Walmart Employee Trampled to Death by “Black Friday” Shoppers

[johnny karate]

You know, Germany during the Third Reich had one of the lowest crime rates in modern history. I'm sure with enough oversight, everyone could be forced to behave appropriately in all situations.

Or here's another idea: Don't trample other people to death because the Nintendo Wii is extra cheap today.

[gdnp]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

And I'm fairly certain no one was forced to trample some guy to death.

There you are wrong. In a stampede situation like this the people in the front are being pushed from behind. If they try to stop they will be run over and trampled as well. They cannot possibly hold back the crush. They are forced to keep moving forward whether they like it or not; this is what leads to people getting trampled.

[Drudgewire]

I REEEEALLY wish it hadn't been a guy just trying to do his job so I could be completely heartless about this.

[Ausmerican]

All the debate about the store and the idiot shoppers and no mention in the entire thread of this stellar piece of humanity?

Originally Posted by NYT Article in OP

Four other people, including a 28-year-old woman who was described as eight months pregnant, were treated at the hospital for minor injuries.

Cos I mean, yeah, that's where an 8 month pregnant woman should be alright. When she was released from hospital she should've been charged with endangerment.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by gdnp

Well, let's look at 2 possible scenerios. In one case you have 2000 people outside the store with no crowd control: no barriers, no one in charge. Just 2000 people pushing and shoving, trying to get to the front, trying to squeeze through a space that is too narrow. The people in the back are pushing trying to get to the front. The people in the front are trying to hold their position. The doors open and people start to surge through. The people in the back push harder. Someone in the front trips and falls: in this case the store employee. The people in the back can't see it, and the people in the front can't stop because if they do they will be trampled themselves. People get injured and in this case someone dies.

Scenerio 2: Same store, but there are 4 uniformed security people outside managing the crowd. People are made to line up rather than gathering in an unruly mob. Barriers have been set up to keep the line orderly. People are kept away from the front of the building so that they are not being pushed into the doors by the crowd behind. No one trips, and if they do it is not in the front of a stampede. Everyone is inside within 10 minutes of the doors opening.

The way to stop a stampede is to prevent it from staring in the first place. If the crowd is becoming unruly the police are called before it gets out of control. Perhaps you hire off-duty policemen for crowd control, if necessary.

I eagerly await reading the newspapers to hear of your appointment to Crowd Control Czar! But before you accept the position, maybe you should consider that "managing the crowd", "people are kept", and "people are made to" are all kind of vague. How managed? How kept? How made to? And "no one trips"? How do you achieve that? Everyone inside in 10 minutes? 2000 people inside in 10 minutes? Just how wide are these doors? My math skills aren't the best, but 2000 people in 10 minutes is 200 people a minute, or between 3 and 4 people per second. What's the average walking speed of a human being? Is anyone in the crowd significantly slower? And all of these wonders are to be achieved by four people? In uniforms, yeah, that should help. If they are magic uniforms that come with powers.

Sheesh. Crowd dynamics are complicated things. You can't armchair this sort of thing, not even on the internet. Well, you can, but then any jerk is going to come along and mock you.

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

You know, Germany during the Third Reich had one of the lowest crime rates in modern history. I'm sure with enough oversight, everyone could be forced to behave appropriately in all situations.

Or here's another idea: Don't trample other people to death because the Nintendo Wii is extra cheap today.

Well, thread didn't get Godwinned until the second page. We should all pat ourselves on the back for that I guess.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

Well, thread didn't get Godwinned until the second page. We should all pat ourselves on the back for that I guess.

Technically, I mentioned neither Hitler nor Nazis. You fail.

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Technically, I mentioned neither Hitler nor Nazis. You fail.

I'd argue it but Dr. Roxo is one of the best characters on television so I'd rather just enjoy your avatar.

[gdnp]

Originally Posted by Sefarst

It is unexpected crowd behavior. How many stores are there in the country that offered discounts today? Hell, we don't even need to go that far. How many Wal Mart stores are there in the country? All of them were offering discounts. How many people died at those Wal Marts?

So what is your alternative explanation? That a Long Island, NY Wall-Mart just happened to have 2000 animals out in front at 5 AM, while all the others had normal people? Doesn't that seem a bit far fetched?

Quote:

Yeah, Wal Mart should really stop offering such good deals. They need to raise their prices and stop having sales that will excite people. People aren't capable of controlling themselves and shouldn't be expected to.

Let's try this once again: the people in the back are pushing. The people in the front are trying to squeeze through a door too small for them to all fit while avoiding being crushed by those behind them. No one is trying to trample anyone.

Quote:

Oh those poor people who stampeded another human being to death because they wanted to buy some video games at 10% off! You're right, the real monsters here are the companies who offered the deal in the first place.

Yep. They offered a deal that led to a predictable mob scene without having the resources to deal with it.

Quote:

Reminds me of those monsters in our government who build our roads. Don't they know that allowing people to drive on interstates will inevitably lead to wrecks?

As a straw man this is pretty weak. It reminds me of someone who throws a cigarette out the window in fire season and then claims that they shouldn't be blamed for starting a wildfire because they have done the same thing hundreds of times before and nothing bad happened.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by gdnp

There you are wrong. In a stampede situation like this the people in the front are being pushed from behind. If they try to stop they will be run over and trampled as well. They cannot possibly hold back the crush. They are forced to keep moving forward whether they like it or not; this is what leads to people getting trampled.

Oh I see, only the people in the back were the bad ones.

Also, this:

Originally Posted by CNN

The employee was "stepped on by hundreds of people" as other workers attempted to fight their way through the crowd, Fleming said.

Originally Posted by New York Times

“When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling, ‘I’ve been on line since yesterday morning,’ ” Ms. Cribbs told The Associated Press. “They kept shopping.”

Damn Wal-mart for making these people behave this way. Damn them straight to Hell!

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

I'd argue it but Dr. Roxo is one of the best characters on television so I'd rather just enjoy your avatar.

We have a deal.

[bpesta22]

Not sure about worker's comp laws in new york, but since this guy was working, can he even sue? I thought wc barred one from suing his / her employer?

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Oh I see, only the people in the back were the bad ones.

That is a possibility. Real determined pushing may have mostly been at the back of the mob. Folks near the front know they are going to get the goods they want. The root of the problem is a first-come-first-served situation with limited inventory. Folks at the back are thinking they may not reach the goods before they are all gone. 2000 people is a huge crowd to enter a Wal-Mart under these circumstances.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by gdnp

Let's try this once again: the people in the back are pushing. The people in the front are trying to squeeze through a door too small for them to all fit while avoiding being crushed by those behind them. No one is trying to trample anyone.

Ahem...

Originally Posted by New York Times

“When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling, ‘I’ve been on line since yesterday morning,’ ” Ms. Cribbs told The Associated Press. “They kept shopping.”

While it may not have been anyone's intention to trample this guy to death, they certainly behaved in manner that demonstrated they didn't care if he was.

By the same token, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Wal-Mart did not intend to have one of its employees trampled to death either. The difference being it wasn't Wal-Mart actually trampling this guy to death, it was the people rushing in desperate to save a little money on a Blu-ray player.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

This is why we should celebrate Festivus instead.



Serious question: How does someone get trampled to death? What actually kills them? Kicks to the head? Or 10, 200 pound people lying on top and crushing him to the point he can't breath?

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Kaylee

Ah, no. But if a retail store chain's management intentionally develops and implements marketing techniques and policies that go out of their way to create unsafe mob scenes, shouldn't they be held responsible for that?

Sorry, but no, Wal-Mart didn't go out of their way to create unsafe mob scenes. They went out of their way to attract costumers on one of the most competitive days of the year. Could things have been done better? Yes. Was this negligence? Not as far as I can see.

Quote:

Wal-mart deserves their reputation -- they worked hard to earn it. I don't know of any other corporation that locks their employees in so that can't leave. Yah Wal-mart! Unions are bad! Locking in employees so they can't leave when there's a fire, or when there's an emergency and someone needs to go to a hospital is good!

I can't believe no one else picked up on this bit of myth. Wal-Mart doesn't lock its employees in so they can't leave. They lock the front doors so no one can get in when they have no one manning them. They do not block the emergency exits. The night crews can leave very easily, even without using the alarmed exits. People say dumb false things about Wal-Mart all the time, and no one class them on it. That is why they have a bad reputation. They are big. Are they perfect? Hell no.

But yes, most unions are bad anymore. There we agree.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

That is a possibility. Real determined pushing may have mostly been at the back of the mob. Folks near the front know they are going to get the goods they want. The root of the problem is a first-come-first-served situation with limited inventory. Folks at the back are thinking they may not reach the goods before they are all gone. 2000 people is a huge crowd to enter a Wal-Mart under these circumstances.

This whole line of reasoning completely baffles me.

Can someone please tell me what exactly the deals Wal-Mart was offering that makes them culpable for driving people into a murderous frenzy? Two for one bricks of gold? A free unicorn with every purchase? Lightsabers?

Seriously, there's no amount of money you can save on "Guitar Hero 3" that makes it okay to forget basic humanity.

[kallsop]

Originally Posted by rwguinn

You just don't understand.
These poor people are too stupid to keep themselves under control.

Obama's gonna fix that, buy them gas and pay their mortgage too. I want my mommy!

[gdnp]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

I eagerly await reading the newspapers to hear of your appointment to Crowd Control Czar! But before you accept the position, maybe you should consider that "managing the crowd", "people are kept", and "people are made to" are all kind of vague. How managed? How kept? How made to?

They are told to form a line. People will not typically try to push past a person if they are standing behind them in a line. The unruliness of the crowd is caused by the lack of organization: "hey, I was here before that guy who just squeezed in front of me!" I have been on subway platforms like this. If you don't push with everyone else you never get on a train.

Quote:

And "no one trips"? How do you achieve that?

Well, if no one is being pushed, I see no reason for anyone to trip.

Quote:

Everyone inside in 10 minutes? 2000 people inside in 10 minutes? Just how wide are these doors? My math skills aren't the best, but 2000 people in 10 minutes is 200 people a minute, or between 3 and 4 people per second. What's the average walking speed of a human being? Is anyone in the crowd significantly slower?

I made the conservative assumption that the average Wall-Mart had a least 2 sets of double doors in the front that could easily accommodate 4 people entering per second. 10 minutes tops.

Quote:

And all of these wonders are to be achieved by four people? In uniforms, yeah, that should help. If they are magic uniforms that come with powers.

Are my ideas here so absurd to warrant this level of sarcasm? Yeah, I think 4 people can handle a crowd of 2000 normal people. Maybe with 2000 animals it would take 8. Maybe it would have taken police rather than security guards. I don't really know. I'm not an expert at crowd control. Neither is this Wall-Mart, obviously. But strangely enough, people attend sporting events where much larger numbers of people enter, generally in an orderly fashion without stampedes. In fact, I suspect many of the same animals that stampeded this man to death at Wall-Mart have attended sporting events without stampeding. Strange, that.

Quote:

Sheesh. Crowd dynamics are complicated things. You can't armchair this sort of thing, not even on the internet.

I didn't start "armchairing" until accusations were made by others that the people in this crowd were animals. My guess is that there may have been a few animals in a much larger group of normal people who responded the same way you or I would have in the same situation. Which is why it is imperative that the store avoid such a situation developing.

Quote:

Well, you can, but then any jerk is going to come along and mock you.

I don't typically alter my behavior to try to influence the actions of jerks. But thanks for the warning.

[gtc]

Originally Posted by gdnp

Do you really think that there were 2000 animals outside of Wall-Mart at 5 AM? Or a bunch of sleep-deprived people who had been standing in freezing weather for hours with the hope of saving some money so that they could get through Christmas without going too much deeper into debt as the economy heads down the tubes? You really think you would have acted that much differently in a similar situation?

Please don't try to blame the economy for this. These people weren't starving to death and no child needs an Xbox that much.

Originally Posted by gdnp

The doors open and people start to surge through. The people in the back push harder.

If you read the article, they broke the doors down when the man who died went to open them.

Originally Posted by Ausmerican

All the debate about the store and the idiot shoppers and no mention in the entire thread of this stellar piece of humanity?

Cos I mean, yeah, that's where an 8 month pregnant woman should be alright. When she was released from hospital she should've been charged with endangerment.

I saw on TV this week a lady on crutches getting knocked over at a Myer store during one of their door buster sales. I think she was after a dress.

Originally Posted by gdnp

But strangely enough, people attend sporting events where much larger numbers of people enter, generally in an orderly fashion without stampedes.

Its not really strange. The gates to sporting events and concerts open well before the starting time of the event and everyone has already paid. No one is going to miss out by waiting a few minutes more and there is usually assigned seating.

It took a decade for Europe to redesign their football stadiums to avoid the potential for crowd surges and crushes. The removal of terraces and the allocation of assigned seating was a big help here.

The shoppers who actually trampled the employee probably had no control over their actions at that point as they were probably being buffetted by the crowd. But they shouldn't have joined the mob in the first place or left when it became obvious that it was unruly. But door buster sales are dangerous.

A barbaque and a raffle for the ridiculously cheap specials could have saved a lot of trouble. Australian department stores went down that route in the 1990s when things got out of hand.

[Redtail]

Originally Posted by gdnp

You just gave a strong argument against your own point. "This type of stupid has been happening for a while...I don't recall many people getting hurt (badly) but it was sheer luck that they didn't."

No, you made a stretch to fit your argument.

Quote:

This is not unexpected crowd behavior. It is entirely predictable. No one forces Wall-Mart to open at 5 AM or to temorarily deeply discount prices on highly sought-after items in limited quantities. They do this to bring people into their stores, people who they hope will then buy other items as well. They are responsible for creating the atmosphere that led to the stampede. Thus they are responsible for making sure that it can be controlled.

That's right, it's not unexpected. You know what else is not unexpected? A car suddenly cutting off a motorcycle causing the biker to go down. Now let's say that I'm riding my bike, a car cuts me off and cause me to wipe out and I die in the accident. It is later found that the reason the person cut across my lane because Krispy Kreme just turned on it's Hot Doughnuts Now sign. Why should KK be held responsible?

Quote:

Do you really think that there were 2000 animals outside of Wall-Mart at 5 AM? Or a bunch of sleep-deprived people who had been standing in freezing weather for hours with the hope of saving some money so that they could get through Christmas without going too much deeper into debt as the economy heads down the tubes?

Do I have to pick one or can I add the third option of "both "?

Quote:

You really think you would have acted that much differently in a similar situation?

I know I would have acted differently. I was in a similar situation at the launch of the Xbox 360. I camped out in front of Best Buy over night and in the morning when the doors opened and the mad rush for the doors started, I and a few others stood where we were and winced as others charged. Shocking statement from a gamer I know but I (and perhaps the others who didn't charge) had a thought as the tension was mounting and my thumbs got closer to the buttons of all of that HD glory... "This hunk of plastic isn't worth me or anyone else getting hurt." Weird huh?

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

This whole line of reasoning completely baffles me.

Can someone please tell me what exactly the deals Wal-Mart was offering that makes them culpable for driving people into a murderous frenzy? Two for one bricks of gold? A free unicorn with every purchase? Lightsabers?

Seriously, there's no amount of money you can save on "Guitar Hero 3" that makes it okay to forget basic humanity.

I don't entirely understand it either. Their Black Friday Sale this morning (5-11am) apparently had some great deals. I bet most people were after deeply discounted electronics. The ad says:

MP3 players from $26
Digital cameras from $69
GPS units from $97
Laptops from $299
Blu-ray players from $128
50" plasma TV $798
42" LCD 1080p TV $598
32" LCD TV $388

I'm not sure, but I guess that stuff is cheap at those prices.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Redtail

I know I would have acted differently. I was in a similar situation at the launch of the Xbox 360. I camped out in front of Best Buy over night and in the morning when the doors opened and the mad rush for the doors started, I and a few others stood where we were and winced as others charged. Shocking statement from a gamer I know but I (and perhaps the others who didn't charge) had a thought as the tension was mounting and my thumbs got closer to the buttons of all of that HD glory... "This hunk of plastic isn't worth me or anyone else getting hurt." Weird huh?

It sure is. Imagine someone employing the concept of "personal responsibility" and making a conscious decision to act responsibly. How did you ever overcome the insidious combined mind control powers of Best Buy and Microsoft instructing you to buy their products?

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

I don't entirely understand it either. Their Black Friday Sale this morning (5-11am) apparently had some great deals. I bet most people were after deeply discounted electronics. The ad says:

MP3 players from $26
Digital cameras from $69
GPS units from $97
Laptops from $299
Blu-ray players from $128
50" plasma TV $798
42" LCD 1080p TV $598
32" LCD TV $388

I'm not sure, but I guess that stuff is cheap at those prices.

Yeah, it probably is. Sadly, I see nothing on that list that warrants trampling another human being to attain.

[William Parcher]

Wii Console $249
Xbox 360 (includes Guitar Hero) $199

[gdnp]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

Oh I see, only the people in the back were the bad ones.

Quote:

The employee was "stepped on by hundreds of people" as other workers attempted to fight their way through the crowd, Fleming said.

So it is your contention that hundreds of people callously stepped on a man, killing him, when they could have avoided doing so, just so they could save a few bucks on an XBox? Do you really have this low an opinion of humanity?

Quote:

Damn Wal-mart for making these people behave this way. Damn them straight to Hell!

Well, that is a bit harsh. I do not believe "Wall-Mart", whoever that is, wanted this guy trampled to death either. I suspect by next year they will have better developed store policies to avoid the situation.

Originally Posted by johnny karate

While it may not have been anyone's intention to trample this guy to death, they certainly behaved in manner that demonstrated they didn't care if he was.

I can't condone this behavior. The best I can say is it is somewhat akin to a driver who becomes caught in a 4 hour traffic tie-up as the police investigate a fatal accident. One becomes frustrated, and wonders why the investigation is needlessly inconveniencing them. "It's sad that someone died, but it wasn't my fault and I have stuff to do." Callous

Quote:

By the same token, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Wal-Mart did not intend to have one of its employees trampled to death either. The difference being it wasn't Wal-Mart actually trampling this guy to death, it was the people rushing in desperate to save a little money on a Blu-ray player.

Once again you imply it is "the people" who are guilty. What people? If two guys grab for the last cabbage patch kid and then one shoots the other, I have no problem charging the shooter. Who would you charge here? All 2000 people?

Originally Posted by johnny karate

This whole line of reasoning completely baffles me.

Can someone please tell me what exactly the deals Wal-Mart was offering that makes them culpable for driving people into a murderous frenzy? Two for one bricks of gold? A free unicorn with every purchase? Lightsabers?

Seriously, there's no amount of money you can save on "Guitar Hero 3" that makes it okay to forget basic humanity.

You still don't get it. No one was in a murderous frenzy. This was a group of ordinary people. No one was trying to trample anyone to death. The stampede once started is no longer controlled by rational thought. It is panic. It becomes a question of trample or be trampled. If you or I were in the middle of the crowd we might have performed the fatal step.

If I had, I like to think I would have gone back after the crowd had thinned to render assistance. Easy to say from my comfortable couch.

[gtc]

They also had a responsibility not to put themselves in that situation in the first place.

There is plenty of blame to go around but please don't try to exonerate the members of the crowd just because its the store is a Walmart.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

I don't entirely understand it either. Their Black Friday Sale this morning (5-11am) apparently had some great deals. I bet most people were after deeply discounted electronics. The ad says:

MP3 players from $26
Digital cameras from $69
GPS units from $97
Laptops from $299
Blu-ray players from $128
50" plasma TV $798
42" LCD 1080p TV $598
32" LCD TV $388

I'm not sure, but I guess that stuff is cheap at those prices.

Ok prices - not good enough for me to be up at 5 A.m. or competing with people who think they are.

[gtc]

Originally Posted by fuelair

Ok prices - not good enough for me to be up at 5 A.m. or competing with people who think they are.

From the article, many of them were there since the day before.

[gdnp]

It looks like the Wal-Mart was more incompetent than oblivious to the potential risk. Although I wonder how much of the security was there to prevent shoplifting and how much for crowd control:

Quote:

"We expected a large crowd this morning and added additional internal security, additional third party security, additional store associates and we worked closely with the Nassau County Police," said Hank Mullany, Wal-Mart's vice president for the Northeast, in a statement. "Despite all of our precautions, this unfortunate event occurred."

Yet from the NYT article in the OP:

Quote:

The throng of Wal-Mart shoppers had been building all night, filling sidewalks and stretching across a vast parking lot at the Green Acres Mall in Valley Stream, N.Y. At 3:30 a.m., the Nassau County police had to be called in for crowd control, and an officer with a bullhorn pleaded for order...<snip>...

By 4:55, with no police officers in sight, the crowd of more than 2,000 had become a rabble, and could be held back no longer. Fists banged and shoulders pressed on the sliding-glass double doors, which bowed in with the weight of the assault. Six to 10 workers inside tried to push back, but it was hopeless.

Suddenly, witnesses and the police said, the doors shattered, and the shrieking mob surged through in a blind rush for holiday bargains.

[William Parcher]

There was tons of other stuff on sale as well. It's over now, but you can still see the prices for everything here. Enter your zip code to get the local prices for all the Black Friday deals.

[steve s]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Sheesh. Crowd dynamics are complicated things.

Not really. Last year I was interested in a new computer so I drove by a Best Buy just before they opened for black Friday (I ended up not going in. I just drove back home.) There was a huge crowd but it was very orderly. They had railings set up to keep everybody in line. The front of the line was kept back from the doors. There were two security guards at the front of the line and several more along the length of the line. It was calm and well organized. Why couldn't WalMart have done that much?


Steve S.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by gdnp

So it is your contention that hundreds of people callously stepped on a man, killing him, when they could have avoided doing so, just so they could save a few bucks on an XBox? Do you really have this low an opinion of humanity?

No, my low opinion only extends to the people who trampled someone to death just so they could save a little money, not humanity in general.

Originally Posted by gdnp

I can't condone this behavior. The best I can say is it is somewhat akin to a driver who becomes caught in a 4 hour traffic tie-up as the police investigate a fatal accident. One becomes frustrated, and wonders why the investigation is needlessly inconveniencing them. "It's sad that someone died, but it wasn't my fault and I have stuff to do." Callous

And it proves my point that the people involved weren't necessarily innocent victims at the mercy of the hypnotic power of fantastic savings. They were callous. Callous enough to not care if someone else got hurt so they could be the first kid on their block to have whatever useless piece of crap is trendy to own this week.

Originally Posted by gdnp

Once again you imply it is "the people" who are guilty. What people? If two guys grab for the last cabbage patch kid and then one shoots the other, I have no problem charging the shooter. Who would you charge here? All 2000 people?

I wasn't there, so I can't give you specific names. Anonymous mob violence isn't any less a crime just because were not sure who the actual perpetrators are. However, I would imagine video surveillance, if there was any, and the testimony of those present will hopefully lead authorities to those responsible.

Originally Posted by gdnp

You still don't get it. No one was in a murderous frenzy.

Forgive my hyperbole, but the guy who was trampled to death might take issue with that statement.

Originally Posted by gdnp

This was a group of ordinary people. No one was trying to trample anyone to death. The stampede once started is no longer controlled by rational thought. It is panic. It becomes a question of trample or be trampled. If you or I were in the middle of the crowd we might have performed the fatal step.

I'm sorry, but to call the rush to save money on Christmas gifts a "panic" is retarded. There was nothing vital at stake here. No one's life or safety depended on them buying whatever it was Wal-Mart was selling them. This was nothing more than good old fashioned greed with a generous dose of selfishness thrown in that escalated due to mob mentality.

You act as if this riot somehow started of its own accord. These people chose to mob Wal-Mart in the middle of the night so they could save a little money on crap they don't really need. These people chose to starting shoving and pushing when they decided they wanted in the store ahead of everyone else. These people chose to step on, over, and around this poor man who spent his last moments on this Earth dying under their feet.

Perhaps you lack control over your own actions to such a degree that you look to those in authority to dictate your behavior. Personally, I find myself able to properly assess right and wrong, and what's truly important, so that I don't find myself in situations where someone else might be injured or die so I can get a new Blackberry.

Originally Posted by gdnp

If I had, I like to think I would have gone back after the crowd had thinned to render assistance. Easy to say from my comfortable couch.

It's not only a matter of making the right choice in certain situations. It's choosing to be in those situation at all.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by steve s

Not really. Last year I was interested in a new computer so I drove by a Best Buy just before they opened for black Friday (I ended up not going in. I just drove back home.) There was a huge crowd but it was very orderly. They had railings set up to keep everybody in line. The front of the line was kept back from the doors. There were two security guards at the front of the line and several more along the length of the line. It was calm and well organized. Why couldn't WalMart have done that much?

If we're looking for small efforts that could have avoided this tragedy, is too much to ask that the people who trampled this man to death not be such greedy, selfishly jerks and maybe show a little consideration for their fellow human beings? Why couldn't they do that much? Is a railing really the only thing preventing us from killing each other for an iPod?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

Which is what's going to happen. I imagine part of the settlement will be a non-disclosure clause to prevent the numbers from getting out.

Again, the fact it was an employee changes the equation. You don't take Black Friday off if you work in retail, so he's not in the same voluntary rioter category a shopper at the same store would be. I feel very sorry for the family.

Or you could take the attidude that some have. "Jobs have risks and risky enviroments. He chose to work at walmart on black friday and so intentionaly took those risks"

Quote:

But before we point fingers at any one company, remember there are three incidents of violence linked in this thread. Two of them are Wal-Mart, but there are also a lot more Wal-Marts than any other department stores out there. They're basically a victim of the odds being stacked against them more than anything.

Oh they are certainly not the only company that wants near riots, and encourages such. When the near riot you ferment turns into a full scale riot you are responcible for that.

Walmart being so large means that they are the most likely to be hit in this way, and getting them to change could well encourage less enphasis on getting people to run into stores at 5am.

Holding stores responcible for the effects of the crowds that they incite will discourage policies that in create those crowds.

Note that I am not saying that they should be responcible for individual acts of violence, but in trampeling they are responcible. What would those have done differently to prevent this on an individual level? The people trampleing couldn't stop as they had no were to go, the others pushing in wanted in and wouldn't stop.

How is an individual going to stop this?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

Again, every major retailer in the country does this. Wal-Mart just has so many stores it's more likely this will happen at one of theirs than somewhere else.

So what?

Similar arguement. All mining companies intentionaly create unsafe coniditions so why punish the largest because they kill the most people? It is unfair right?

Retail employers are now no longer responcible for createing a safe working enviroment.

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

And I'm fairly certain no one was forced to trample some guy to death.

So you have a thousand people behind you pushing you, and the guy infront of you falls, what do you do?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by Sefarst

Oh those poor people who stampeded another human being to death because they wanted to buy some video games at 10% off! You're right, the real monsters here are the companies who offered the deal in the first place. Reminds me of those monsters in our government who build our roads. Don't they know that allowing people to drive on interstates will inevitably lead to wrecks?

So you charge the entire crowd with manslaughter?

[ponderingturtle]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Sorry, but no, Wal-Mart didn't go out of their way to create unsafe mob scenes. They went out of their way to attract costumers on one of the most competitive days of the year. Could things have been done better? Yes. Was this negligence? Not as far as I can see.
.

So no one was at fault here? We should veiw this as a nessacary part of having christmass.

[Travis]

I find the idea that four security guards could have handled this crowd laughable. Have you ever seen how many armed police officers are needed to control a rioting crowd hell bent on destruction and death? People in large crowds are death machines. That's why I've never been to a music concert, large sporting event or parade. People in large groups only bring about mayhem, destruction and death. People are callous and certainly no one in that shopping crowd cared one bit they had killed that man all they cared about was saving some money for themselves.

Humans are callous horrible beings in general and a large group of them is something more terrible than the sum of their hideous parts. Wal-Mart could have had 40 security guards there and it wouldn't have mattered against that many uncaring savages.