EDIT- I think we both agree that B&M holiday sales are an exercise in bad at this point, from the consumer stand point.
I do agree indeed. They were bad before anybody died, back when it was just injuries here and there and a generally unethical business tactic (bait-and-switch).
Personally I don't fuck with doorbusters. Closest I've come to them is showing up maybe an hour after opening to see if Target still had their cheap flatscreen in last year (they did, we bought it) and having somebody who was showing up at opening this year pick us up a Blu-Ray player.
I'm nearly certainly she didn't trample anybody to death to get it, but I don't ask questions.
If they're talking about the sliding doors, tearing them "off their hinges" is fantastically easy.
They're designed to come off their hinges. I knocked one off the runner with a pizza box, once, by accident. The box wasn't even dented. They do that in order to prevent injury. They're not security doors.
Not that this excuses any of this, but the implication that somehow there had to be some inhuman force in order to knock the doors off the runners is inaccurate. One person could easily do it just by pushing kinda hard.
If they're talking about the sliding doors, tearing them "off their hinges" is fantastically easy.
They're designed to come off their hinges. I knocked one off the runner with a pizza box, once, by accident. The box wasn't even dented. They do that in order to prevent injury. They're not security doors.
Not that this excuses any of this, but the implication that somehow there had to be some inhuman force in order to knock the doors off the runners is inaccurate. One person could easily do it just by pushing kinda hard.
Well fine then. :P
None of this changes the fact that Wal-Mart created this crowd (though again this is not about Wal-Mart bashing, as most other stores do the same), intentionally, then did very little to control it. The fact that injuries have been common in the past suggests that this didn't just suddenly become a bad idea earlier today. It was already grossly irresponsible.
Also, it's possible that Thanatos is freakishly strong.
I'm a big guy, and I was holding it against my chest, so it had my weight behind it, but I hit it with the corner of the box, and like I said, the box wasn't even dented, and I was walking at a normal speed.
I'm not saying that you just have to blow on it or something, but I would be surprised if your average ten-year-old were incapable of knocking it off its hinges.
Still, even with the doors being easy to "break down" (already covered) it still makes more sense that this push came mostly from the rear.
Otherwise you're assuming that the people at the front, watching the employees on the other side of the glass try and brace the doors, though this was just some cutesy tug-of-war that Wal-Mart was staging this year to add a new challenge to their "doorbuster" sales. Bust actual doors! Yay! That or, again, they thought that they'd get in no trouble for breaking through the doors like the damn Kool-Aid Man.
Or, alternately, that they thought that pushing open doors being actively braced by employees with a thousand people at their back was a good idea. Which goes back to my "self preservation" argument. Watch the Boise video linked earlier...you see some motherfuckers getting their faces smashed into the door frames and shit, and that's with the doors open. You'd have to have a damned death wish to incite such an action with a door (braced or unbraced) in front of you...you're asking to get either crushed or trampled.
I see no reason that somebody who is already at the front of the line has any incentive to start a push through the closed doors, other than extreme impatience finally outweighing their natural aversion to death.
More likely, to me, is that the people at the back just caught a glimpse of people at the door (or even just one person at the door) and though they were opening up...then started pressing forward...this could easily lead to the tragic series of events that followed.
EDIT: It's also possible this is just an attempt to maintain some of my faith in humanity, that they wouldn't actually tear through the doors into a closed store like a zombie mob in search of brains. But when I read the above it logically makes a lot more sense than some of the alternatives suggested here.
EDIT- I think we both agree that B&M holiday sales are an exercise in bad at this point, from the consumer stand point.
I do agree indeed. They were bad before anybody died, back when it was just injuries here and there and a generally unethical business tactic (bait-and-switch).
Personally I don't fuck with doorbusters. Closest I've come to them is showing up maybe an hour after opening to see if Target still had their cheap flatscreen in last year (they did, we bought it) and having somebody who was showing up at opening this year pick us up a Blu-Ray player.
I'm nearly certainly she didn't trample anybody to death to get it, but I don't ask questions.
I did the online for a 50in plasma this year, no hassle, cheaper then at the store, free shipping, no tax8-)
My "black friday" shopping consisted of buying a suit for the holiday party, at a paltry 10% off, all gone after tailoring No line.
If they're talking about the sliding doors, tearing them "off their hinges" is fantastically easy.
They're designed to come off their hinges. I knocked one off the runner with a pizza box, once, by accident. The box wasn't even dented. They do that in order to prevent injury. They're not security doors.
Due to fire safety code oddly enough. If you reach into them, and pull open, they hinge off and blamo, you get in. My building keeps getting mad at me for breaking in (though I do put them back) when I forget my keys while out drinking.
On a side note, non dead bolt locks can be picked with a credit card wonders of security.
None of this changes the fact that Wal-Mart created this crowd (though again this is not about Wal-Mart bashing, as most other stores do the same), intentionally, then did very little to control it. The fact that injuries have been common in the past suggests that this didn't just suddenly become a bad idea earlier today. It was already grossly irresponsible.
Or we could blame the assholes that did it. My yuppie ass Best Buy had a line, nobody went nuts, it was rather orderly and they had nobody monitoring it.
Or are you saying discount sellers should allocate cop favors ect by location, based on their client... ie profile them?
As well as unethical (bait-and-switch).
I'm not sure how true this part is. They claim to have x amount of y for x price, after that who knows. It's not a bait and switch if you look into what you are buying.
This is simple...
The people going to it treat it as a smash and grab.
I agree that most of the blame has to be on the shoppers. Other stores had this kind of sale without fatalities, but something about this group of people lead them to keep stepping on another human being because they didn't want to miss a slightly cheaper TV.
This drives me crazy. I think every single person in that crowd should at the very least spend a year in jail. I can't stand that they won't have to face any kind of repercussion.
Or we could blame the assholes that did it. My yuppie ass Best Buy had a line, nobody went nuts, it was rather orderly and they had nobody monitoring it.
Or are you saying discount sellers should allocate cop favors ect by location, based on their client... ie profile them?
The fact that injuries (including fairly serious ones) have happened in the past, and that minor injuries in initial rushes aren't even particularly uncommon, suggests that this method was already irresponsible before anybody died. The fact that this instances at this store went a little worse than usual is just icing on the cake.
That's great that your local Best Buy went well. People have been getting injured (including trampled after falling, though not resulting in death) at these doorbuster sales for years.
I'm not sure how true this part is. They claim to have x amount of y for x price, after that who knows. It's not a bait and switch if you look into what you are buying.
Yes, and I'm sure that having 50 people show up for 5 cheap DVD players, 45 of which will have to buy higher-priced items, never enters into their minds.
I'm not saying it's prosecutable, but it's still a bait-and-switch. Sorry.
This is simple...
The people going to it treat it as a smash and grab.
Yes, I'm sure that's exactly what happened. The dudes at the front of the line thought it would be cool if they just busted the doors down and took what they wanted. Sure. My explanation a couple posts up makes a lot less sense than that. Right.
I agree that most of the blame has to be on the shoppers. Other stores had this kind of sale without fatalities, but something about this group of people lead them to keep stepping on another human being because they didn't want to miss a slightly cheaper TV.
Actually, this seems to be the first fatality reported at any store, anywhere. But injuries have been common. Do you consider that to be reasonable?
People keep acting like this was some kind of freak occurrence. It really wasn't. It was only marginally worse than the norm...many stores have perfectly orderly queues I'm sure, but chaos breaks out at many other stores every single year.
This drives me crazy. I think every single person in that crowd should at the very least spend a year in jail. I can't stand that they won't have to face any kind of repercussion.
So the person who was in the middle of the throng, unable to get out and being forced forward by the crowd, and who didn't continue to shop but left horrified when they found out what happened should go to jail?
Because I got $texas that such a person exists in a crowd that large.
But overgeneralizations FTW, I guess.
EDIT: Or you actually think that person should go to jail, in which case what the fuck is wrong with you?
I agree that most of the blame has to be on the shoppers. Other stores had this kind of sale without fatalities, but something about this group of people lead them to keep stepping on another human being because they didn't want to miss a slightly cheaper TV.
Also, though I already replied to this, I'll point out that this also falls victim to the "this group of people" argument...that somehow naturally this group of people must be evil, and that all the groups that stampeded into stores causing less severe injuries across the country year after year were just "better" people, and that's why nobody died.
Rather than, you know, that this entire situation was somewhat dangerous to begin with.
Just like the fans at Roskilde were a bunch of assholes who wanted to trample some motherfuckers, right? And all the less dramatic fan crushes that merely caused injuries were because those fans were righteous dudes.
No, it's impossible that something simple (like seeing employees or an employee at the door and mistaking it for them opening it) triggered the rear/flanks of the crowd to push in, touching off a tragic chain of events. More likely, of course, is that a group of shoppers just went rabid and decided loot the place, with a reckless disregard for both their physical and legal wellbeing.
Sure, this doesn't explain the people that continued to try and shop afterward. That I can just right up to a disgusting lack of regard for their fellow man. Same way people rubberneck and watch Bumfights. That still doesn't mean that this was in any way intentional on the part of the crowd.
I realize that this was just a case of the usual panic that caught a bit of bad luck. I don't think there's some single exacerbating factor that resulted in this death. I think stores are culpable for actions they inspire, and Walmart and other retailers certainly share the responsibility. But in this case, I assign more blame to the shoppers, because they were the ones committing the action that directly lead to someone getting trampled. The marketing policies of the store doubtless contributed, but unless Sam Walton was personally stomping the life out of that person I'm going to place the responsibility more on the crowd.
As for my wish for absurdly punitive measures, I don't really think they should be that harsh, but I do wish someone would face punishment.
Sure, plenty people in the crowd were probably scared and being shoved along. It's irrelevant, though, because they weren't acting as people, they were acting as a panicked, stupid crowd. If they act as a mass, I'll judge them as a mass. If they were thinking as people, if each person in that crowd was an individual, I don't think they each individually would have thought, "Hey, this stampede is awesome, let's keep going." If all those poor, defenseless people in the middle had just stopped, they might have gotten off with just injuries.
I agree that most of the blame has to be on the shoppers. Other stores had this kind of sale without fatalities, but something about this group of people lead them to keep stepping on another human being because they didn't want to miss a slightly cheaper TV.
Also, though I already replied to this, I'll point out that this also falls victim to the "this group of people" argument...that somehow naturally this group of people must be evil, and that all the groups that stampeded into stores causing less severe injuries across the country year after year were just "better" people, and that's why nobody died.
Rather than, you know, that this entire situation was somewhat dangerous to begin with.
Just like the fans at Roskilde were a bunch of assholes who wanted to trample some motherfuckers, right? And all the less dramatic fan crushes that merely caused injuries were because those fans were righteous dudes.
No, it's impossible that something simple (like seeing employees or an employee at the door and mistaking it for them opening it) triggered the rear/flanks of the crowd to push in, touching off a tragic chain of events. More likely, of course, is that a group of shoppers just went rabid and decided loot the place, with a reckless disregard for both their physical and legal wellbeing.
Sure, this doesn't explain the people that continued to try and shop afterward. That I can just right up to a disgusting lack of regard for their fellow man. Same way people rubberneck and watch Bumfights. That still doesn't mean that this was in any way intentional on the part of the crowd.
I certainly don't think it was intentional on anyone's part. I don't ascribe intentions to crowds, anyway. They're a big, unthinking blob of people.
I agree completely with your theory on how this started. Nor do I think these people were somehow worse, they just got unlucky. I do, however, think that at least some of these people should face consequences. For example, if I was working double shifts every day, fell asleep at the wheel, and hit a jogger, I would get in trouble. I don't think that becomes a value judgment on what kind of person I am; it's a necessity of our society.
I realize that this was just a case of the usual panic that caught a bit of bad luck. I don't think there's some single exacerbating factor that resulted in this death. I think stores are culpable for actions they inspire, and Walmart and other retailers certainly share the responsibility. But in this case, I assign more blame to the shoppers, because they were the ones committing the action that directly lead to someone getting trampled. The marketing policies of the store doubtless contributed, but unless Sam Walton was personally stomping the life out of that person I'm going to place the responsibility more on the crowd.
As for my wish for absurdly punitive measures, I don't really think they should be that harsh, but I do wish someone would face punishment.
But of course punishing the company that intentionally gathered the crowd so as to pad their bottom line so that that company will not do so in the future thus definitely averting future tragedies like this one since they are the one single actor that could have certainly prevented it makes no sense, right?
Maybe I went a little crazy with the italics there.
Sure, plenty people in the crowd were probably scared and being shoved along. It's irrelevant, though, because they weren't acting as people, they were acting as a panicked, stupid crowd. If they act as a mass, I'll judge them as a mass.
That's fucking retarded.
If they were thinking as people, if each person in that crowd was an individual, I don't think they each individually would have thought, "Hey, this stampede is awesome, let's keep going." If all those poor, defenseless people in the middle had just stopped, they might have gotten off with just injuries.
Or they might have gotten knocked down and tramped to death. But fuck them and their sense of self-preservation, right?
Add to that the fact that none of those people in the middle likely had any idea what was going on up front (or if they found out, they found out far too late) and your judgment of them is...well, like I said, fucking retarded.
For example, if I was working double shifts every day, fell asleep at the wheel, and hit a jogger, I would get in trouble. I don't think that becomes a value judgment on what kind of person I am; it's a necessity of our society.
That's you choosing to drive, as an individual, knowing that it's dangerous and without any need for self-preservation. It's also a matter of you choosing not to sleep when not at work, unless your job is scheduling you such that you never have breaks long enough to sleep adequately (there are laws regarding this in most states, I believe).
Basically I'm just not seeing this as in any way analogous.
I do, however, think that at least some of these people should face consequences.
Who, though?
The people at the front, who (if, as you say, you agree with my theory) were literally forced forward by the people at the rear? Those are the only ones you'd likely be able to identify on camera...the rest are going to be moving forward because they have to, to avoid falling and being trampled.
The people most responsible physically are those at the very back, but good luck identifying them.
At which point again I'd suggest that if you feel the need to punish somebody you might want to consider going after the entity that gathered the crowd there intentionally with very little plan to control them (because that's part of the point, to create that sense of frenzy) in order to make a profit.
Yeah, if the people in the middle had stopped, they might be dead as well.
I've been in one of those throngs before.
It's terrifying.
I almost get the idea that many of the people ascribing the most blame to the crowd honestly have never been in a mass like that.
To the point where you're being physically crushed, can hardly breathe, and you know that if you fall you will likely die. Well, maybe not likely but it feels that way, and it's certainly well beyond possible.
Ok, yes. I wholeheartedly agree that the company should face some form of punishment. I am not in any way excusing their actions, nor suggesting that they do not bear responsibility. Are you suggesting that they are the sole bearers of responsibility?
As for what befalls people stuck in the flow of the crowd, I'm trying to differentiate between the actions of individuals and the actions of groups. I don't believe that any single person in that group would ever willingly harm stomp someone to death. I'm willing to believe that they are all the nicest people in the world. The fact remains that that group crushed the shit out of someone.
As I said, I don't think we can ascribe motives to groups of individuals, so I don't believe there was any ill intent in the crowd's actions. I can only judge the action of the crowd, which was to kill someone. So I think that group bears responsibility for its action.
I do not honestly think everyone in it should be punished. I do think that in an ideal world they could pinpoint the people who started the crush and punish them. I realize this is not an ideal world and those people will remain nameless. I understand why nobody will bear the responsibility for this. That doesn't stop it from horrifying me.
And I have been in a large panicky crowd before, but I don't see how that makes me any more qualified to find the situation appalling.
As for my analogy, it's a profit-driven decision that leads to the death of another person. I think that is precisely what happened here. Unless there were gunmen behind the crowd or something, and I haven't read that anywhere.
The fact that injuries (including fairly serious ones) have happened in the past, and that minor injuries in initial rushes aren't even particularly uncommon, suggests that this method was already irresponsible before anybody died. The fact that this instances at this store went a little worse than usual is just icing on the cake.
That's great but... you just argued above that they have to do this
That's great that your local Best Buy went well. People have been getting injured (including trampled after falling, though not resulting in death) at these doorbuster sales for years.
I was trying to not be a bigot and not play the class card. But fuck it I'll go ahead and do it. This is a problem with a certain social economic class on this day. Flame on. But we all know it's true. In the DC area it's no brainer which places are going to be chaos, and which places are going to be fine. Oddly enough, the greater the income in the area by the store, the more calm it is. Yeah it's shitty but that's life.
The point is it's not the store or the sale, it's the people going to it.
Yes, and I'm sure that having 50 people show up for 5 cheap DVD players, 45 of which will have to buy higher-priced items, never enters into their minds.
I'm not saying it's prosecutable, but it's still a bait-and-switch. Sorry.
You know this and I know this, so why doesn't the consumer know this? It's not like this isn't public knowledge, and it's not like this doesn't happen year after fucking year. So either they are stupid, or two they go in there knowing this fact and act like even bigger animals because of it. The problem is still the consumer.
Hell I've got friends that know this, and work as a team to knock people down to grab item X. They are assholes for doing it.
Yes, I'm sure that's exactly what happened. The dudes at the front of the line thought it would be cool if they just busted the doors down and took what they wanted. Sure. My explanation a couple posts up makes a lot less sense than that. Right.
I don't doubt that people push. I also know people scope out the place and plan a speed run to what they want. It's just idiocy all around.
I think we agree on the problem here, so I don't think we are really arguing over it. I stand by my solution, week long deals. If the brick and mortars can't deal with it they need to modernize and move the fuck on! Most of them already offer those deals online, and online sales are killing in store sales.
The system as it is, is fucked.
As for my wish for absurdly punitive measures, I don't really think they should be that harsh, but I do wish someone would face punishment.
Not really possible because you don't know who started it. Ever been evacuated from a building from a real fire? That "orderly line" goes out the window fast, it's dog eat dog. The problem is why do people treat a sale like this?
I almost get the idea that many of the people ascribing the most blame to the crowd honestly have never been in a mass like that.
Actually been there and done that. In a fire, good for me I had training for this, and just dodged out of the way.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
It's not that simple though again - mobs are a feedback loop. Something simple as a bunch of people pressing in one direction pretty quickly gives rise to a bunch of emergent dynamics in the crowd.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
Wanna know something sad? The cops arrested 25+ people at my store yesterday for stealing the $2 DVDs.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
Wanna know something sad? The cops arrested 25+ people at my store yesterday for stealing the $2 DVDs.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
It's not that simple though again - mobs are a feedback loop. Something simple as a bunch of people pressing in one direction pretty quickly gives rise to a bunch of emergent dynamics in the crowd.
I didn't read the whole thread but I wanted to relate a story of my own.
After a Rolling Stones concert that ran long, the crowds trying to get on the subway were massive and they were announcing on the speakers that the line was shutting down soon.
As the next train came, we all started what we felt was a peaceful, small-step march to the door. But a wide swath of people all gently nudging forward in the back can compound into something much worse up front.
As I got close to the door, I was literally lifted off my feet. I no longer had any control over my motions relative to the floor. I was being twisted and tilted and was an inch or two off the ground. And as my body started to tip forward, my forward momentum only increased. It was like being caught in a slow river. I can only assume there were others in the same situation.
By the time I found solid footing inside the train, people in front of me were screeching at me to stop pushing them. I was so off balance that I had to stumble/run to the other side of the train to keep from falling and getting trampled. A woman was screaming that I was an asshole and she was going to call the cops on me. There was not the time nor the calmness necessary for me to attempt to explain everything I just wrote here. I was never purposefully pushing anyone. But whatever, I made my way towards another section of the train. Other entry doors had been not nearly so crowded.
I certainly wasn't pushing or rushing anyone. Furthermore, I never got the sense that anyone behind me was doing anything particularly malevolent. While not completely off the ground, I think the few behind me in contact with me were almost equally out of control. There were just a lot of slight nudges that were all conspiring and compounding to lift the 140-lb weaklings like myself into veritable domino-bombs. A lot of people in a wide crowd trying to fit into a small door can create pressure up front, and the gentle nudgers in the back could very well not imagine their fractional role in it.
There very well might have been some people who were trying to mosh-pit their way to the front of the line in this Wal-mart case. If security cameras can truly pick that out, then ok. But I'd be wary. Considering the number of people who were certain that the entire mob scene at the subway was somehow all my fault, I can imagine that the appearance of someone tumbling through the crowd could be misleading.
But Wal-mart? Fuck yeah. They should have had a better system. Do take-a-number, like Best Buy. Or more careful roping of lines. And police or armed guards. They should have known. They are absolutely liable in our modern sense of liability. Their ads, and the disregard for the safety of the ensuing crowd, are what created this mob scene, almost like yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater.
Also, fuck New Yorkers.
EDIT: I get the sense that this is what ELM is trying to say. It doesn't have to be like trying to escape a fire. A tightly-packed yet seemingly orderly march from a wide crowd into a narrow doorway can create forces that not everyone is aware of.
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Richard_Dastardly on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited November 2008
Corporate tends to want the stampede, as has been noted. When corporate wants something, individual stores don't have all that much power to say no. To use an analogy:
Customers=lions
Individual stores=Christians
Corporate=Caesar watching from the royal box
The most you can usually do as an individual store is try and keep order. Which they did to the best of their ability- you had 6-10 employees in Valley Stream trying to hold the door closed. They just got overpowered. The employees wouldn't be listened to, the paramedics wouldn't be listened to, the COPS wouldn't be listened to by some people. Monday morning quarterback all you want; you're simply not going to stop a mob like that no matter what you do. They TRIED to keep the store closed. They failed.
And since Valley Stream is one of the company's big sellers, I do not expect that the store will ultimately get to take any real precautions for next year. They'll have to fight off the same stampede again, except next year NOBODY will be willing to man the door. Corporate won't learn anything unless the same thing happens at Bentonville home office.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Well yes, that's decidedly different but my take was that we were apportioning blame to everyone in the crowd - which well - I can't bring myself to do. A lot of little actions could easily create a big bad one. That comment afterwards - yeah - that was just a bit "wow".
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Well yes, that's decidedly different but my take was that we were apportioning blame to everyone in the crowd - which well - I can't bring myself to do. A lot of little actions could easily create a big bad one. That comment afterwards - yeah - that was just a bit "wow".
If this were the first time this had happened, I would give that view consideration. At this point no, fuck that, people just don't care that they're killing someone to get a $20 television. And why should they? I mean it's not like there's any penalty for it or anything. And hey, that Wal-Mart employee knew what he was getting into when he took the pre-employment piss-test. I'm sure he was adequately compensated for the assumption of risk.
I doubt many people were thinking, "I'm gonna trample me some motherfuckers today." But, perhaps it was more a sudden, irrational panic, cuz some of those people had been waiting for hours to save fifty bucks.
I doubt many people were thinking, "I'm gonna trample me some motherfuckers today." But, perhaps it was more a sudden, irrational panic, cuz some of those people had been waiting for hours to save fifty bucks.
They were also stuck in the middle of a crowd in the midst of bloodlust with no way out. That can be enough to cause a panic.
I doubt many people were thinking, "I'm gonna trample me some motherfuckers today." But, perhaps it was more a sudden, irrational panic, cuz some of those people had been waiting for hours to save fifty bucks.
This is why there are whole bunch of different crimes pertaining to killing someone based on levels of intent and direct involvement.
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Well yes, that's decidedly different but my take was that we were apportioning blame to everyone in the crowd - which well - I can't bring myself to do. A lot of little actions could easily create a big bad one. That comment afterwards - yeah - that was just a bit "wow".
If this were the first time this had happened, I would give that view consideration. At this point no, fuck that, people just don't care that they're killing someone to get a $20 television. And why should they? I mean it's not like there's any penalty for it or anything. And hey, that Wal-Mart employee knew what he was getting into when he took the pre-employment piss-test. I'm sure he was adequately compensated for the assumption of risk.
What the hell are you talking about? As far as I know this is the first time someone was killed by a BF crowd.
I doubt many people were thinking, "I'm gonna trample me some motherfuckers today." But, perhaps it was more a sudden, irrational panic, cuz some of those people had been waiting for hours to save fifty bucks.
They were also stuck in the middle of a crowd in the midst of bloodlust with no way out. That can be enough to cause a panic.
Ugh, anymore the winds changing can be enough to cause a panic.
Yeah I was about to post, Yar's narrative is a good example of what I mean - no one has to explicitly do anything dickish in order to create a fairly bad situation. And then of course if anyone panics or feels they are somehow threatened by it, then you get big problems quickly.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Well yes, that's decidedly different but my take was that we were apportioning blame to everyone in the crowd - which well - I can't bring myself to do. A lot of little actions could easily create a big bad one. That comment afterwards - yeah - that was just a bit "wow".
If this were the first time this had happened, I would give that view consideration. At this point no, fuck that, people just don't care that they're killing someone to get a $20 television. And why should they? I mean it's not like there's any penalty for it or anything. And hey, that Wal-Mart employee knew what he was getting into when he took the pre-employment piss-test. I'm sure he was adequately compensated for the assumption of risk.
What the hell are you talking about? As far as I know this is the first time someone was killed by a BF crowd.
Really? It seems every year and always at several Wal-Marts people get trampled by massive crowds. If none of them have died yet I'd be pretty surprised, because that's generally what happens when someone gets trampled by a triple-digit crowd.
If this were the first time this had happened, I would give that view consideration. At this point no, fuck that, people just don't care that they're killing someone to get a $20 television. And why should they? I mean it's not like there's any penalty for it or anything. And hey, that Wal-Mart employee knew what he was getting into when he took the pre-employment piss-test. I'm sure he was adequately compensated for the assumption of risk.
What the hell are you talking about? As far as I know this is the first time someone was killed by a BF crowd.
Trampling someone to hospitalization isn't exactly sweetness and light, either. And that's been a nearly annual facet of Black Friday for a decade or more.
Which is also why Wal~Mart should have put various preparations and precautions into effect.
Posts
I do agree indeed. They were bad before anybody died, back when it was just injuries here and there and a generally unethical business tactic (bait-and-switch).
Personally I don't fuck with doorbusters. Closest I've come to them is showing up maybe an hour after opening to see if Target still had their cheap flatscreen in last year (they did, we bought it) and having somebody who was showing up at opening this year pick us up a Blu-Ray player.
I'm nearly certainly she didn't trample anybody to death to get it, but I don't ask questions.
They're designed to come off their hinges. I knocked one off the runner with a pizza box, once, by accident. The box wasn't even dented. They do that in order to prevent injury. They're not security doors.
Not that this excuses any of this, but the implication that somehow there had to be some inhuman force in order to knock the doors off the runners is inaccurate. One person could easily do it just by pushing kinda hard.
Well fine then. :P
None of this changes the fact that Wal-Mart created this crowd (though again this is not about Wal-Mart bashing, as most other stores do the same), intentionally, then did very little to control it. The fact that injuries have been common in the past suggests that this didn't just suddenly become a bad idea earlier today. It was already grossly irresponsible.
As well as unethical (bait-and-switch).
'Tis true, he's a gigantic bear of a man.
I'm not saying that you just have to blow on it or something, but I would be surprised if your average ten-year-old were incapable of knocking it off its hinges.
Otherwise you're assuming that the people at the front, watching the employees on the other side of the glass try and brace the doors, though this was just some cutesy tug-of-war that Wal-Mart was staging this year to add a new challenge to their "doorbuster" sales. Bust actual doors! Yay! That or, again, they thought that they'd get in no trouble for breaking through the doors like the damn Kool-Aid Man.
Or, alternately, that they thought that pushing open doors being actively braced by employees with a thousand people at their back was a good idea. Which goes back to my "self preservation" argument. Watch the Boise video linked earlier...you see some motherfuckers getting their faces smashed into the door frames and shit, and that's with the doors open. You'd have to have a damned death wish to incite such an action with a door (braced or unbraced) in front of you...you're asking to get either crushed or trampled.
I see no reason that somebody who is already at the front of the line has any incentive to start a push through the closed doors, other than extreme impatience finally outweighing their natural aversion to death.
More likely, to me, is that the people at the back just caught a glimpse of people at the door (or even just one person at the door) and though they were opening up...then started pressing forward...this could easily lead to the tragic series of events that followed.
EDIT: It's also possible this is just an attempt to maintain some of my faith in humanity, that they wouldn't actually tear through the doors into a closed store like a zombie mob in search of brains. But when I read the above it logically makes a lot more sense than some of the alternatives suggested here.
I did the online for a 50in plasma this year, no hassle, cheaper then at the store, free shipping, no tax8-)
My "black friday" shopping consisted of buying a suit for the holiday party, at a paltry 10% off, all gone after tailoring
Due to fire safety code oddly enough. If you reach into them, and pull open, they hinge off and blamo, you get in. My building keeps getting mad at me for breaking in (though I do put them back) when I forget my keys while out drinking.
On a side note, non dead bolt locks can be picked with a credit card
Or we could blame the assholes that did it. My yuppie ass Best Buy had a line, nobody went nuts, it was rather orderly and they had nobody monitoring it.
Or are you saying discount sellers should allocate cop favors ect by location, based on their client... ie profile them?
I'm not sure how true this part is. They claim to have x amount of y for x price, after that who knows. It's not a bait and switch if you look into what you are buying.
This is simple...
The people going to it treat it as a smash and grab.
This drives me crazy. I think every single person in that crowd should at the very least spend a year in jail. I can't stand that they won't have to face any kind of repercussion.
The fact that injuries (including fairly serious ones) have happened in the past, and that minor injuries in initial rushes aren't even particularly uncommon, suggests that this method was already irresponsible before anybody died. The fact that this instances at this store went a little worse than usual is just icing on the cake.
That's great that your local Best Buy went well. People have been getting injured (including trampled after falling, though not resulting in death) at these doorbuster sales for years.
Yes, and I'm sure that having 50 people show up for 5 cheap DVD players, 45 of which will have to buy higher-priced items, never enters into their minds.
I'm not saying it's prosecutable, but it's still a bait-and-switch. Sorry.
Yes, I'm sure that's exactly what happened. The dudes at the front of the line thought it would be cool if they just busted the doors down and took what they wanted. Sure. My explanation a couple posts up makes a lot less sense than that. Right.
Actually, this seems to be the first fatality reported at any store, anywhere. But injuries have been common. Do you consider that to be reasonable?
People keep acting like this was some kind of freak occurrence. It really wasn't. It was only marginally worse than the norm...many stores have perfectly orderly queues I'm sure, but chaos breaks out at many other stores every single year.
So the person who was in the middle of the throng, unable to get out and being forced forward by the crowd, and who didn't continue to shop but left horrified when they found out what happened should go to jail?
Because I got $texas that such a person exists in a crowd that large.
But overgeneralizations FTW, I guess.
EDIT: Or you actually think that person should go to jail, in which case what the fuck is wrong with you?
Also, though I already replied to this, I'll point out that this also falls victim to the "this group of people" argument...that somehow naturally this group of people must be evil, and that all the groups that stampeded into stores causing less severe injuries across the country year after year were just "better" people, and that's why nobody died.
Rather than, you know, that this entire situation was somewhat dangerous to begin with.
Just like the fans at Roskilde were a bunch of assholes who wanted to trample some motherfuckers, right? And all the less dramatic fan crushes that merely caused injuries were because those fans were righteous dudes.
No, it's impossible that something simple (like seeing employees or an employee at the door and mistaking it for them opening it) triggered the rear/flanks of the crowd to push in, touching off a tragic chain of events. More likely, of course, is that a group of shoppers just went rabid and decided loot the place, with a reckless disregard for both their physical and legal wellbeing.
Sure, this doesn't explain the people that continued to try and shop afterward. That I can just right up to a disgusting lack of regard for their fellow man. Same way people rubberneck and watch Bumfights. That still doesn't mean that this was in any way intentional on the part of the crowd.
As for my wish for absurdly punitive measures, I don't really think they should be that harsh, but I do wish someone would face punishment.
Sure, plenty people in the crowd were probably scared and being shoved along. It's irrelevant, though, because they weren't acting as people, they were acting as a panicked, stupid crowd. If they act as a mass, I'll judge them as a mass. If they were thinking as people, if each person in that crowd was an individual, I don't think they each individually would have thought, "Hey, this stampede is awesome, let's keep going." If all those poor, defenseless people in the middle had just stopped, they might have gotten off with just injuries.
I certainly don't think it was intentional on anyone's part. I don't ascribe intentions to crowds, anyway. They're a big, unthinking blob of people.
I agree completely with your theory on how this started. Nor do I think these people were somehow worse, they just got unlucky. I do, however, think that at least some of these people should face consequences. For example, if I was working double shifts every day, fell asleep at the wheel, and hit a jogger, I would get in trouble. I don't think that becomes a value judgment on what kind of person I am; it's a necessity of our society.
But of course punishing the company that intentionally gathered the crowd so as to pad their bottom line so that that company will not do so in the future thus definitely averting future tragedies like this one since they are the one single actor that could have certainly prevented it makes no sense, right?
Maybe I went a little crazy with the italics there.
That's fucking retarded.
Or they might have gotten knocked down and tramped to death. But fuck them and their sense of self-preservation, right?
Add to that the fact that none of those people in the middle likely had any idea what was going on up front (or if they found out, they found out far too late) and your judgment of them is...well, like I said, fucking retarded.
I've been in one of those throngs before.
It's terrifying.
That's you choosing to drive, as an individual, knowing that it's dangerous and without any need for self-preservation. It's also a matter of you choosing not to sleep when not at work, unless your job is scheduling you such that you never have breaks long enough to sleep adequately (there are laws regarding this in most states, I believe).
Basically I'm just not seeing this as in any way analogous.
Who, though?
The people at the front, who (if, as you say, you agree with my theory) were literally forced forward by the people at the rear? Those are the only ones you'd likely be able to identify on camera...the rest are going to be moving forward because they have to, to avoid falling and being trampled.
The people most responsible physically are those at the very back, but good luck identifying them.
At which point again I'd suggest that if you feel the need to punish somebody you might want to consider going after the entity that gathered the crowd there intentionally with very little plan to control them (because that's part of the point, to create that sense of frenzy) in order to make a profit.
I almost get the idea that many of the people ascribing the most blame to the crowd honestly have never been in a mass like that.
To the point where you're being physically crushed, can hardly breathe, and you know that if you fall you will likely die. Well, maybe not likely but it feels that way, and it's certainly well beyond possible.
Online only for me, thanks.
I'll go after opening. I figure if it's not still there (whatever "it" was this year), it wasn't meant to be.
I mean, it's still crazy crowded in the store after opening, but the initial rush is just retarded. I'll pass.
As for what befalls people stuck in the flow of the crowd, I'm trying to differentiate between the actions of individuals and the actions of groups. I don't believe that any single person in that group would ever willingly harm stomp someone to death. I'm willing to believe that they are all the nicest people in the world. The fact remains that that group crushed the shit out of someone.
As I said, I don't think we can ascribe motives to groups of individuals, so I don't believe there was any ill intent in the crowd's actions. I can only judge the action of the crowd, which was to kill someone. So I think that group bears responsibility for its action.
I do not honestly think everyone in it should be punished. I do think that in an ideal world they could pinpoint the people who started the crush and punish them. I realize this is not an ideal world and those people will remain nameless. I understand why nobody will bear the responsibility for this. That doesn't stop it from horrifying me.
And I have been in a large panicky crowd before, but I don't see how that makes me any more qualified to find the situation appalling.
As for my analogy, it's a profit-driven decision that leads to the death of another person. I think that is precisely what happened here. Unless there were gunmen behind the crowd or something, and I haven't read that anywhere.
I don't bother with BF at all, anyway.
That's great but... you just argued above that they have to do this
I was trying to not be a bigot and not play the class card. But fuck it I'll go ahead and do it. This is a problem with a certain social economic class on this day. Flame on. But we all know it's true. In the DC area it's no brainer which places are going to be chaos, and which places are going to be fine. Oddly enough, the greater the income in the area by the store, the more calm it is. Yeah it's shitty but that's life.
The point is it's not the store or the sale, it's the people going to it.
You know this and I know this, so why doesn't the consumer know this? It's not like this isn't public knowledge, and it's not like this doesn't happen year after fucking year. So either they are stupid, or two they go in there knowing this fact and act like even bigger animals because of it. The problem is still the consumer.
Hell I've got friends that know this, and work as a team to knock people down to grab item X. They are assholes for doing it.
I don't doubt that people push. I also know people scope out the place and plan a speed run to what they want. It's just idiocy all around.
I think we agree on the problem here, so I don't think we are really arguing over it. I stand by my solution, week long deals. If the brick and mortars can't deal with it they need to modernize and move the fuck on! Most of them already offer those deals online, and online sales are killing in store sales.
The system as it is, is fucked.
Not really possible because you don't know who started it. Ever been evacuated from a building from a real fire? That "orderly line" goes out the window fast, it's dog eat dog. The problem is why do people treat a sale like this?
Actually been there and done that. In a fire, good for me I had training for this, and just dodged out of the way.
But you are missing the issue, why did this mass act like this over saving a couple bucks? That's the core issue.
This is the part that drives me crazy.
These people might have had the same mentality as people who participate in destructive riots. I mean, really, could you blame them for the complete breakdown of order and basic morality when Legally Blonde 2 was on sale of $9?
Wanna know something sad? The cops arrested 25+ people at my store yesterday for stealing the $2 DVDs.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Dude, that's like stealing a free sample.
I curse you and your knowledge of things.
After a Rolling Stones concert that ran long, the crowds trying to get on the subway were massive and they were announcing on the speakers that the line was shutting down soon.
As the next train came, we all started what we felt was a peaceful, small-step march to the door. But a wide swath of people all gently nudging forward in the back can compound into something much worse up front.
As I got close to the door, I was literally lifted off my feet. I no longer had any control over my motions relative to the floor. I was being twisted and tilted and was an inch or two off the ground. And as my body started to tip forward, my forward momentum only increased. It was like being caught in a slow river. I can only assume there were others in the same situation.
By the time I found solid footing inside the train, people in front of me were screeching at me to stop pushing them. I was so off balance that I had to stumble/run to the other side of the train to keep from falling and getting trampled. A woman was screaming that I was an asshole and she was going to call the cops on me. There was not the time nor the calmness necessary for me to attempt to explain everything I just wrote here. I was never purposefully pushing anyone. But whatever, I made my way towards another section of the train. Other entry doors had been not nearly so crowded.
I certainly wasn't pushing or rushing anyone. Furthermore, I never got the sense that anyone behind me was doing anything particularly malevolent. While not completely off the ground, I think the few behind me in contact with me were almost equally out of control. There were just a lot of slight nudges that were all conspiring and compounding to lift the 140-lb weaklings like myself into veritable domino-bombs. A lot of people in a wide crowd trying to fit into a small door can create pressure up front, and the gentle nudgers in the back could very well not imagine their fractional role in it.
There very well might have been some people who were trying to mosh-pit their way to the front of the line in this Wal-mart case. If security cameras can truly pick that out, then ok. But I'd be wary. Considering the number of people who were certain that the entire mob scene at the subway was somehow all my fault, I can imagine that the appearance of someone tumbling through the crowd could be misleading.
But Wal-mart? Fuck yeah. They should have had a better system. Do take-a-number, like Best Buy. Or more careful roping of lines. And police or armed guards. They should have known. They are absolutely liable in our modern sense of liability. Their ads, and the disregard for the safety of the ensuing crowd, are what created this mob scene, almost like yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater.
Also, fuck New Yorkers.
EDIT: I get the sense that this is what ELM is trying to say. It doesn't have to be like trying to escape a fire. A tightly-packed yet seemingly orderly march from a wide crowd into a narrow doorway can create forces that not everyone is aware of.
True, but the dickiness of the situation becomes apparent when, told that the store is closing because of a death, customers say, "But I've been waiting in line since last night!" and keep shopping. This wasn't a situation of a large crowd trying to cram into a small space. Walmart stores are pretty big. Not as big as the Walmart parking lots, which equal in size to many small African nations, but I bet many of those people were simply rushing to get their hands on the best deals before they were gone.
Customers=lions
Individual stores=Christians
Corporate=Caesar watching from the royal box
The most you can usually do as an individual store is try and keep order. Which they did to the best of their ability- you had 6-10 employees in Valley Stream trying to hold the door closed. They just got overpowered. The employees wouldn't be listened to, the paramedics wouldn't be listened to, the COPS wouldn't be listened to by some people. Monday morning quarterback all you want; you're simply not going to stop a mob like that no matter what you do. They TRIED to keep the store closed. They failed.
And since Valley Stream is one of the company's big sellers, I do not expect that the store will ultimately get to take any real precautions for next year. They'll have to fight off the same stampede again, except next year NOBODY will be willing to man the door. Corporate won't learn anything unless the same thing happens at Bentonville home office.
If this were the first time this had happened, I would give that view consideration. At this point no, fuck that, people just don't care that they're killing someone to get a $20 television. And why should they? I mean it's not like there's any penalty for it or anything. And hey, that Wal-Mart employee knew what he was getting into when he took the pre-employment piss-test. I'm sure he was adequately compensated for the assumption of risk.
They were also stuck in the middle of a crowd in the midst of bloodlust with no way out. That can be enough to cause a panic.
This is why there are whole bunch of different crimes pertaining to killing someone based on levels of intent and direct involvement.
Ugh, anymore the winds changing can be enough to cause a panic.
Really? It seems every year and always at several Wal-Marts people get trampled by massive crowds. If none of them have died yet I'd be pretty surprised, because that's generally what happens when someone gets trampled by a triple-digit crowd.
Trampling someone to hospitalization isn't exactly sweetness and light, either. And that's been a nearly annual facet of Black Friday for a decade or more.
Which is also why Wal~Mart should have put various preparations and precautions into effect.