So this is one more reason not to hire a felon. Glad I don't live in San Fran. It makes you wonder if Kahr did not hire him because of his background, would people be mad that he did not get a secound chance.
Yes...
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/start.asp
http://www1.odcr.com/search.php
It's that easy
Employers verify work history everyday, is it unreasonable to verify criminal history? If a daycare had hired a convicted sex offender would you take the same position?
As usual, the actual criminal is getting off lighter than the manufacturer with deeper pockets. That said, Kahr is culpable civilly here. A firearm is a controlled item until it enters the stream of commerce. They should've had controls in place, to include employee background checks to limit the likelihood of this happening. Of course, Kahr Arms will not really be out $600K. The next Kahr price increase will include a little extra to cover this. Ultimately, it's the consumer that pays. 
If I owned a business in which access to firearms is part of the job, I sure as hell would do a background check.
If I had this case, I'd use my attorney's fee to buy guns.
So much for this thread. http://www.okshooters.com/showthrea...isco-Considers-Legal-Protection-for-Criminals Toss in a few people who are mad that you make money, and the business owner does not have a chance.
Waaa waaaa waaaa How about: "Be a responsible business owner?"
I agree, but then when you don't give the poor felon a secound chance, you are the bad guy.
That's just for you baby...
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
