One For The Second Amendment

[Annie]

The right to defend oneself trumps the order not to, which makes it illegal to discharge employment for that reason.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_06_05-2005_06_11.shtml#1118499071

David Kopel, June 11, 2005 at 10:11am

W.V. Court Vindicates Self-defense Right for Employees:
​

In Feliciano v. 7-Eleven, a masked woman with a gun attempted to rob the 7-Eleven where Feliciano worked. While the robber was distracted by another employee, Feliciano grabbed her gun, and held her captive until the police arrived. "Following this incident, 7-Eleven terminated Feliciano, who was an at will employee, for failure to comply with its company policy which prohibits employees from subduing or otherwise interfering with a store robbery."

The West Virginia Supreme Court cited numerous precedents showing that the right of self-defense is very well-established and substantial public policy. Accordingly:

we hold that when an at will employee has been discharged from his/her employment based upon his/her exercise of self-defense in response to lethal imminent danger, such right of self-defense constitutes a substantial public policy exception to the at will employment doctrine and will sustain a cause of action for wrongful discharge. Consistent with our prior precedent, we hold further that an employer may rebut an employee's prima facie case of wrongful discharge resulting from the employee's use of self-defense in response to lethal imminent danger by demonstrating that it had a plausible and legitimate business reason to justify the discharge.​

 

[5stringJeff]

I can't believe that 7-Eleven would have such a moronic policy. Good for Mr/Ms. Feliciano.