Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Chicago T-Mobile Clerk vs. 2 Robbers Edition

Chicago crime scene (courtesy

According to its neighbors, a T-Mobile store in the south side of Chicago has been robbed several times. Yesterday, things didn’t go as planned — for the robbers. Two perps entered the phone store, displayed handguns and demanded money. An armed clerk put paid to their plan. He drew his weapon, fired and hit both suspects multiple times. As for the store’s policy on employees carrying a gun, reports that . . .

T-Mobile corporate exercises no legal influence on local store policies regarding employees carrying firearms. That said, T-Mobile prohibits the carry of firearms in its “Supplier Code of Conduct(pdf)“:

 Prohibit carrying or transporting handguns, firearms or other legally controlled or prohibited weapons of any kind that are not required for job performance on T-Mobile leased or owned property;

Maybe carrying handguns is required for job performance. Or maybe it should be.

Tadros said he hopes allowing employees to have weapons with a concealed carry license will be a deterrent.

“A lot of people think they can go out and rob people without anyone defending themselves,” Tadros said. “It’s a great thing to have to protect yourself even when you’re not in your business. If you’re out in the streets and someone is threatening your life, you can go out and protect yourself.”


I suspect that the losers of the gunfight will not be suing the store for false advertising, re: the sign on the store-front window. After this incident, perhaps store management will change the “NO CONCEALED WEAPONS’ verbiage to “LEGAL CONCEALED CARRY WELCOME”.

The management will receive many congratulatory phone calls for their enlightened policy of encouraging armed employees. The  T-Mobile store is located at 2051 E 95th St, Chicago, IL 60617-4712.  Their phone number is 773-902-2181. I heard a “memory is full” message when I attempted to call.  Snail-mail would be worth a note.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Link to Gun Watch


  1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    4 baddies down in less than a week, no good people hurt. Keep the momentum and Chicago’s criminals may get a lesson about what happens when good people aren’t going to be their victims any more.

  2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Hey Shannon! Here’s another one for you to link to in your twatter feed as “evidence” that “No good guy with a gun has ever stopped a bad guy.”

    I mean, since “evidence” doesn’t mean what you think it means, being a PR “expert” and all…

    1. avatar Kendahl says:

      There are people who see the clerk’s shooting the robbers as no different from the robbers’ shooting the clerk. They would call both murder. Personally, I’m glad the clerk prevailed. By the way, it’s more than four bad guys down. An Uber driver in Chicago took out a would be mass murderer a while ago.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        “There are people who see the clerk’s shooting the robbers as no different from the robbers’ shooting the clerk.”

        Sure, for the ‘true believers’ that’s a fact.

        But, they are such a tiny minority of people they really can’t have sway. Pick 10,000 “Moms” from across the country to imagine their child as that clerk and ask if there’s a difference and I’ll go out on a limb and predict 90+% of them will say ‘yes.’

        The Progressive view is good only in theory. It breaks down completely when confronted with the real world. And, that’s why Progressivism will not prevail long term. It may enjoy bubbles of success (as we’ve seen over the last century or so), but it cannot be sustained.

        Propaganda always shows itself for the lie it is, and Progressivism cannot flourish without propaganda.

        1. avatar Greg in Allston says:

          Speaking of theory, Richard Feynman once said, “You’re theory may be beautiful, you may be a very smart person, but if your theory doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong “. We have been running these Progressive experiments for decades and they’ve all failed miserably. The question is how do we get the Progressives to recognize their failures and change course.

        2. avatar BDub says:

          I believe the saying goes, “In theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice they are not.”

        3. avatar Gordy says:

          I have always heard it as:
          “The difference between theory and practice is greater in practice than it is in theory”.

        4. avatar JasonM says:

          @Greg in Allston

          You’re assuming the progressives want the same sorts of things that rational people want (happiness, prosperity, freedom, etc.). You need to understand that their true goal is control. Period. They’d rather control a wasteland than live as equals in a utopia.

        5. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          @Greg in Allston: +1000 for the Feynman quote. Good job.

        6. avatar Stuki Moi says:

          “The question is how do we get the Progressives to recognize their failures and change course.”

          Progressives will learn that their time has passed, the same way the dinosaurs did.

          After all, they do have about the same size brains, hence capacity for learning.

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        And that resulted in San Francisco based Uber issuing a policy that all of its Uber vehicles would be henceforth and forever “Gun Free Zones” (right). I personally have NEVER asked a rider if they were carrying before letting them into my car and so far no rider has asked me, either. (I’m not, but it’s best to let people wonder.)

        I brought up the issue with Uber support regarding the SHOT Show here in Vegas next week, thinking it might be an issue with their hoplophobic management, but so far – crickets.

        My impression is that this is another of those lawyer-driven policies where Uber does not want to get sued if one of their driver “partners” with a gun makes a bad decision and Uber’s deep pockets get drawn into the case so they have adopted a “Don’t ask-don’t tell” mindset and published an official policy saying they are opposed.

        I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has ridden Uber and had any issues in this regard.

        1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          If no one asks, then why not be armed?

          Not that I think someone asking should stop you, either.

        2. avatar Cliff H says:

          Rock, I look at it this way – If I ask and he says yes then I, in theory, have to refuse the rider. If it is a person I would not want in my car because he is armed, how foolish would it be for me to ask in the first place. If it is another POTG like you and I then I DO want him in my car in case I need assistance of some sort.

          #1, HE is not breaking any law by entering my car armed. #2 I am not breaking any law by not asking him. #3 The worst outcome is that Uber finds out and cancels his privileges in which case he will just switch to Lyft or one of the other companies attempting to compete with Uber. I’m pretty sure him being black-balled by Uber will not be information provided to a competitor.

  3. avatar MurrDog says:

    Corporate’s probably going to fire that guy as well. No good deed.

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      It’s an “authorized retailer” for T-Mobile, not T-Mobile themselves.

  4. avatar Ralph says:

    I hope that the two Mensa members recover and thereafter have long and productive careers peddling their @sses in the joint.

    1. avatar Stinkeye says:

      It’s Cook county, Illinois. Those guys will be back on the street before their wounds heal. Armed robbery is barely considered a crime on the south side of Chicago.

  5. avatar J says:

    Obviously that sign was ignored by the robbers. Good thing it was also ignored by the clerk.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Don’t those signs carry the force of law in Chicago? How long before Rahm and his new Head Cop drop an anvil on this guy?

    2. avatar Sian says:

      With the blessing of the manager, apparently. Good feels all around. (except for the bad guys)

  6. avatar pwrserge says:

    Funny part is that this sign is not worth the plastic it’s made from. It has no legal standing.

    1. avatar Cknarf says:

      I love carrying in places with improper signage.

      1. avatar salty says:


        perp 1: “gimme your grip”

        tmo employee with a sense of self preservation: “make my day punks!!”

        perp 2: “wait, the sign says no guns, we were promised an easy payday!”

        TESSP: “PSYCH!!!! say hello to my lil fren!” pew pew pew pew pew pew

        Obama: “if i had a son…”

        me: hahahshahahahahhaahahah

        you; spew coffee

  7. avatar Frank says:

    I call BS. The robbers couldn’t have brought their guns in. The sign on the door makes this a “gun free zone” and we all know that DGU is a made up stat by the NRA.

    1. avatar rswartze says:

      Wait until the perps sue the store for entrapment. They ‘lured’ them in thinking it was a gun free zone.

  8. avatar Mk10108 says:

    2 down saving the City some coin. 5k more to go…OR once criminals get tired of brothers getting airated might think it a no win and forgo the behavior. Big win for everybody.

  9. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Alright! I liked the one on 87th last week better(and it got more local press). Amazingly enough both news reports were quite positive…East 95th is nowhere I want to hang out. Legal self-defense as a “thing”-who knew in Chiraq?

    1. avatar Mighty Mo says:

      Ha ha………no shit! Why in the hell is Dean giving out the address? None of us are going to go there. I wouldn’t drive very far South of I-55 unless I was in a Panzer. Every time I go I consult Heyjackass to make sure the loop is still a demilitarized zone.

  10. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    There’s more good to this story than is mentioned here. Tadros, quoted in the story, is a T-Mobile district manager. Another man, Joudeh, is identified as a T-Mobile regional manager and quoted as saying T-Mobile allows concealed carry in its stores. That sounds pretty encouraging coming from T-Mobile managers.

    Also, this store clerk struck each gun wielding robber twice: left arm & abdomen, and left arm & groin. Ouch and double ouch. I guess you *can* outdraw a drawn gun, or two. It definitely speaks well of speed, surprise and violence of action as a countermeasure to violent crime.

    Finally, a Chicago liquor store clerk recently plugged dead two armed robbers. CPD says the clerk won’t face charges. Nor should he or the T-Mobile clerk, but it’s encouraging that the City doesn’t appear so far to be harrassing citizens over clean shoots.

  11. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    Lawyers, managers, and company policies are not going to get you home safe once someone sticks a gun in your face.

    You know that whole “safety is your responsibility” slogan… Well, it’s true. Stay armed.

  12. avatar Jason says:

    Another DGU that will be completely and willfully ignored by the MSM turds.

    1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      Wrong. They’ll just add it to the “gun violence” statistics.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        You nailed it.

        The two thugs will be added to the list of those wounded by ‘gun violence’.

        Hey! One of the thugs was 24 years old! He’s now a child victim of gun violence!

        1. avatar Jason says:


        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          Was it within 10 miles of school? “School Shooting.”

    2. avatar BDub says:

      The only DGU we will ever see reported on in the MSM is one where a bystander is hit by the defending citizen (unless the citizen is an off duty cop).

  13. avatar Jeff R in IL says:

    The sign pictured carries no legal weight in IL.

  14. avatar PeterW says:

    The “robbers” were just following the rules by un-concealing their guns and that bad man behind the counter maniacally threw a barrage of dangerous lead at them for doing so. Certainly they only needed some warranty work on their T-Mobile phones

  15. avatar James69 says:

    2 Irrate I-phone customers shot by clerk. There’s the headline.

  16. avatar Bob R says:

    Next time don’t post their phone number, you probably cost them business. An email address would be better (snial mail ok too, of course).

  17. avatar Wrightl3 says:

    But…but… it was a gun free zone and that automatically makes it safe.

  18. avatar Jjimmyjonga says:

    Clerk might be deaf now…that had to be really really loud

  19. avatar Libertarian says:

    Thats the best example thats no gun sigs not named in law shouldn t have forced of any law if somebody leave if asked.

    And if we watched the off places in law in illinois >> not any public place should be an “no gun” zone but the ccw law is now 2 years old there and nothing have changed in the part of the 23 off places 🙁 !!

    1. avatar Planet_Federal_Way_Twax_City says:

      Ummmm wat?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email