Pizza Hut driver suspended for carrying a gun

I absolutely agree.

Most of the posts in this thread are nearly incomprehensible to me. I don’t want the pizza guy carrying a gun into my house. If a pizza company advertised “our drivers are unarmed” and then backed that up by firing employees who brought guns to work, I’d be more likely to buy pizza from them than from armed delivery people.

So, yes, if a company has “no firearms while on company premises or performing company activities” in its policies, it’s perfectly ok with me if they fire someone for failing to follow policy.

Pizza guy always comes into my house, even when I’m there alone - and I live in South Africa, the Gun Murder Leader of the world according to some polls. Of course, most pizza delivery guys here are young white/coloured college boys - not your usual gun-toting metric for SA. Still, I’ve up until this thread never even considered the pizza guy might do me harm. I mean, they’re the Pizza Guy! They’re like, messengers from Olympus with their cheesy, meaty, saucy Gifts from the Gods. Drooool!

One wonders how you would establish that Driver X would not have been injured if Pizza Hut did not have a policy against armed drivers?

Maybe it would be better to have a law that no one could be prosecuted for illegally owning or carrying a weapon when it was established that he used such a weapon in self-defense. Bernie Goetz was found to have been acting legitimately in self-defense when he shot the four disadvantaged youths who tried to shake him down, but was still convicted of illegal possession of a firearm. IIRC.

Of course, there will always be idiot politicians who oppose even that.

Regards,
Shodan

Why would someone be bothered by someone being armed. who means you no harm? Is there a precedent for this- armed delivery guy freaks out at small tip and shoots customer? Many convenience store clerks, taxi drivers, etc. are armed, but people use their services with no problem. The part about they are in proximity to your home I don’t get the difference- if someone is doing business with you and means you no harm why does it matter if he’s got a gun strapped to his ankle?

I’m not afraid he’s gonna wig out and shoot me. I’m afraid he’s going to decide I’m cute, shut the door, pull out his gun and rape me. Maybe a little irrational. But so it goes. I’d choose “Peaceful Pizza” over “Armed-to-the-Teeth Pizza.”

If you’re worried about that, then consider that a driver with rape on his mind isn’t likely to follow an instruction to not carry anyway. Can you not ask for a female driver? Even then, how do you know she won’t do something else nasty? One can concoct scenarios until the cows come home. All you can do is trust the company to have screened its drivers.

Looking at it from the perspective of the driver, if villains think I might be armed, they’re likely to look for easier prey; if they know I’m not armed, then I’m easier prey.

A guy who is willing to commit something as henious as rape is going to toe the line when it comes to the rules of his pizza delivery job?

ETA: sorry, **Quartz ** pretty much said this above.

Just a thought, but does Pizza Hut use armed guards for its cash transfers? Or rather, does the company it uses mandate, expect, or allow its delivery staff to be armed?

Wasn’t there a Doper who ran a Pizza Hut? Kung Fu Lola, perhaps?

I am not soo uncomfortable with the delivery guy in my house but I wouldn’t want ANYONE with a gun entering my home. I don’ t think it’s something I should even have to worry about when all I want is a pizza! If this is the norm- i mean armed delivery ppl then i am going with frozen pizza!

He doesn’t need a gun to do any of that.

Really? Why not?

Where on earth are you going with this?

If you’re comparing a delivery guy with a pizza to a delivery guy with a truck full of cash, then you should probably just let that thought go.

WAG: they might shoot her. I can’t back that up, though.

So don’t worry about it. You’ll never know anyway.

Unless he shoots you. You’ll probably notice that.

After that, I really don’t care if this is seen as an insult.

:rolleyes:

My concern isn’t so much maliciousness as hotheaded stupidity. I worry about the person who has already shown (IMO) an incredible lack of judgment by delivering pizzas armed accidentally shooting the neighbor’s cat, the neighbor, or me because that pizza deliverer heard a funny noise that triggered their vigilante fantasy.

Why? It’s entirely appropriate to compare the attitude. Surely the lives of each are equally important? If they’re OK with Securicor or whoever using armed guards to protect their money, it would be hypocritical of them to not be OK with their drivers being armed.

Surely you can point to cites of lawful concealed carriers who have shot the neighbor’s cat, the neighbor, or anyone else because they have an incredible lack of judgment and a vigilante fantasy and are not impugning the character of a law-abiding person who has show he or she is no danger to anyone because of an irrational fear on your part.

The evidence to back up your fear does not exist. There is no basis in reality for your fear that the pizza guy is a danger to you because he is legally carrying a concealed firearm.

This fear you have is irrational, unfounded, and something you need to work out yourself, not a just reason for your insulting and inflammatory language about those who legally carry.

Why would you consider that an “incredible lack of judgement”?
There’s lots of gun hysteria in this thread. People who are fearful of the idea of being next to guns or armed people.

You know, when Florida was considering enacting the first CCW laws, the gun lobby was there to say “there will be bloodbaths in the streets! people will be shooting each other over parking spaces!”

Florida passed it, and it was very successful - no permit holders used their guns to commit a crime. There was also downward trend in certain crimes, so other states decided to enact that.

A few years ago Ohio was debating on being the 37th (IIRC) state to enact shall-issue CCW laws. I lived in Ohio at the time and was interested in the subject so I kept up with the debate.

At the time (not sure if it’s still true), with decades, dozens of states, and million(s?) of people licensed to carry, not one ever used their legally carried gun to commit a crime. It was actually found that they were abnormally law-abiding as a group, commiting fewer crimes than even police officers. It’s hard to believe, I know. None of the hysterical predictions remotely came true…

And yet there was the gun control lobby, debating in Ohio, saying “there will be bloodbaths in the streets! People will be shooting each other over parking spaces!”

If someone doesn’t intend you harm, then why is their being armed threatning? If someone does intend you harm, they can certainly inflict it upon you without a gun - or, for that matter, they probably won’t obey rules or laws about guns.

You’ve probably stood next to at least dozens of armed, legal CCW holders in your normal life and were never threatened. Why would retroactively knowing they were armed scare you?

Where’s the “lots”? By my count, of the many people who have responded to the thread, only three have objected to guns inside their homes. Also, none of them have said that your guns should be wrested from your hands by the state, just that they don’t want the guns in their house and will take minimal steps (ordering from non-gun-carrying deliverers) if that will make guns in their homes less likely. That’s hardly “hysteria.”