http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27955316

what is wrong with these people???

shaking my head and wondering what is wrong with people? Is a fetus and a young man worth the price of cheap television?

Crazy huh!

My wife experienced the butt end of this when another shopper literally tore the garment out of her hand as she inspected it.

This is Cape Town, S.A. Theoretically more "evolved" than other places in Africa.

Absolutely horrendous. LaLa and I went this morning to our local Walmart. It's a supercenter so it is open 24 hours a day, but there must have been 1,500 people crammed into the aisles waiting for the 5 am sales. It was crazy. Like wolves hovering over prey. Truly sad.

Want2Stay

When people start dying over sale prices it's time to ban these black Friday sales. I hope they have video of that door and are able to place responsibility on the people who did this. I know Walmart has cameras everywhere. They'd be able to even see those same people checking out and hopefully be able to get ID. Most don't pay in cash.

That's just insane.

That's awful.

I never shop on the day after Thanksgiving. The retailers bombard the public with ads so much that it is just disgusting.

Then the news channels in our area fly around giving reports on how crowded the parking lots are at various retail stores and malls--not helping the matter any at all.

I hope this makes some people (that obviously turn into raging maniacs because stuff is "on sale") think about their actions. Consume, consume, consume!

How about spending the Friday after Thanksgiving with your family? And eating more turkey? Play some board games. Charades. Anything.

That's what this day should be about. More family time and NOT spent shopping.

Charlotte

There is a question that has probably never been asked before....

The responsibility lies square on the shoulders of Walmart.

They design their stores so that an occupant load of thousands of people can get OUT quickly and safely in an emergency. Of course to do this there must be several exits placed around the store's exterior.

Walmart does not design their stores to let thousands of people IN...at least not all at the same time through a couple of doors at the main entrance.

Walmart invited, enticed and incited a mob which they would have absolutely no control over. They set this up. They are responsible.

Walmart doesn't even need black friday to turn a profit. This was caused by pure corporate greed.

While I agree that Walmart Should be held partially responsible for bad planning and foresight...their store design, sale and customer load did NOT give rise to a MURDER...the people that committed the CRIME should and will be held accountable. No one forced those people to act like animals and blaming it on corporate greed is ridiculous. It was a criminal act. Period.

:crosseyedcrazy:

You think so?

Personal responsibility is again "out the window," eh?

Since WHEN is anyone other than yourself responsible for your actions?

How about Toys R Us in California? I guess by extension of your "logic" they are responsible for the deaths of the two morons who decided to chase each other around a store full of shoppers (and likely a lot of children too) with their guns and then shot each other to death.

Tell you what, how about NO sales? Let everyone pay full price for everything? But then I guess you'd be complaining that the stores were "gouging" the people and not being "sensitive enough" in a tough economy to help people make their dollars "stretch a little" for the holidays?

ba109, have you ever heard of "mob mentality" and "mob rule?" From the "nutso bride to be's" that are on television ransacking the stores and ripping wedding dresses out of each other's hands to trampling a young man to death to firing off guns in a crowded toy store. Where is Personal Responsibility for one's own actions?

But I guess it's easier to "blame shift."

LOL....since when did the word M O R O N S rise to the level of "auto censored????"

Maybe I should have said they were I D I O T S who won't trouble society anymore?

Just try describing a panhead phillips screw

GREAT post!!

Charlotte

gee...why am I not surprised?

I have to agree Charlotte.

I thought it was square on the money and ba109's OPINION about the heinous incident.

I think that WalMart bears an enormous amount of responsibility in this.

Stampede is a funny thing. It become impossible to escape it when you are trapped in the middle. You can be minding your own business, one or two people give a shove, and it's all over. Like dominoes, there is no stopping it.

Why set it up to begin with? What is the purpose of those big draws except to make even more money to line the pockets of the Walmart heirs???

Just a clear indicator that Christmas has become waaaaaaay too commericalized.

And...nope, I do not...and have NEVER gone shopping like that..there is no purpose for me. I don't like the unpredictable crowds. Plus, the Walmart heirs have enough money (all at the expense of their employees and venders).

JMHO

committed

Yep, no doubt about it, people behaving like animals is the fault of someone else.

Why not just give the stuff away like the stores do whenever the "good folks" decide to go on a looting rampage.

If the businesses didn't make the products available, there would be no reason for looting, stampeding, or greedy mob actions.

I wonder how many WalMart stores across the country DIDN'T have a problem with "their" mobs of people gratefully seeking to spend less of their hard earned money?

Naaa...it's NEVER the fault of the individual. It's always someone else's fault for their "bad behavior."

egg zak lee

and the ONLY ones that committed a CRIME here are the idiot customers. While Walmart could be held civilly responsible for a failure to plan properly...they are guilty of no crime.

Not a surprise though in today's world to see some types trying to blame a company for the shortcomings and criminal actions of others. Heck...that is America today!

A volatile atmosphere was created.

Just like when all those people were trampled to death many years ago at the "Who" concert in Cincinnati OH.

It was a highly charged environment. They wisely decided to stop with festival seating because it was an atmosphere looking for a disaster to happen.

I live less than 2 blocks from a SuperWalmart. A few years ago a shopper's leg was broken during the black Friday insanity.

They don't do it anymore. They are lined up...security is on the premises, and the police are there to insure orderly conduct when "filing" through the doors. A mob scene is now avoided because the managers of this one PREVENT it from happening.

Anytime you get that many people in an area there has to be people maintaining order. It is reckless not to have adequate security.

While those people might have been purposeful in their conduct, there are still times when all it takes is one person to throw it out of control.

I was on a jumbo jet once (with my 6 and 4 year old) and we had to evacuate the plane on the tarmac. I refused to get in that line down the aisle because people were pushing and shoving in an already dangerous fashion. The steward pushed and shoved her way to where I was still seated with my children. She told me that I HAD to evacuate the plane...get in the aisle. I told her that I was NOT going to place my children in that peril. The line wasn't even moving at that time. They were still opening the doors for us to leave and I was not going to have my kids trampled in that mess. We would wait and get at the end of the line.

It wasn't like the plane was on fire or anything. There was a bomb threat...we had to evacuate is all. It wasn't worth that risk to me. If they cared about the kids they would have had them be evacuated FIRST before all the adults went crazy. Nope, I sat right there....kept them safe.

She considered it an emergency situation. Had she MADE me get in that line, and one of my kids been hurt by the mass of people pushing and shoving, darn right...I would have blamed the airline.

All it takes is one person...and other bodies are subjected to that outside force that forces them into motion.

committed

http://www.northjersey.com/business/news/Door-buster_champ_is_ready.html


Door-buster champ is ready
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Last updated: Wednesday November 26, 2008, EST 7:42 AM
BY JOAN VERDON
STAFF WRITER
The Wal-Mart store in Secaucus is preparing for Black Friday as if its reputation depends on it.

It does.

Last year, the Secaucus store was the biggest seller on Black Friday of all of the 5,700 Wal-Mart stores around the world. (Black Friday is a big deal at only about 2,500 of those stores — in the U.S. and Puerto Rico.)

Wal-Mart usually never releases store rankings, but a Wal-Mart spokesman confirmed for The Record that last year Secaucus was the Black Friday winner, followed by another New Jersey store, in Kearny, in the No. 3 spot. The Wal-Mart store in Valley Stream, N.Y., ranked No. 2.

The three top stores have a common advantage: They are close to one of the last remaining large U.S. cities with no Wal-Mart stores — New York City. New York City shoppers looking to take advantage of Wal-Mart's Black Friday discounts are likely to head for one of the three stores.

Steven Restivo, Wal-Mart's chief spokesman for New Jersey, said the fact that the Secaucus store reached the No. 1 spot ahead of far larger supercenters is impressive. Supercenters contain full-sized supermarkets, as well as a full-sized discount store.

"It happened for a number of reasons," Restivo said. "Certainly Secaucus is in a densely populated area of northern New Jersey. They're also the closest store to midtown Manhattan, and we don't have any stores in the five boroughs of New York City. But we know New York City customers spend more than $120 million a year at Wal-Mart."

Wal-Mart has tried in the past to open stores in Queens and Staten Island, but plans for both were dropped in the face of intense union, community and political opposition. Wal-Mart executives eventually announced they plan to stay out of New York City, at least for the near future.

The Secaucus Wal-Mart opened in 2004 in the Harmon Meadow shopping complex, which is owned by Hartz Mountain Industries Inc. It is adjacent to a Sam's Club, the warehouse store division of Wal-Mart.

Restivo would not comment on how much revenue the Secaucus store took in on Black Friday last year to reach the top spot, but based on statistics the company has released previously, The Record estimates that number at close to $1 million.

Retail analyst Burt Flickinger III, managing director of the New York consulting firm Strategic Resource Group, said it is realistic to expect that the Secaucus Wal-Mart could do between $500,000 and $1 million on Black Friday this year. He believes sales could be lower this year because spending on consumer electronics — usually a big driver of Black Friday results — is expected to be weak. In order to match last year's success, Flickinger said, the Secaucus store "really needs to do exceptionally well in consumer electronics and apparel, two areas that are down this year."

Flickinger said it isn't surprising the Secaucus and Kearny stores were top Black Friday performers because North Jersey, unlike other parts of the country, isn't "site saturated" with Wal-Mart stores. "Where Wal-Mart has lower store saturation its stores tend to outperform initially, and then as Wal-Mart site-saturates markets, then the stores go from overperforming, to performing modestly, to underperforming," he said.

Wal-Mart has a store under construction within a few miles of the Secaucus and Kearny stores, off Tonnelle Boulevard in North Bergen. That store will be Wal-Mart's first supercenter in North Jersey.

At the Secaucus store on Black Friday, nearly all of the 580 employees will be working one of the nine-hour shifts that begin at 4 a.m. that day.

Last year, more than 4,000 shoppers lined up overnight for the 5 a.m. opening. Store employees said they are expecting the same number, or more this year, drawn by door-buster specials including a 50-inch high-definition TV for $788 and a Garmin navigation device for $97.

Wal-Mart employees call the Black Friday early-bird sales "the blitz," and Secaucus manager Tracy Ferschweiler had a blitz-planning meeting with 22 supervisors Monday afternoon. "This is going to be a really, really big Black Friday for us," Ferschweiler said, as he outlined the plans to serve coffee and cookies to the waiting shoppers, and to have three portable toilets stationed in the parking lot.

One supervisor suggested one or two store employees be assigned to serve as "line savers" for people who need someone to hold their spot while they use the toilets. "That would be a great service," Ferschweiler responded. "Let's do it. Let's offer line savers between 1 and 5 a.m."

At the meeting, Ferschweiler described how the store will handle the high demand for the door-buster deals. When the doors open at 5 a.m., shoppers will be directed to color-coded stations where they will get a ticket for the TV set or other sought-after item. After they present the ticket at the cash register and pay for the item, they then will pick it up at two pickup stations in the store, where the goods will be carefully monitored.

The system was put in place, Ferschweiler said, to prevent shoppers from taking the door-buster specials without paying during the 5 a.m. frenzy.

"Last year they had to stop letting people in the building because it was so full. Imagine a 162,000-square-foot building at capacity — standing room only. You cannot really monitor what's coming in and out of the building," he said. "This way ensures that everything's paid for, and it really helps the customer who doesn't want to lug these items around."


ba109: Corporate greed, competition, $$$$, status. Buzz words like "doorbusters" and "the blitz". They got what they asked for. Customers busted the doors down and blitzed the store. Walmart played it to perfection.

ETA: Valley Stream Walmart wanted that trophy. They wanted to be Number 1 in the world.

All set in motion with words like these.

The atmosphere was created and actually encouraged.

Intent is clear by that article.

I sure hope that the worker who died in the name of commercialism didn't die in vain.

committed

"Walmart is protected from a direct lawsuit in this case by the New York State Workers' Compensation Law. Mr. Damour's family will receive a measly $6,000 burial allowance under the law."

http://www.workerscompensation.com/...art_criminally_responsible_for_quot.html

I don't know if he will even receive that much. If I read correctly, he was from a temp agency, so he was not even a direct employee of Walmart.

http://www.travelindustrywire.com/article34567.html

The Power of Momentum in Action

Wal-Mart and Toyota are two apparently dissimilar firms. They operate in two different industries and come from different countries and cultures. But they are two of the world's 15 richest companies, and each is number one in its own industry. More importantly, both got there by creating the conditions needed for the momentum effect to emerge. Although one has lost its momentum, the other is still in full swing.

Wal-Mart:

Sam Walton launched his company with a focus on customers. What is remarkable is the way that this customer focus created exceptional growth and continued to power Wal-Mart for many years after it had become a major industry force. Whatever its current challenges -- and there are many -- for the better part of a generation Wal-Mart was a momentum-powered firm.

Sam Walton knew about retail, but his main asset was the fact that he knew about customers. His strength was this: He liked to listen to them and observe them, and he understood their needs. When he started out, he related deeply to a very specific kind of customer -- people like him, people from the United States' rural South.

Walton's customer orientation made him aware of the potential of this region's smaller towns. In 1962, when Wal-Mart was launched, the standard wisdom held that large retail operations could not survive in towns with fewer than 100,000 residents. But Walton decided that this was where opportunity lay, and he deliberately opened stores only in small towns where there was no large-scale competition.

Walton understood that these customers would value his offering, that they would appreciate being able to shop locally, rather than making long journeys to larger towns. He also realized that these shoppers were worth more than they seemed. Although their wallets weren't as full as those of people in large cities, Wal-Mart was able to command a higher share of their spending because there was no competition. The combination of cheaper premises, lower labor costs [and] no competition ... meant that Walton's customers were extremely profitable to service.

This winning combination gave Wal-Mart the traction it needed to start building momentum. As the firm mushroomed, it continued to improve all aspects of its operation, from customer service to supply chain and supplier relationships. Eventually, Wal-Mart was able to glean economies of scale in purchasing to achieve its mantra of "Every Day Low Price" (EDLP) and gain further momentum.

EDLP runs counter to traditional retail promotions that lure customers into stores, hoping that they'll also end up buying more expensive products. The famous expression to describe retail strategy in the days before Wal-Mart was "an island of losses in an ocean of profits." It was really an island of bait in an ocean of arrogance and customer abuse. It was akin to duck hunting -- attracting customers the same way hunters attracted wild ducks with decoys.

With EDLP, Wal-Mart turned the relationship with customers upside down. It moved from duck hunting to a vibrant partnership. Wal-Mart's competitors, to their discomfort, failed to understand that, although EDLP was jargon on the surface, it expressed a strong, hidden emotional value deeply appreciated by customers: trust. This customer trust powered the company's growth for decades.

Unfortunately, momentum doesn't look after itself. There is a perception that Wal-Mart slowly began to pay less attention to many of the key drivers of its success -- respect for employees, local communities, and suppliers -- and began to lose its momentum as a result. Momentum is dynamic: Unless it is constantly nurtured, it will ebb away. However, the reward for that unstinting attention can be immense -- it can make you number one in the world.
...
Momentum leaders are not lucky -- they are smart. They have discovered the source of momentum and, with it, the beginnings of a smarter way to exceptional growth. Managers often talk about "riding the wave." Momentum leaders aren't that passive. They live by this motto: First build your wave, then ride it.

ba109: Walmart knows exactly what they are doing. They even leaked their black friday deals two weeks in advance.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/13/news/companies/walmart_blackfridayad/?postversion=2007111310

So true.

I was thinking about the "no competition" comments in the article. Yeah, the little mom & pop stores in small towns are no competition. I remember when they opened here and several family owned stores could not compete. It was really sad because some of the stores had been around for decades--clothing, furniture, etc. The grocery store is still around, though.

When WM first built here the grocery store moved into the shopping center close to it. There wasn't much in the way of groceries at WM so they thought it was a good move.

Last year they built the "Super" WM. A lot of people objected and delayed the ground-breaking but ultimately WM barged on in with it.

The family-owned grocery store moved back into the heart of the town and they get a lot of traffic there. They had to scale down, though. This is their former location and it's a lot smaller. I like to get my groceries there or in Houston when I'm in town. Super WM is ridiculously huge and when you need one little thing it takes forever to go in there to find it.

I wish I could avoid it completely. I used to work there some years ago and my DIL worked there recently.

It's still the same as far as the way employees are treated.

And vendors? Don't even get me started!

WM has a policy for their vendors if they want to keep selling their merchandise at WM.

I'll use the pickle company as an example. Their pickles sold in big jars (2 quarts or so) for $3.99. WM wanted to keep the pickles at $2.99 so when costs went up for the vendor, they were forced to make changes so that they could still sell their pickles. Or WM wouldn't sell ANY of their other merchandise.

I have noticed this with water filters. The company kept changing them and taking away the little things, like the filter monitor on top of the filter to help indicate when it needed to be changed out. In lieu of the filter monitor they included stickers to stick on the side of your pitcher. Then they changed the filter design and the size, too. I don't know what else they are going to be able to change to keep their cost down so they can keep selling their merchandise at WM.

It's terrible. Not only that--most of the stuff from WM is made in China. What's even made in the USA anymore? I remember the "Made in the USA" campaign they started when I still worked there.

Humorous, though, is what happened when WM tried to open in China for the first time and most of what they had was the same junk they have here. The Chinese didn't like it so they had to revamp.

I stay away from WM as much as possible, even if it means paying a little extra for that bottle of shampoo or whatever at another store. It's really hard for people in this little town NOT to shop at WM when they can't afford to drive an hour away to Houston or they don't have transportation to do so. WM is shooting fish in a barrel here.

Charlotte

what a bunch of baloney...the local supermarket here uses the term "doorbuster." That doesn't mean come and stampede.

Every sales person has used the term blitz at one time or another...that does not mean murder.

You people really are clueless. The criminals here are the ones that stampeded. It doesn't take one as someone suggested. It takes many tolerating and participating to create that.

Walmarts job is to attract customers and makes sales...that is their purpose. The people that come to their store should act in an orderly fashion...but they put getting a TV ahead of common decency. And you people are allowing the true criminals here to pass the buck.

Pathetic.

A local car dealer here says they are blowing up prices...I guess they would get what they asked for if people show up with bombs strapped to their chests.

Ludicrous.

medc,

It would be nice if you would post something worth reading. It is afterall your thread.

So far all you've done is hurl insults or sling mud at opinions that differ from your own. I have not insulted you or ridiculed your opinion.

I have no problem with punishing someone that diliberately and purposefully plowed someone down and proceded to kill that person. I don't think that happened. An investigation of the incident will hopefully tell.

Enjoy your thread.

oh, really...so what happened? Nice people just decided to knock a door off its hinges and stampede into a store....please.

you have yet to post anything about this worth reading.

there was a crime committed here. There is NO doubt about that. The police are reviewing the store footage and attempting to identify people to charge with this murder.

I'm sure they are ****edit****

Let's wind down the rhetoric folks or this thread will be locked.

Trading insults and calling people clueless is not OK.

Walmart's job is to make money...and to make their stockholders happy. We all know who the largest stockholders are.

When you get thousands of people together...there is no way to insure "orderly" unless you have trained people there to insure it.

It was a free for all.

Common sense would tell you that some kind of method to the madness is needed.

I was the person that said it could be started by one person. All a stampede needs is one person to shove. It has a domino effect...especially in a crowd of that size.

The walmart here has had no problems since THEY implemented a plan to control the crowds.

committed

Murder?

Please.

They won't be able to charge anyone with murder. Involuntary manslaughter is the most that they will be able to do, if that.

And reckless endangerment for the victims that lived.

Charlotte

a murder is an illegal killing. This was a murder. Their ability to charge someone with murder does not change the fact that this was an illegal killing.

the charges you mentioned are most likely...but that doesn't change what happened here.

and the idea that one person could start this domino effect is dead wrong.

It is the "job" of ANY company, or individual for that matter, to "make money." That is how anyone, individual or company, AFFORDS to buy anything or to provide any service and are NOT on the "government dole."

And no, I don't know who the largest stockholders are, nor do I care. People trade their cash for stock in the hope of seeing their investment go "up." But ALL investing also involves RISK of losing the entire investment, just like Farmers risk losing everything every time they invest in buying seed in the hope that the seeds will grow into "saleable" products and they can make back their initial investment, pay for maintaining the "farm" and the workers of the farm, AND have some "profit left over after all the expenses (including TAXES that are confiscated by the 'do nothing to earn it' government) are paid.

Yep, stockholders are "bad people too."





Okay, so now people are mindless cattle, "provoked" to a mindless stampede in a "Follow the Leader" sort of way.

Human beings do NOT have a mind and are NOT able to THINK about their actions and CHOOSE how to behave or not behave?

Now WHO are these "trained people" that you envision who could "control" a mindless mob bent on getting what each individual IN that mob thinks they want or have a "right" to getting, no matter who "gets in their way?"

Maybe the Police? Armed guards? WHO is going to stand in front of a mob that is stampeding and get them to "stop" or "turn away" in another direction?




Okay. Perhaps the model used at your local WalMart store would be effective everywhere. That might make some sense since no other WalMart store seems to have had someone trampled to death, so there "must" be some store managed "crowd control" plan that works. Maybe the manager of that particular store didn't follow the company plan? Or maybe the "mob" at that store was not going to follow ANY plan if it "got in the way" of their "getting what they wanted?"

And I have to wonder, if we apply the same logic, what should any given marriage DO to prevent each spouse from doing whatever they want to do no matter who gets hurt in the process, just so long as the individual "gets what they think they need?"

But it's probably the fault of the Faithful Spouse, even in that instance, for not taking the steps necessary to prevent their spouse from exercising their "free will right" to do whatever they want to do and trample on the marriage.

Ya, it's always "someone else's fault." We've heard THAT logic before, starting with excuses like "the devil MADE me do it."

Somehow the picture of the "wild West" keeps coming to mind with the Sheriff the only person standing between the mob and the prisoner they want to "get and string up" so that they will feel "justice has been served." Nevermind the "Rule of Law" or that THEY could be be "object" of mob rule themselves at some point in time. But the Sheriff has a gun and HE knows that even that can't stop a "determined mob." All he can do is tell the mob that SOME of them will also die as he defends the jail (store) from their craziness and illogic.

Maybe we should just arm all the WalMart employees with Cattle Prods to help "direct the herd." Somehow I don't think that a little shock would deter the mob much, though, just so long as "someone else" got the shock and they could keep on stampeding to get what they so desperately want.

Have you ever seen pictures of armed police officers, dressed in complete riot gear, trying to stand off a "determined mob?" Very effective all the time, don't you think? Maybe if we just station water cannons by the entrances to the stores to "cool of the heated crowd" we could "deter the mob from their self-appointed task" of getting what they want before anyone else might get the object of their desire?"

Besides, even if they (those charged with protecting the store, the employees, AND the people of the mob themselves) felt their lives were threatened, all they have to look forward to is jail time for themselves if they DO their job. Just look at the two border patrol officers in Texas who are "doing a lot of time" for shooting a drug smuggler in the [censored]."

We don't want "personal responsibility" so we want to "farm it out" to "someone else." THEN we want to toss their butts in jail IF they do what we TOLD THEM TO DO.

Yep, the management of WalMart is responsible for providing a "land of opportunity" for the masses. But "protect" the store so that all WILL have an opportunity? Not enough "Border Guards" in the nation for that it would seem.

Yep...I hope those poor victims who trampled the employee to death can somehow find a way to cope with being forced to kill.

I also hope that all of the active wayward spouses out there can find a way to cope with being forced into the groin of another by a bad, bad betrayed spouse.

What is an "invitee"?

From Wikipedia:



Failing to provide security to manage the crowd they invited resulted in unsafe foreseeable conditions which constitutes negligence on the part of the property owner (Walmart).

Walmart is solely responsible. As any property owner would be for creating an unsafe condition on it's property.

Were injuries and even death foreseeable. I would estimate that yes...they were.

Here's a link from 2005 which links to several news stories about injuries at Walmart on Black Fridays in the past. I'm certain it's not an exhaustive complete list but just a taste of what Walmart has experienced in the past and neglected to recognize as a serious problem for their guests.
Walmart history of Black Friday injuries

Here's another reason Walmart is responsible...it's employee incited the crowd by doing the following:



Someone above mentioned that if someone, say a terrorist, had brought a bomb and detonated it at the entry point killing hundreds of said shoppers that it would be ridiculous to hold Walmart responsible and I agree as such risk wouldn't be "foreseeable" and thus, not negligence (absent specific warnings or threats).

Singling out and charging any specific customer that can be identified as an instigator of the mob mentality is OK by me too (this includes the Joking Walmart employee) but the ultimate responsibility, IMO, rests with Walmart, it's management and executives. Charge the CEO and Store Manager with negligent homicide (even if they are later acquitted or charges are dropped) and see if this event EVER happens at a major retailer again.

I see that legislatures are now getting involved and considering laws to protect their citizenry. Most are considering mandating security. I tend to favor a law requiring that advertised sale prices need to be made available to shoppers for at least one business day and that if they run out of an item they must offer "rain check" certificates to permit customers to return and get their item for said price at a later date.

Such law won't likely be necessary if the legal system is allowed to have it's way with Walmart by imposing a stiff punitive penalty against them for their gross negligence in this case which would make the future cost of protecting their invitee/guests/customers economical in comparison. This is how the legal system is supposed to work...to protect employees and patrons from profit driven Companies that ignore risk for the sake of the almighty dollar.

On another note...I don't have any idea why Walmart employees have failed to unionize yet. This event likely wouldn't have happened if a couple of 6' 3" union guys in union jackets were standing outside directing the unruly customers. IMO...it's not coincidental that this event occurred at a Walmart...they've been abusing their workforce for years now. It was only a matter of time. This is NOT Sam Walton's company anymore.

Mr. Wondering

SCARY!

And guns ablazing in Toys R Us...people are getting whacked out.

The blame lies entirely on the money grubbers who made this whole thing happen.....the shoppers.

I guess a $788 flat screen is what Christmas is all about?!

The real shame is that the damn thing will probably be $728, regular price, before the end of January.

Beware of stupid people in large crowds! I very rarely even go to concerts anymore because people get so stupid.

When I was a bartender we had to count heads and then start a line outside where the doorman counted heads leaving and let that exact amount in. Fire safety and all that stuff. We also had to be very careful about who we served and how much they already had, lest they leave in their car and kill themselves, or god forbid, someone else.

Why shouldn't stores have to watch out for their customers?

What's the difference?

For that matter, why shouldn't Kid Rock be responsible for fights that start at his concerts because his security lets the crowd get out of hand.

But then what about soccer games?

I don't know what the answer is.

I think the answer is a little thing called personal accountability.

If a person possesses the mental faculties to get a job, earn an income, have enough money after expenses for Christmas shopping, and get themselves to a retailer, is it too much to ask that they not trample the store employees to death?

I disgree with bars and clubs being liable if a patron drinks and drives, and I disagree with retailers being liable in a situation like the one in the original post on this thread.

WalMart is not at fault at all IMO.

The blame should be placed....get this....on the people who CHOSE to stomp an innocent man to death.

I would expect a bunch of BSs to excel in placing blame where it truly belongs.

Agreed.

It works both ways though. As a bartender I felt a responsibility to my customers. I felt a responsibility to the waitresses and everyone else I worked with, that I would do my best to maintain a atmosphere where people were not blitzed out of their minds. But the patrons should hold themselves just as accountable. As should the bar owners. And if we didn't hold ourselves accountable the law surely would.

Accountability works as long as everyone is held accountable or feels like they are accountable for others. The store owners are accountable for what happens in their store, just like the politicians, the bankers, etc should be held accountable for the sorry state they leave in their wakes.

I don't know, but I think it's about caring about other people and what influence you do have, or responsibility. That is not meant to sound cute.

And yeah Krazy, people should care enough not to trample another human being, but people get really stupid.

I personally avoid Walmart and crowds like the plague, because people in large crowds get even stupider.

If I had to fight a crowd just to save 10 bucks on a Christmas present, we'd all be making home made gifts at my house. And it looks like it just may come to that by next year.

How freaking sad to go to work and get killed over a freaking TV. But it happens all the time. Kids get killed over their tennis shoes, or a candy bar.

The question of liability really isn't a matter of opinion. A jury made up of impartial men and woman, after hearing ALL the facts...will determine legal liability.

Personal accountability doesn't address preventing this from happening again. Who is in the best position to guarantee that??

Next time it could be one of your children....maybe they don't die, they just become disabled for life....wouldn't you want to hold Walmart responsible then????

Even if you answer "no", that is your choice. Lawyers don't bring lawsuits by themselves...they do so on behalf of injured persons. This young man's parents will get their day in court and "liability"/blame will be adjudicated. The workman's compensation laws may insulate Walmart and/or the issue will be convoluted to such an extent by the workman's comp laws that Walmart will be able to settle quickly, secretively and cheaply.

Hopefully, enough punishment is in the bad press Walmart has received and the fear of unionization for Walmart to change it's Black Friday procedures everywhere, no matter the outcome of litigation on this particular case. They got LUCKY this time that it was employee that died and not a customer that became merely disabled (requiring lifelong expensive medical care).

Mr. Wondering

Quote

This is how the legal system is supposed to work...to protect employees and patrons from profit driven Companies that ignore risk for the sake of the almighty dollar

Worth repeating....IN BOLD TOO!



The SEIU has tried and tried to no avail. Walmart is really quick to get a whiff of the union interests when it happens to hit their store...and they shut it down really quick. They threaten to close the store and leave the area if the Union makes it in there. People will find themselves out of a job, the community will find itself without a store...since they gobble up everything else.

If management is doing their job, unions aren't even needed.

I had to do a strategic analysis on Walmart. I had to dig into some of their 'stuff' and I can tell you it isn't a pretty picture. I actually found some early words of Sam Walton, and how he managed to make such a profit. He was talking about the employees and he said 'we pay them as little as we can get away with'. Doesn't sound like someone who considers his "associates" very important.

They are making money hand over fist at the expense of the workers. They could spread that wealth back to their employees...they wouldn't miss a million here or there considering that total net sales for 2008 is 374.5 BILLION!!!

Anyways...I am glad that another person has piped in with some valuable information.

committed

So, should the customers who stomped the life out of the employee bear any responsibility at all, or is it all big, bad WalMart's fault?

Sure, they are money-grubbing, penny-pinching, employee-devaluing scum, but that has no bearing here IMO.

Some people have it in for WalMart for a multitude of reasons, but that's another topic entirely.

Maybe I should follow OM into a WalMart, shoot him in the head, and let WalMart take the blame due to their poor security.

Comparing apples and oranges isn't...pardon the pun...fruitful.

committed

The only difference between what actually happened and the situation I proposed is premeditation.

That employee was murdered by that mob, plain and simple. The fact that it happened to occur on the property of the most hated (yet wealthiest) retailer on the planet is, or should be, inconsequential.

You throw a party at YOUR house.

You invite hundreds (if not thousands of people).

You promise them a big, good, time.

Someone gets hurt at YOUR party...at YOUR house...by another party goer.

YOUR homeowner's is gonna pay.

That's the way it works.

YOU are responsible for the actions of YOUR guests...in YOUR home.

At least...that's how I see it.

committed

I agree that in a courtroom, that's the case.

I also think that's it's a ridiculous load of BS.

If one of those "adults" makes a stinky, am I expected to provide diapers and wipes, too?

Not true.

It still comes back to foreseeability.

If this specific event happened at their tenth annual Black Friday sale and they had never experienced anything like this mob mentality before, perhaps, they could argue that the things they did were adequate.

Since this ISN'T the case and they've had tons of injuries and "mishaps" at previous Black Friday sales before they should have known better and addressed it.

Either way...it's a question of fact for the jury whom will have the benefit of ALL the information regarding this event and the history of these events to determine whether Walmart was derelict in it's duty to protect it's guests.

Mr. Wondering

p.s. - The homeowner's insurance will pay IF it's foreseeable risk. If a party goer is served alcohol and hurts someone else at the party playing some drunk practical joke then that MAY BE a foreseeable risk. If the same party goer pulls out a gun or knife and injures another guest...THAT is not a forseeable risk which the homeowner owes a duty to protect his guests from (unless it's a hunting party on his property or a party of drunken gun enthusiasts showing off their weaponry).

Gotcha.

I was thinking along the lines of rowdy raucous behavior...in which alcohol is a factor.

I know of an incident where a person was shot and killed by someone other than the homeowner. The shooter 'knew' where the homeowner kept the guns...and used one to shoot another houseguest. Homeowner's insurance paid on that one. All they had to prove was that the homeowner had not used due diligence in protecting the other houseguest, as in locked up the guns.

committed

I kind of like your assertions here, Mr.W., especially the "where injuries and even death forseeable" part and the "creating an unsafe condition on it's property" part. That has, it would seem, broad application to all sorts of "invitees" and the resulting outcome that could affect them "negatively."

It totally negates the concept of personal responsibility and shifts it to the "inviter."

So, heck yes, sue Walmart for "allowing" the mob rule to kill someone.

And while we are suing Walmart, let's toss Planned Parenthood into that mix too, because they don't even make a "pretense" of their invitations. Their invitations are DESIGNED to get an unsuspecting baby on their premises and then deliberately kill it, all, I am quite sure, without their approval of even being there, let alone their approval of being killed because they were "carried along" by someone else who wanted to be there.

They are definitely "creating an unsafe condition on it's property" for every child that enters the premises, carried against their will by their "mother."




Oh goody, more blogs of blame shifting and ignoring personal responsibility for ones OWN actions.




Ya, fire his butt. Then go after the city for not allowing the store to be open 24 hours. If the city had allowed that, perhaps the crowd would have entered in a more "orderly fashion."




Yippee! And I guess Walmart should have "Forseen" that the mob would break down the doors, shatter the glass, and trample on the employee, killing him. And it's equally interesting to note that not ONE person stopped their "bum rush" to try to help a "downed" person. In fact, they got angry that the Store announced that they had to close early because of the death of someone. Heaven forbid that ANYTHING should "stand in their way" of getting their shopping fix met!




Spoken as we have come to expect from lawyers. Just SUE anyone for any reason, "toss the case against the wall and see what sticks." BUT DON'T ever think that PEOPLE are PERSONALLY responsible for THEIR choices and actions.

I think we need to be suing the local, state, and perhaps even federal governments for anything that results in the death or injury of someone....say a pedestrian crossing a street who is hit and killed by the driver of a car who DIDN'T think the "rules of the road" applied to him.

You know, like that tragic case where the elderly man was hit a couple of times by cars and left to die in middle of the street while NO ONE came to his aid.

The PROBLEM is our society, Mr.W., that has lost the ability to CARE what happens to someone else, just so long as "*I* get to do whatever it is that *I* want to do."

Now just where do you think this "coarseness" has come from? "Am I my brother's keeper?" Cain is alive and well and so is self-centered, self-focused, selfishness....after all, it's all "just relative," right?

After all, they (the governmental units) SHOULD have forseen that the open invitation to cross the road COULD have resulted in the death of an innocent person as the result of the action of some other person. Stop lights (locked doors), the appointed time to cross (Opening time for the store, Cross/Con't Cross signs), and the presence of WAY MORE cars than the government "planned for" on that street, are NO EXCUSE. DON'T "look both ways" as you are NOT RESPONSIBLE for choosing to cross the road whenever you feel like it.





Oh for crying out loud. Station a Police Officer at EVERY intersection, or at least do so during RUSH HOUR when the government KNOWS their roads are going to be overcrowed. Do so at ALL intersections to "protect the public" from their own idiocy.




A "workable idea." How about picking up that item in JUNE. Let's put some time between the urgency of getting it for Christmas.

But if they only have ONE DAY to get the ticket, and they don't want to WAIT until more items are received from the manufacturers and then shipped to the stores, how exactly is that supposed to help solve the problem of the "shoppers" who WANT IT NOW! and don't care to wait? "Let someone else get a ticket and wait, but I am NOT waiting for what I want!"





Oh crap. I guess we might as well sue the Auto companies for making cars available to the public that can exceed the posted speed limit too. Ya, that's what we need, more NANNY STATE laws to control the people who can't seem to exercise their own restraint and actions.





Mr.W., do you REALLY think a "couple of 6' 3" guys, union or otherwise, would STOP a mob intent on getting what it wanted?

And guess what, the POLICE were at the Walmart to "ensure order" and they left BEFORE opening time. Let's sue the city too for removing the officers from a "likely forseeable" event instead of remaining to "ensure order." THEY, after all, ARE in uniform and ARE ARMED, just like the 'ol sheriff standing between the door to the jail and the angry mob.

Why don't the employees unionize? Just wait for Obama to have his way and have NON-secret balloting where those same 6'3" burly guys can stand around and intimidate the voters. NO secret ballots!

And maybe they don't unionize because the company does a pretty good job at providing wages and benefits for their employess, without the need for UNION DUES and union control of their lives.

You know, the more I think about Mr. W's suggestion that the company should be held liable and that suing the company would "impose" some future restrictions, why don't we also sue Toys R Us for "allowing" people who are "packing" into their store?

Let's mandate metal detectors at every entrance to every store, and even include "pat downs" of everyone entering the store as a "requirement" for entry into the store?

I mean, if metal detectors are mandataory for places of public "invitation," say like Court Houses where people are invited to come by the govenments, why shouldn't we require the same "precautions" for anywhere that people might be "invited" to come?

Why not just require a "raffle ticket" type number and let people into the story ONLY when "their number" is called?

Let's see just how ridiculous we can make this elimination of Personal Responsibility for one's actions.

I belong to a union...a very powerful union in fact...and guess what..unions for the most part suck. Detroit would be in a better position right now to compete absent unions. Walmart unionizes and you will just see scores more people added to the unemployment lines.

FH, it should be no surprise to anyone that people wish to pass the buck...that is the nature of America these days.

It should also be no surprise that the vultures come out of the woodwork ready to hand out business cards when they see Walmarts deep pockets.

Walmart SHOULD assume some responsibility here IF there is clear evidence that they had not prepared adequately for this event. BUT, there should be an expectation of personal responsibility on the part of EVERY patron. If these criminals are identified, they will be prosecuted....then they will have some lawyer telling them to either be quiet or to "spin" the story. After-all, that is what lawyers are for isn't it??? To cloud up the waters...to make the truth less evident or keep it hidden. Show me a lawyer that always tells his client to just be honest and let the chips fall where they will. Nope...not happening.

This thread has gone way beyond my original intent. I will now ask that the thread be closed.

Sure they do.

Actually they systematically investigate and remove any attempts by any employees to organize. One store voted for it...that store was closed down. A meat department at one store voted for it...they eliminated butchering from all stores 3 days later. They utilize intimidation in the form of WE WILL FIRE WHOMEVER TRIES TO UNIONIZE and WE WILL SHUT DOWN ANY STORE THAT TRIES TO UNIONIZE.

It's only a matter of time now...unfortunately, some unlikely store(s) have to be the first to organize and likely take the hit. Walmart's retalitory actions would have been overlooked by the Bush Adminstration. They aren't going to be as lucky with the Obama Administration.

This employees death is only one example of what a union does. It protects it's brothern from injury AND negotiates for disability and life insurance protection for injured parties such that they aren't in the position where you think they should be...having to sue the patrons that injured them to cover their losses because the store shouldn't be responsible at all.

Bringing abortion into THIS thread is such a stretch. I hope you didn't pull a muscle. Sorry MEDC for continuing the off topic'ness but I just amazed at how this happens to fit into every thread he posts on now.


MEDC...this is exactly what I'm saying. I'm not on the jury and neither are you. The legal system is imperfect but it still remains the best place for the public to turn to get all the facts out on the table with each side able to present their most favorable facts in their most favorable light and let the jury figure it out as best they can. In part....lawyers and lawsuits protect the public and impose consequences for behavior such that the government doesn't have to micro-manage legislate every little thing.

Prosecutions...go for it, but I think they should include the Walmart employee that joked with the crowd, the Walmart manager and maybe some executives.

Consider what you'd do if your son was that employee killed at Walmart. Would you not wish he was part of a union knowing the benefits you've been entitled to when injured on the job? Would you not want to hold Walmart responsible AS WELL AS the people that trampled your son???

Mr. Wondering

Locking this thread at MEDC's request.