Firearms Talk banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,098 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
violate any or all of the Shoot, Shovel, or Shutup rule at your own risk. this poor bastard found out the hard way when libretards are in charge

Detroit groundskeeper fired after finding loaded gun, handing it to cops

Published May 15, 2012 FoxNews.com



A Detroit groundskeeper, who turned in a loaded handgun he found hidden in weeds while working, was fired by the Wayne County Department of Public Services, MyFoxDetroit.com reports.

John Chevilott, who is just two years shy of retirement, found the loaded snub-nosed revolver on May 3 when he and his crew were mowing a lawn in Wayne County. Chevilott secured the gun, waiting for police to drive by so he could hand it over to them.

But, according to the station, the Detroit police never did pass by, so Chevilott finished his work that day, drove the gun home and later that same evening turned it into his local police department.

He says the cops ran the gun and discovered the weapon had been stolen from St. Clair Shores in 2005.

"They said I did the right thing getting it off the street," Chevilott told MyFoxDetroit.com.

However, Chevilott's superiors at the Wayne County Department of Public Services had a much different opinion. His foreman, who had knowledge of the situation, was suspended for 30 days, and after 23 years on the job, Chevilott was fired for violating department policies.

According to a Wayne County spokeswoman and the rules, employees aren't allowed to possess a weapon on work property.

Chevilott says he didn't bring a weapon to work. He found it on the job.

"There is no policy. I've never seen a policy what to do if we find a gun out here. So, all I did was secure the situation to make sure nobody else got hurt or killed."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/1...ing-it-to-cops/?test=latestnews#ixzz1uzrEpGV0
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,202 Posts
Damn, see what happens when you are honest?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,460 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,822 Posts
My post from a similar thread;

This is a case study in why our country is circling the drain!

"Central government's preeminent failure exists in its inability to distinguish between one’s behavior as innocent or malicious." -
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,286 Posts
I hope this situation is reviewed and the employee is rehired. Maybe that employee should sue his employer for having a loaded gun on the premises where said employee could have been seriously hurt or killed while mowing. ;) I mean really, the employer had the gun on the property before the employee had 'possession of it'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,495 Posts
i hope this situation is reviewed and the employee is rehired. maybe that employee should sue his employer for having a loaded gun on the premises where said employee could have been seriously hurt or killed while mowing. ;) i mean really, the employer had the gun on the property before the employee had 'possession of it'.
+2

.......................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,451 Posts
First, let me say I'm in agreement with all of you, this guy got hosed. Having said that, he waited for a police car to pass by? Pretty much everybody has a cell phone these days. If I were in his shoes, I'd leave the piece where it lay, call the police and let them take it from there. Had he done that, him and his boss would still be on the job.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,374 Posts
He will sue and get his job back with back pay, benefits and attorney's fees. This will cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars and the morons who fired him couldn't care less. It won't cost them a dime. Those responsible for the firing should be fired and docked the cost of the settlement. This is just exactly like the "zero tolerance" crap in the schools. No one wants to actually think, so they make blanket policies to hide behind. Any public employee who hides behind such bullsh!t policies is unfit to have a job, period.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,404 Posts
He will sue and get his job back with back pay, benefits and attorney's fees. This will cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars and the morons who fired him couldn't care less. It won't cost them a dime. Those responsible for the firing should be fired and docked the cost of the settlement. This is just exactly like the "zero tolerance" crap in the schools. No one wants to actually think, so they make blanket policies to hide behind. Any public employee who hides behind such bullsh!t policies is unfit to have a job, period.
I know I'd shove a lawyer up their a$$, and have him

pitch a tent...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,048 Posts
There could have been prints to connect it with a felon if he didn't touch it, maybe even solved a murder. He probably changed his mind on keeping it for himself.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,228 Posts
Couple of thoughts, where he was at, getting the police to respond isn't going to happen. They might show up a few hours later.

There's another interesting twist in state law, it says that local govt can not make laws restricting govt employees from carrying guns, unless they make a law restricting employee from carrying. IANAL, but I wonder if the county has such a law, and if they are even allowed to write said law.

As much as I'd like to think it was nefarious intent to avoid paying retirement benefits, I honestly don't think they are that smart. It was probably one of the anti gun liberals that made the decision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,451 Posts
Couple of thoughts, where he was at, getting the police to respond isn't going to happen. They might show up a few hours later.
Yeah, on second thought you're probably right, they'd have grown old waiting for the police. Like someone else mentioned, he probably thought about keeping it and had second thoughts. And unless there's a lot more to this, he will get his job back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,404 Posts
Couple of thoughts, where he was at, getting the police to respond isn't going to happen. They might show up a few hours later.

There's another interesting twist in state law, it says that local govt can not make laws restricting govt employees from carrying guns, unless they make a law restricting employee from carrying. IANAL, but I wonder if the county has such a law, and if they are even allowed to write said law.

As much as I'd like to think it was nefarious intent to avoid paying retirement benefits, I honestly don't think they are that smart. It was probably one of the anti gun liberals that made the decision.
I have to primarily suspect nefarious intent to avoid. IMHO, at least

what we've been shown seems to indicate it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
336 Posts
Yes, it's likely true that the best thing to do would be to not touch the gun and call police as it has a decent chance of actually being evidentiary for something, much less in and of itself. Still, people don't always think with their brain. He did the right thing in the end and you can't argue intent. Robo hit it right on the money. It's unfortunate that in the end, the taxpayers are going to give this guy what he deserves for what those dimbulbs are putting him and his supervisor through.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top