Wendy's Employee Kills Robber

So if the place is insured, and IF the employee remembered that there would be just a minimal loss suffered, part of me is thinking that it may have been a reckless to go "outside" the establishment.

The outer walls of Wendy's are mostly windows. From most angles of fast food parking lots i can usually see the front counter. So i'd think that if it were merely curiosity or to assess the situation as some suggest, the employee would simply need to look outside. This is how I think a Wendy's or similar fast food joint differs from the Mall-being-robbed analogy used above. If you see the robber, it doesn't count as stumbling into him on the way out. that is of course IF you see him. The robber could have been on the side covered by brick towards the rear.

Either way the employee used a bit of that time to retrieve his gun. Good idea. He could have also locked the doors and waited for police, gun in hand. From what i understand, when your firearm is drawn creating distance is generally a good idea for a trained citizen defending themself -rather than closing in. But we all act a little different than we'd like under stress. It's always fun for me to QB after the fact and i've indulged yet again. Who knows maybe we learn a little each time.
 
So if the place is insured, and IF the employee remembered that there would be just a minimal loss suffered, part of me is thinking that it may have been a reckless to go "outside" the establishment.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.

I would have gone.

I would have gone looking for the bad guy and hoped to find him and shoot him or force him to surrender and be arrested. I would not recommend that for 99% of the population however. For the 99% I would suggest staying inside, keeping low, buttoning up and waiting for the police to arrive.

Stupid? It is all a matter of perspective. What kind of world do you want to live in? The kind where people can commit armed robbery and get away with it or the kind of world where most people are willing to risk things to not allow such behavior to go unchecked?

Me? I prefer the second one and so I have for many years not allowed such things to simply pass me by.

Most people prefer to die of old age in a hospital after having spent their life savings trying to prolong the final miserable 2% of their life. Call me crazy but I would rather die young(er) and have no regrets.
 
Stupid? It is all a matter of perspective. What kind of world do you want to live in? The kind where people can commit armed robbery and get away with it or the kind of world where most people are willing to risk things to not allow such behavior to go unchecked?

The way it is put, the Obvious/right answer would be door number two. (no one can answer that they want to live with more crime) - to be fair i have to remember you did mention that this is the way You think and would act. One thing to note is that unlike an assault or injury in which case the harm has been done and cannot be undone, perhaps you're thinking of stopping the harm from being done by retrieving the goods.

Other thoughts that come to my head: I had been viewing this as more of a "clear the house at night vs. Hole up in bedroom" debate. So i was just a bit surprised at the varied responses since there seems to be more of a one-sided majority to stay in the most secure spot. And that's before any legal stuff comes into play - just considering short term survival. Was this situation much different than that?
 
The way it is put, the Obvious/right answer would be door number two.
Click to expand...

It is not obvious. My way is not guaranteed to reduce crime and is fraught with many risks. I believe I understand the risks and deal with them as best I can. I can't even say with certainty that is the best way of doing things. It merely the way I would do it.
 
Playing the odds...

As DNS points out, the odds of being robbed in a fast food place, or a convenience store, in general aren't that high.

On the other hand, in the last couple weeks in the KC area, we appear to have a two man team that has been robbing fast food places (three chicken places, so far) and several other stores; 10 robberies in two or three weeks.

So, the odds in that area of town are significantly higher, at least in the short term.
 
As DNS points out, the odds of being robbed in a fast food place, or a convenience store, in general aren't that high.
Click to expand...

I don't know where he is getting his numbers from but I would dispute them. True, fast food stores are not robbed "often"; however convenience stores are robbed literally all the time. Especially stores that are open 24 hours a day. If you are a clerk at one your chances of being robbed are much higher than just walking the streets. In fact in this very forum we discussed a case of one store where the owner has now killed five armed robbers over the years.
 
Hmm,,,tried to reply twice to this thread but didnt go thru? I was robbed working for Wendys back in the 90's . The most dangerous time in my mind IS at closing time or running the drive thru late [2am-ish?]. Nothing in Wendys is worth my life [except ME :) ] to retrieve or pursue thru some mis-guided sense of pride or justice.But,,,personally they wouldnt have ushered me to the back room,office,bathroom or freezer without a fight whether i'm armed or not,the possibilty of bad things happening increases,,,I'm not going to second guess.
 
If the robbers already left,,,good riddence,,,let the police deal with them and live to recieve that measly check on Friday.The employee did the wrong thing,,atleast from my perspective.

Funny thing,I was robbed during rush hour with a line full of aggravated customers waiting to order and a dining room full of customers munchin on thier meals,none had a clue as to what was happening or what had JUST happened.I gotta say that dude was bold.
 
Double Nought: "Yes, the inside was just robbed and the robbers left. The robbers WERE the danger and now the danger is no longer there."

And you'd know this because... You are WRONG -- they left the ROOM. Why would you NOT try to determine what's going on? What they are doing? Improve your tactical position and understand the strategic environment!? At that point seemed he felt he could help gather info to i.d. them later. Apparently he has -- at least one.
Click to expand...

I must have missed it. Please tell me again why it is unsafe to be in a business that has just been robbed. You said it wasn't safe, but failed to explain why it isn't.

One does not improve his tactical position by leaving the concealment and cover and going outside into a parking lot where one apparently believes the robbers to be going. He felt he could help? It almost got him killed and for what? Some of Wendy's money?

What is this grand tactical position that is being improved by leaving the building? The employee knew that there were at least 2 bad guys and that the bad guys were armed. So what advantage was gained by exposing himself to superior numbers in a parking lot?

His position outside in the parking lot would be for if the robbers came back? Given that he can only defend one side or at most, two sides, how is he going to stop the robbers if they enter from an unprotected side?

I have worked enough places and been to enough gun schools to know that one does not strive to improve one's "tactical position" when one isn't being directly threatened by going to a place where one may be directly threatened as happened in this case.

Even if you can show that the employee experienced some tactical position gain by going out in the parking lot, he didn't gain any personal safety by doing so. He put himself at considerable risk that resulted in having a bad guy re-engage him for a second time. Doing this made his actions not tactically sound. .


I don't know where he is getting his numbers from but I would dispute them.
Click to expand...

The links were provided. I don't know how you could have missed them.

On the other hand, in the last couple weeks in the KC area, we appear to have a two man team that has been robbing fast food places (three chicken places, so far) and several other stores; 10 robberies in two or three weeks.

So, the odds in that area of town are significantly higher, at least in the short term.
Click to expand...

Oh sure. There are criminals who specialize sometimes. In the DFW area, we have had several serial bank robbers.
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/10/arlington-police-looking-for-s.html
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/09/coppell-police-seek-help-ident.html
http://www.fbi.gov/dallas/press-releases/2010/dl061610.htm
 
I must have missed it. Please tell me again why it is unsafe to be in a business that has just been robbed. You said it wasn't safe, but failed to explain why it isn't.

One does not improve his tactical position by leaving the concealment and cover and going outside into a parking lot where one apparently believes the robbers to be going. He felt he could help? It almost got him killed and for what? Some of Wendy's money?

What is this grand tactical position that is being improved by leaving the building? The employee knew that there were at least 2 bad guys and that the bad guys were armed. So what advantage was gained by exposing himself to superior numbers in a parking lot?

His position outside in the parking lot would be for if the robbers came back? Given that he can only defend one side or at most, two sides, how is he going to stop the robbers if they enter from an unprotected side?

I have worked enough places and been to enough gun schools to know that one does not strive to improve one's "tactical position" when one isn't being directly threatened by going to a place where one may be directly threatened as happened in this case.

Even if you can show that the employee experienced some tactical position gain by going out in the parking lot, he didn't gain any personal safety by doing so. He put himself at considerable risk that resulted in having a bad guy re-engage him for a second time. Doing this made his actions not tactically sound. .

You may look at it that way but as a good member of the public the moral issue is the safety of the public. Going out the door to get a plate or such is a what people should do thing. Its called being a member of the public.
Plus I think the guy involved there had a better idea than you do as the end result is bad guys 0 him 1.
 
Last edited:
The links were provided. I don't know how you could have missed them.
Click to expand...

My point is the conclusions drawn from the data were quite erroneous.

There are 200,000,000 people on the street every day vs. 145,000 stores. Yet the stores account for 5.5% of robberies versus 43.1% for robberies on the street. More than a 1000 times more potential opportunities yet only ten times more robberies. So your odds of being robbed if you work in a convenience store every day are much greater than if you just walk the street every day.

In fact on average more than 10% of convenience stores are robbed every year. 10% of the population is not, no where near that.
 
The numbers may look odd but the odds of getting shot and killed in a convenience store is much higher than on the street though per stick up.
 
Funny in the updated article it said that the robber was shot in the head on Blue Fin Circle. Now, I am not familiar with this area, but it does not appear that this was the Wendy’s parking lot. Obviously I have no way of knowing, but it appears the employee may have pursued the robber.
 
Common sense notwithstanding, I don't know of any prohibition to following a robber for suspect or vehicle identification purposes.
Click to expand...

Florida law allows a citizen to not only follow for ID sort of reason but also allows us to detain, with whatever force is needed, a person we personally witnessed engaged in certain "violent felonies" including arson...

We are not required, in florida, to let a violent felon escape us...

Brent
 
As for my subsequent discharge from my job... well... I was lookin' fer a job when I found that one...

Brent
 
I doubt he will be fired. One article I found said this:

Bryan Saba, chief operations officer for the Wilmington Island Wendy’s franchise, said Dasher was not barred from carrying a gun while on duty.

“I’ve never told him he could have a gun at work. I’ve never told him he couldn’t,” Saba said, but added that he doesn’t “encourage anybody to carry a weapon into the store.

Wendy’s International does not set safety policies for franchisees, according to a company spokesman Denny Lynch.
Click to expand...
 
You may look at it that way but as a good member of the public the moral issue is the safety of the public. Going out the door to get a plate or such is a what people should do thing. Its called being a member of the public.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that getting a license plate number is more important than one's own personal safety.

A matter of public safety? So because he has a gun, he is now a cop encumbered with the responsibility of protecting public safety?

Sure, getting a plate number is a very good thing to do as are getting any other details about the robbers. However, leaving a place of cover and concealment and blindly running out into the parking lot where there is no cover or concealment was stupid and it resulted in violence where the hero got lucky.

A moral issue? We are morally obligated to get license plate numbers even if such action puts us in life threatening situations? I don't think so.

Plus I think the guy involved there had a better idea than you do as the end result is bad guys 0 him 1.
Click to expand...

Risking his life for a license plate number is a better idea? Better than what?

Dasher shot Clark in the head. Either close range or a heck of a shot!
Click to expand...
Could be close range. Could be a heck of a shot. It could be a poorly aimed shot, aiming for the chest but looking over his sights which caused the shot to go high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top