Project Wonderful Banner

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

That damned sanity

What's Mallard raving about today?

Gas Station Attendants, Trial Lawyers.

Does anyone know all these other heroes Mallard reference, to whom this has happened? Because this is the first I've heard of such an incident.

I specifically don't want to know about all the ex-heroes who took the same action with much worse results.

13 comments:

starshark said...

Funny you should ask! If you googlenews "mark beverly mn" you get a single Fox news article about a poor old soul who lost his job when he pulled a dirty robber off a screaming woman.

Here's the kicker: Even the Fox news article notes that the video footage doesn't support his claim (the footage doesn't show the robber attacking the woman), the station's policy is 'don't attack robbers' which the guy who was fired knows because he did the training, and even the police say in the article 'don't attack robbers'.

So, the guy was an idiot and the station doesn't want idiots working for it. Tinsley finds the weirdest people to defend.

starshark said...

Here's the link, BTW:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356710,00.html

"The security tape did not show the female co-worker struggling with the robber over the cash-register drawer, Casey said.

"The female employee was never attacked," she said. The robber reached in and grabbed cash out of the drawer.

"We have a statement from both [Beverly] and the female employee," [Marathon Petroluem spokesperson] Casey said. "Neither one of them say anything about her being attacked, hurt or anything, and the video we have substantiates it."

Beverly said that from his vantage point, he thought she was being attacked.

"With both of them so close it looked — from the angle that I was at — it looked like she was being attacked," he said."

exanonymous said...

Another implies there was a previous case.

Anyways, my feeling is that if it really was the Right Thing, then it outweighs losing a job (which has nothing to do with trial lawyers but company policy?). If you can't comply, don't work there.

Michael said...

Geee....

Anthony said...

I know it's silly to ask this but how exactly did the trial lawyers win? Unless you look up the story, Mallard makes it sound like the gas station was afraid to be sued by the robbers.

Frankie Machine said...

Holy Crap.
I used to work right by that SuperAmerica.
As someone who is personally trying to get Minnesota's statehood revoked, I believe that this story, if true, is hilarious.

rewinn said...

Anthony said...
I know it's silly to ask this but how exactly did the trial lawyers win?

Pft! Apply MallardLogic(tm):

1. Trial Lawyers own all the gas stations.

2. Gas station owners win when they fire people.

THEREFORE:

The Trial Lawyers Won!

rewinn said...

P.S. to Mallard: the gas station owner is a capitalist in a free market who is free to hire and fire based on any logic or no logic. The employer's decided it's more profitable to let robbers take the cash and run off, than to pay the hospital bills of the occasional employees and customers caught in a shoot-out. Isn't that the employer's choice???

Suddenly - Mallard is for worker's rights?

That gas station employee could really use a union - is Mallard going to lead the organizing drive?

Kaitlyn said...

Anthony - What everyone said, plus this.

The hero got fired. (BTW - the word hero reminded me of the heroes in the Colbert Nation, which made me laugh. Congrats, Bruce! I laughed while looking at your comic.)

Anyways, dude lost his job because he was heroic. The reason the store had the "don't be a hero" policy, in Tinz's mind, is so the criminal won't sue and they won't be liable for his or hers injuries.

In all likelihood, the policy is in place for the reasons rewinn said - it's just money - why risk your life?

This is pure speculation, but what if the fired guy had an unrequited crush on the female employee? He thinks he'll win her over by being a hero and chivalrous to boot!


Back to the comic - he just realized the world is a crazy place? He covers POLITICS!

Kaitlyn said...

This is a bit OT, but I know it'll be appreciated here.

I read this letter in last November's issue of Reader's Digest. (Waiting room. I had my own books, of course, but I like reading the cheesy magazines when I can.)

This letter bugged me a lot. It was in response to the "that's outrageous!" section from whatever month he was talking about. The topic was obviously veterans' benefits.

The guy lives in North Florida, home to many military bases. First, he says there are *really* handicapped vets, but there are fakers! And both groups get things! That we the taxpayers pay for! Like a VA pension in addition to their military retirement. (in some cases.) And a 100% disabled vet doesn't have to pay property taxes.

The icing on the cake? Free license plates for disabled vets!

I just bet this guy has a support our troops ribbon.

It just bugged me, you know? And, now, it makes me think of Bruce/Mallard.

exanonymous said...

Kait- that's probably one of those idiots who thinks all disabilities are 100% visible, physical, and obvious.

Regarding the trial lawyers:
It's assumed by tins&ilk if there's a bad guy it'll be one from his lineup. Big Oil isn't a bad guy, so obviously you shoot for the equivilant, Big Lawyers.

luke said...

Frankie machine-

Holy Crap. I live near that station. There is a small possibility that that guy was my friend's boss at one point. I will have to look into this.

Also, I support your movement.

Anonymous said...

The actual reason they do this is to both avoid medical bills and to avoid robbers deciding that it might just be easier to shoot the attendant. The other problem that could rise up is that if they officially allowed it it wouldn't be impossible for the reverse to get punished, if you didn't try to fight the robber off due to fear or something similar that you could get fired or reprimanded...though I bet tinsley would support that.