. I side with the pharmacist. Think about the teenage girl slaughtered at the pharmacy on tge east coast after this. This country needs CCTV and operation clean sweep. No guns period. You get caught with 1 and u become a prison bitch that eats expired tomato soup while in a dark hole doing time. This is not conducive to raising children, this constant fear.

Sep 12 11 - 1:52am
Ryan

You're right, CCTV did so much for the UK during those riots! Oh wait...

Oct 08 11 - 7:27pm
Anti Cowardice

You also aren't alowed to own guns in the UK. Funny how that doesn't do much for their crime rate, eh? Not to mention that London is widely recognized as THE most surveilled city in the world...

Oct 08 11 - 7:28pm
Anti Cowardice

Also, your "think of the chldren" stance is exactly what will lead to you VOLUNTEERING to give up your civil rights.

Sep 11 11 - 3:44am
Jovy

My GOD so many of these comments are idiotic.

Sep 11 11 - 8:35am
Giggles

Well I know where to never shop again. I am a CC Permit holder and I carry 99% of the time. It is my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to keep and bear arms....if you don't want to...you don't have to...BUT I DO and I WILL!

Sep 11 11 - 9:08am
GunOwner

Compliance over confrontation.... yeah we tried that, two planes hit the twin towers and one hit the Pentagon.

Flight 93 did something different, they fought back and while they lost their lives no additional lives were lost by another plane hitting a target.

The only thing Walgreens is interested in is minimizing their liability. If they had REAL concern over their employees well being they would have 24 hour armed security.

There is a local convenience store where the owner ENCOURAGES his employees to get their concealed carry permit and bring a gun to work. About 2 months ago the store was robbed and one of the robbers was shot by the employee, no customers or employees were injured, but could have been if it wasn't for the quick action of the worker.

Sep 11 11 - 9:49am
What

Seriously you guys you need to stop selling guns like its candy. Handguns are for killing people that's it. Don't make handguns accessible problem solved. You change the culture around guns, guns slowly disappear. Stop saying I should be able to carry a concealed firearm that's ridiculous. I live in Canada in a major city, I no zero people who carry a gun and only one family that own guns. They live on a farm and the family are cops. Get your shit together US that's why no one likes you. Your beer sucks too.

Sep 11 11 - 11:39am
random

LOL you make it sound like there's a mass-epidemic of gun violence/armed robberies in the US- way to over-generalize an entire population of people based on a single news report.. maybe you should live in the US first before judging it so harshly because nothing you stated in your post is at all true. Well.. except maybe the beer thing. This may seem shocking to you but I live in a major US city and don't know anyone here who owns a gun either.. and to the best of my knowledge guns aren't exactly handed out like candy.....regardless of any nations weapon laws violence exists all over the world. Even your precious Canada isn't immune. I recently saw a news report that several human feet have been found along the Vancouver shore-line without any explanation. Based on your logic I think it's safe to assume Canada is infested with weird Dexter-like serial killers and Canada needs to get their shit together that's why no one likes you. Your cheeseburgers sucks too.

Sep 11 11 - 1:10pm
What

I didn't make it sound like a mass epidemic. I was regarding the article and the comments regarding the article. If you check the statistics for firearm homicides, you will know why I am saying this. Anyways I don't really care, I just wanted someone to say its my God given right to bear arms. So Learn to play Hockey and get it together people.

Sep 11 11 - 4:14pm
random

all in all.. walgreens just sucks. none of this other bs is important :/

Sep 12 11 - 12:11pm
Jonathon

Hey, What, nobody is asking to comment on how we do things in America. If you like Canada better, great. Stay there and shut the fuck up.

Sep 12 11 - 3:32pm
Go Hoven

Hey random, Canada proved it is a more civilized nation after the Canucks lost the cup! We lost lets destroy the city! That's twice its happened in Vancouver. A roit because of a sporting event, that's intellegent, Go Canada

Sep 11 11 - 11:19am
random

walgreens expects these people to work graveyard-shifts in seedy neighborhoods for slightly above minimum wage and not feel the need to carry a gun?? fcku you walgreens!!!1

Sep 12 11 - 5:19pm
elanvader

lol...go random

Sep 20 11 - 9:37pm
yoadrian balboa

F'k them, let the F'kin robbers take whatever they want, why lose your life over Walgreens property? The robbers don't want to rob you, they want to rob Walgreens so why stop them right?

Sep 11 11 - 11:20am
Also a Gun Owner

I wonder if Hoven's lawyer knows, employers have to irresponsibility to protect an employee's constitutional rights. The argument that the employer is violating his constitutional right to carry a gun will not go to far. I wonder if Hoven if firing his weapon to defend himself, had struck a fellow employee or a customer, would he be picking up the tab to bury them? Just a few thoughts from a gun owner.

Sep 11 11 - 12:14pm
Clarence Darrow

The company, Walgreens, can fire or discipline for failure of the employee to follow the "no firearms" policy.
The employee, Jeremy Hoven, can bring suit (in this instance) against Walgreen's for a policy that he claims caused unsafe and life-threatening working conditions.
The issue is clear: that without violating a "company policy" the worker would be dead or severely injured. The life of an employee supersedes any company policy.

Sep 11 11 - 12:19pm
Clarence Darrow

PS: those of you spouting Constitutional rights. You should take the time to read the Constitution . This case has nothing to do with the Constitution as the Second Amendment pertains to the "GOVERNMENT" making laws about keeping and bearing arms. Private companies can do as they please. Sorry, that's the law. Private companies do not even have to allow free speech.

Sep 11 11 - 12:28pm
Me Myself and I

Walgreen's policy tells me that their locations are sitting targets. In this poor economy, I'm not sure that's a good policy! Ten years ago, the passengers above Pennsylvania decided not to be passive victims. They probably saved hundreds of lives by confronting their attackers! Today they are being honored as heroes and patriots. This pharmacist did nothing less than protect his life. Pharmacists are highly trained professionals who are in charge of the responsible distribution of some highly addictive and dangerous drugs. It is irresponsible to strip them of the basic protections we grant police, air marshals, even lowly armored car drivers. Why is it ok for a bagage carrier to bear arms, and not a pharmacist? I don't believe any masked lunatic should be able to walk into a drug store and have access to it's shelves.

Sep 11 11 - 12:41pm
ooh

I only clicked on this article because I like the word "fire"

Sep 11 11 - 7:29pm
Roger

The Walgreens executives and psychologists who made those rules from their safe little offices made the assumption that the bad guys would just leave once they got whatever they wanted - money, drugs. That could easily not be the case. In the video the bad guys were visibly being brutal and could easily have intended to leave no living witnesses (perhaps they never thought of the cameras). If you took the Walgreens CEO out of his safe little office and stuck him in the same situation this poor worker faced and armed him, my bet is that HE would have opened fire on the bad guys without even a second thought, because the situation simply demanded it. The results speak for themselves - the bad guys couldn't get out fast enough, and they will probably think twice before trying to rob Walgreens ever again.

Sep 11 11 - 7:37pm
Randall

So, should congressman Gifford be thankful NO ONE had a gun to stop Jared from shooting her in the head? I am not fond of guns, I wish we did not live in a world with guns, but the reality is the world is full of crazy people who murder every day. Just because some robberies do not involve murder does not mean a robber will not blow you away on a whim whether you give the cash or not. I do not enjoy the thought of cowering and hoping the criminal with a gun will not kill me. I would rather invest my odds of trying to defend myself than take the odds he will randomly decide not to shoot me. Sure, I may die in the process of taking him out, but at least I would stop him from going on a killing spree where he can just walk up to anyone pleading for their lives with no way to stop their death. Of course gun accidents happen, car accidents happen, cooking accidents happen, ladder accidents happen, bike accidents happen, rollerblading accidents happen... you get my point. The Walgreens employee did the right thing in my book and I am glad someone has the courage to stand up to crime instead of cower and let the criminals have the greater odds.

Sep 12 11 - 4:56pm
elanvader

Totally agree. Very valid points here

Sep 11 11 - 8:08pm
Roger

Please let me add this to my previous comment: since hold-ups are a known recurring problem at Walgreens, its obvious this is a workplace hazard they are not adequately addressing. Until Walgreens is willing to provide adequate protection for their workers, and count that as part of the cost of doing business, then they don't have a leg to stand on in this. Please note I also hate guns, and wish they would be banned like in England. But until the bad guys are disarmed I don't see much choice but for the good guys to be armed, or better, have paid, trained armed guards. You can't know if the bad guys are on drugs so you can't expect rational actions from them (they are holding up the place after all, and that's not rational), so the pacifist approach of the psychologists could easily bring disaster. Bottom line: Walgreens needs to step forward and adequately protect their employees (and other customers) from the bad guys.

Sep 12 11 - 4:47pm
elanvader

Excellent points

Sep 11 11 - 10:44pm
jww

If everyone carried a gun, robbers would think twice before contemplating a robbery. There would be LESS crime.

Sep 12 11 - 8:19am
Jan

Crime has increase so badly that you should be carrying a weapon to protect yourself. You do not hear of all the crimes being done by the criminals. I have seen robbers come in and shoot the clerks and customers for no reason. Violent crimes have increase 100% in the past 20 years. I have seen a 21-year-old clerk killed for $10.00. If you want to stop these crimes, the Death penalty should be enforced immediately, not 20 years later.

Sep 12 11 - 8:21am
Jan

I will not shop at Walgreens anymore for there actions on this employee.

Sep 12 11 - 9:36am
Jbean

Thinking this is a huge bonus for robbers.

Sep 12 11 - 4:50pm
elanvader

Totally agree. Nice for the armed robbers to know in advance that Walgreens employees are totally unarmed and store policy is to hand over the money. So then the armed robbers can kill any witnesses without worry and walk off with the loot. Sounds like a well thought out store policy on how not to have to pay retirement to it's employees.

Sep 12 11 - 12:25pm
KB

Can't fault this guy too much for the actions he took given the circumstances, but I also can't fault Walgreens for firing the guy. Most retail outlets have a non-confrontation policy like Walgreens does for a reason. If they let all their employees carry guns to work and allow them to fire at will at any would-be robbers, they put lives at risk. No, I'm not saying they're going to accidentally fire at a customer; but if somebody's armed and out to rob the place, they're just going to want to get the cash/whatever and run. They likely have no intent in shooting anybody, but once they see a weapon or a threat, that's when they start firing to protect themselves.

Since this seems to be a target for robbery, what Walgreens should have is a concealed panic button like they have at banks to alert the police without the robbers knowing, as well as a trained and armed security guard on-site on the late shift that knows in what situation to draw his weapon and in what situation to comply.

Walgreens is absolutely not violating his right to bear arms by not allowing staff to carry weapons on shift. People just don't understand their rights, especially the right to bear arms and the right to free speech. First off, these prevent the GOVERNMENT from denying you these freedoms, not private parties. It makes me think of celebrities that work as spokespeople for a company who get fired for something they say then cry it's a violation of their freedom of speech.

Also, if this guy had a problem with the company not allowing him to bring firearms to work, that's his responsibility to either take it up with his employer or the labor board if he felt it was a violation of his rights.

Sep 12 11 - 4:54pm
elanvader

I would think it quite a deterrent to a potential robber if they knew employees might be armed. Why chance robbing that store, better to pick another store that advertises their employees will be fired if they choose to protect themselves

Sep 12 11 - 12:25pm
rx

wags said.. Walgreens spokeswoman Tiffani Washington, "Our policies in this area are created to maintain maximum safety for our customers and employees. Our employees receive very comprehensive training on what to do in the event of this kind of situation... Compliance is safer than confrontation."

my training was .... to about a 5 minute video clip.. ! on no eye contact, no quick moves , TELL THAT TO THE ROBBERS<<<

Sep 12 11 - 8:01pm
cp

I am a pharmacist and I have worked for walgreens Fuck their policies
What is the corporation out of its mind--the guy is a hero
His life is in danger and he defended it--Please boycott Walgreens they are a bunch of greedy scum bags

Sep 12 11 - 9:50pm
umm...

agreed. i've seen their shady behavior. employees at walgreens are the least of their concerns. they care about the bottom line. i've seen this happen to entirely too many individuals. there are not even panic buttons in the pharmacy... only an intercom call. clearly, this individual had the IDEAL situation to pick up a phone and make an intercom call for help. i'm glad he is exposing them. he didn't quit, but knowing his company wasn't protecting him, he took matters into his own hands. life > walgreens.

Sep 12 11 - 10:59pm
security man

I used to live in Benton Harbor. Things there are really bad now and a lot of thugs are on drugs and they don't care how they finance their habit. Trust me, the younger they are, the worse they are, and they don't give a hoot about killing anybody....even if their demands are met. The guy did a good job, and their needs to be revised store policies that allow law-abiding citizens who have carry permits to defend themselves anywhere, anytime. Walgreens just lost my business!

Sep 13 11 - 12:33pm
Employed At Will

Regardless of what you might think about the policy, employers are allowed to establish rules of their workplace, and they are allowed to fire employees for violating those rules. "Rights" don't come into it. This employee's lawsuit is a lost cause. If you want to carry a gun to work, you should check the employ handbook before you do.

Sep 13 11 - 5:05pm
Boycott Walgreen

That s right, screw Walgreen for not be able to protect us. The pharmacist did right!

Sep 14 11 - 9:48am
D.M.

This is what's wrong with our country. Too many people and organizations believe we, as humans, have no right to defend ourselves. Jeremy Hoven did the right thing and he will win his case if for no other reason than the public outcry for justice and the boycotting of Walgreen's.
At the end of the day, a job at Walgreen's can't compare to the value of his life. If these piece of crap thugs knew that employees were armed then armed robbery would no longer take place.
So, Walgreen has a "non-escalation" policy, huh? If you want to follow that logic, then when the police arrive they shouldn't be allowed to shoot either - retarded. Just yesterday, we had a local court building attacked by a nut with a rifle. He shot a secretary and a police officer. Another officer shot and killed the scumbag. If this officer was working for Walgreen's, he would be fired too?
I applaud Jeremy for his bravery and will boycott Walgreen's until they hire him back.

Sep 20 11 - 9:04pm
yoadrian balboa

Next time, just stand back and say, "go ahead, take whatever you want to, I won't stop you, I just work here and I don't give a $hit what you take, I'll just step aside while you get what you want ok??"

Sep 20 11 - 9:14pm
yoadrian balboa

Now I understand what Walgreens wants, instead of trying to defend Walgreens property with my life, if some robber comes in and tries to rob us I will just stand aside and stay out of the way while the person takes whatever they want. I won't try to stop the robber in any way. It's clear now what Walgreens wants so i'm glad that's cleared up.

Sep 21 11 - 6:59pm
MegaEdforpeanutpay

Did a Walgreens pharamcist - a father of eight children - get shot dead as he left his workshift at Walgreens some twenty years ago? I seem to recall that story...

Oct 03 11 - 12:26am
Bird of Paradise

As long as walgreens prophibits its employs from exsercising their 2nd amendment rights then we should boycott them and thr NRA should file suit against them and all other buisnesses that ban their employs from excesising the 2nd amendment rights

Oct 08 11 - 7:15pm
Wow

Wow. There are a bunch of VERY determined anti-gun people commenting on this thread. While I'm sure some of them are sincere, does it sound paranoid to consider that some might be hired PR control by Walgreens? Particularly the ones that are repeatedly trying to argue with anybody else with an opposing viewpoint, and/or the ones that sound particularly upset or vehement at the thought that an employee with a gun MIGHT have saved the day?

Dec 31 11 - 5:24am
Dani

I'm a Walgreens ( not Wal-Greens ) tech and have been for 15 years now. That store is just 45 minutes from my home store. I totally think Jeremy did what he should have done. If you k ew anything about Benton Harbor, you'd understand why he was packin'. If I worked at that store, I'd be relieved if I knew my RPH was carrying. I'd be nervous, but hey, just the thought of working in some stores make me jumpy as a Oxy-moron! I'm sorry he was fired, but glad he got a couple of shots off!

May 08 12 - 9:48pm
Jake Act.Duty Navy

First off let me just start off by saying that the "Anti-Gun" people on this thread will never understand why people like me with C.C. have a loaded firearm on us at all times. Unfortunately they fail to see the value until they are put into that situation and by then it [more than likely] will be too late. So just a little bit of background the Wal-Greens where i currently reside was recently robbed twice in one month and my wife was the cashier who by the way conformed with their "non escalation" policy and yet the punk who robbed her (who was sober) still FIRED A SHOT AT HER!!!!!! By the way at the time of incident she was 29 weeks pregnant.
Next to address the "wreckless endangerment" exhibited by gun owners....If you think that car accidents and gun accidents have something to do with each other you are completely wrong. Whens the last time you heard about someone shooting someone else while texting or talking on a phone, how about when they fell asleep while target shooting. YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD OF IT BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPLETELY UNRELATED. No one goes through any extensive training to get a license and it even says on the form, "has completed the basic minimum requirements by the state of WHERE EVER YOU LIVE to be licensed to drive."
By the way I am a certified C.C. weapons and firearm safety instructor certified by my home state and the NRA to certify NON CRIMINAL, LEGALLY AND MORALLY RESPONSIBLE citizens to carry a concealed weapon. They are subjected to an 8 hour safety course containing the most current local, state and federal laws as they pertain to carrying and transporting your firearm. A range qualification test at the 3, 10, and 25 yard lines since that is more than likely the farthest distance you would likely have to shoot since your not going to defend yourself at 50 yards from an armed assailant. After they complete that and the 100 question test which they have to get a 90% or better on. As for the questions they missed they have to go back and find the correct answer and bring that forth in order to complete the course. Once the couse in done, they then have to go pay (varies by state and even county in some places) around $120.00 for an FBI Fingerprint Background Check. [By the way for any of you that PAID to have something sealed or expunged from your record you did nothing because the FBI does not get rid of any charges that you have ever been charged and/or convicted of] If all of that checks out and you managed to satisfy the requirements of the state then the make, model and S/N of the weapon you are going to carry is registered and in 6-8 weeks you will get your C.C. permit in the mail.
Now I absolutely agree with the gentleman in this story and think he had every right to defend himself, I can tell you personally I would rather BE TRIED BY 12 THEN CARRIED BY 6. At the same time if I had been at my wifes store that night when that incident occured I would have pulled my firearm and attempted to de-escalate the situation, of course if that was not possible and the three parts of the "Deadly Force Triangle" : Capability, Intent and Opportunity [which were already present otherwise he wouldn't have robbed them in the first place] I would have shot him, and with the training I have received from the military it would have been two to the chest and one to the head to ensure the job was done.
To wrap this up, I would say 99% of all persons that posses and elects to C.C. a firearm does not walk around looking for a situation to use that firearm. Instead they have it in a locked draw, safe, box....etc.....or its in a holster to where it is easily accesible and available IF AND WHEN ITS NEEDED!!! If you are one of these "Anti-Gun Nuts" and you are ever in the situation where someone who is not licensed to carry and is a no good low life criminal who is holding you at gunpoint and shows a certain degree of mental instability you are gonna wish that someone like me is near by to help you out.... CAUSE REALITIY IS THAT IT TAKES LESS TIME FOR THEM TO SQUEEZ THAT TRIGGER THAN IT DOES FOR YOU TO DIAL 9-1-1 OR FOR THE POLICE TO SHOW UP.
AND IF YOU WANT MY GUNS YOU CAN HAVE THEM "BULLETS FIRST" BECAUSE AS AN AMERICAN AND SOMEONE WHO DEFENDS YOUR FREEDOM AND LIBERTIES I STAND BY MY SECOND AMENDMANT RIGHT. WE DONT NEED STRICTER GUN CONTROL LAWS WE NEED A LOT LESS IDIOTS IN THIS WORLD. AND BESIDES GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, DADS AND HUSBANDS THA COME HOME EARLY DO!!!!!!!!!!