Subway Suspension-Shaming For Self-Defense Should Not Stand ~ VIDEO

Opinion

Rockford, Illinois – -(AmmoLand.com)- When discussing corporate gun control, Second Amendment supporters need to keep in mind that it doesn’t just include actions like those Salesforce carried out a couple of years ago. It can also include a number of other policies, like, for instance, self-defense.

Decades ago, 7-11 became notorious among Second Amendment supporters for firing a clerk who had used a firearm in self-defense, in violation of the company’s policy to comply with robbers. In 2002, the company prevailed in a lawsuit after firing a clerk who resisted a robber.

One such case hit the news involving an employee at a Rockford, Illinois, Subway restaurant. This time, Araceli Sotelo has not been fired for defending herself – technically. She’s been suspended until the video of her defending herself during an armed robbery is off the internet. As Second Amendment supporters proved in taking down the nomination of David Chipman, once something is on the internet, it’s there forever. So, for all intents and purposes, Sotelo has been fired for protecting herself, albeit the indefinite suspension leaves her in a state of limbo.

Whether it is a corporate policy imposed on the franchisee or if it’s a decision by the franchisee (who is a small-business owner), Sotelo is being punished for protecting herself. It’s an injustice, as she is the victim of a violent crime and now has financial insecurity added to it.

But while we have an obvious injustice – not to mention a very dangerous blanket ban on self-defense – rectifying it is not so simple in these cases. Part of the problem is obvious to anyone who has read some of Massad Ayoob’s writings over the decades on armed self-defense. The fact is, acting in self-defense does carry risks – and for many business owners, or those high up the corporate ladder, those risks spell legal liability and/or a public relations fiasco.

For instance, last month a 7-11 clerk in Texas was indicted on a murder charge after an incident involving two alleged shoplifters. This past October, a convenience store clerk in New York was charged with manslaughter in another incident involving a shoplifter. Those cases will be formidable obstacles to getting this policy changed in many business settings.

Another fundamental difference is that these are private entities and as such, not subject to the constitutional limitations that the government would be held within. Legislative and political efforts may make it harder for a company to punish an employee who acts in self-defense, but as Sotelo’s case shows, they will still find ways.

To get these companies to change their policies to something that more closely resembles common sense, to say nothing of respecting those who exercise their Second Amendment rights, will take a lot of persuasion and compromise. One step that should be considered is to allow companies to require that employees who wish to have the implements for self-defense readily available complete personal protection courses, like those offered by the NRA.

Remember that these businesses are private property, and just as we fight to have our rights respected and acknowledged, we need to do the same for these businesses. At the same time, pressure should be applied to reverse obviously unjust actions against employees who act to defend themselves. Second Amendment supporters should contact Subway and politely urge them to reverse the suspension of Ariceli Sotelo.


About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

21 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Thinker1

Subway won’t see any business from me.

Rock22

Subway was already on my no go list for sponsoring the Olympic women’s soccer creep.

OlTrailDog

I know it is off topic however some of the comments has reminded me that I’ve stopped visiting Subway. When I think about going there I remember they sponsor that female soccer player who hates the US and keeled during the Olympics. No thanks, I will take my business elsewhere. I just say nope to woke coke too and purposefully comment “No thanks for woke coke” and ask for Pepsi or coffee at other places that I see serve woke coke. I’m going to change the world, one cup at a time 😉

baxterday1

Yet another reason to avoid Subway.

james

She did nothing wrong. She is alive and can find work elsewhere.
In NC a Speedway was robbed in daytime, the clerk was shot after handing over the cash, she died in the hospital. She was a grandmother.
Other times the clerks are sexually abused.

Henry Bowman

SELF-DEFENSE IS A HUMAN RIGHT. PERIOD, FULL STOP!

The answer to corporations like THIS is “GET WOKE, GO BROKE”!
Boycott them into oblivion, and that’ll send a message to the rest of corporate America: WE THE PEOPLE ARE IN CHARGE, NOT YOU!

I Haz A Question

What a coinkidink that I’m seeing an article on Subway after my own trip to my local franchise today for lunch, lol. I ate their sandwiches at least twice a week for years, until a couple of years ago when I finally realized their bread has extreme amounts of sodium. So I cut back to once every other week. Then there was that pedo scandal involving “Jared”. Then the scandal about the tuna fish being…well…something other than tuna. Or even fish. Then the issue with the pressed chicken being something other than chicken. And today… …I went in for a… Read more »

Ansel Hazen

Politely my ass. Do unto others as they do unto you. The libtard left throws everything they can at the wall to see what sticks. We need to fling it back harder.

WI Patriot

“How should Second Amendment supporters address corporate policies that prohibit then shame employees from defending themselves?”

Ignore them…

gregs

corporations and government agencies should be held financially liable if any harm comes to anyone during the commission of a crime if they do not allow lawful concealed carriers to exercise their Second Amendment right. once it hurts them financially, maybe they will rethink their position. government probably not because it isn’t their money, but it’s a start.