Wal-Mart Worker killed by throng.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I see Ryan Thunder has no concept of "neglience" at all. Unsurprising.

Neglience is hard to grasp for people who do not believe there is responsibility for inaction as well as positive acts. The whole conservative ideology is built on the idea that inaction and the "status quo" by default cannot lead to moral culpability, only positive acts can.

So clearly, by extension, all we need to do is increase the role of "traditional values" and "family values" (read: expand the role of religion, particularly in a putative manner). We'll just intimidate everyone - with the full endorsement and aid of the state - into behaving as we see fit down to their personal beliefs.

[Broomstick]

If the police were present and the mob formed, is the onus on the police or Wal Mart for properly dealing with the crowd?

I hate to say it, but... it depends. Really, context counts.

At a certain point, if the mob is large enough and outnumber the police in sufficient quantity there is really nothing that can stop a riot or disaster.

Police use a variety of crowd control techniques, including a resurrection of the phalanx - they line up shoulder to shoulder with shields in front, basically meeting one mob with another but the police mob is armored and much more disciplined. Even so, at a certain point the police phalanx must give way or risk being mowed under by a large mob. Horse patrols were brought back in the 1960's and in major cities are used for crowd control for major events - not only does the mounted police officer have a much better view of what's going on, but horses, unlike police cars, will actively resist being overturned and set on fire. Police horse are truly amazing - they are trained to remain calm despite gunfire, sirens, smoke, and fire (shit that a normal horse would go into a blind panic if exposed to) and on top of that they are also trained to "herd" humans by using their own mass and muscle to push against a crowd. A human can't push against a couple hundred kilos of force but a horse can. In some circumstances a horse can block a spreading wave of force, interrupting the "pulse" if caught early enough). Police can also use tear gas, tasers, and other tools to incapacitate a crowd. That's a pretty fucking extreme measure for a Black Friday shopping crowd, of course, but preferable to a crowd disaster killing hundreds. Of course, incautious use of such tools can cause a crowd disaster - the E2 night club disaster in Chicago was caused by someone firing off pepper spray in a crowded club (said club was also filled beyond legal capacity and had inadquate exits - as with many disasters there are many factors at work). And last but not least, let's not forget the intimidation factor - people tend to behave better when the police are around and visible. If a Wal Mart employee says "line up" and some asshole says "fuck you - ain't gonna do it" then what recourse does the employee have? The police, on the other hand, can arrest Mr. Asshole and remove him and his inflammatory tendencies from the crowd.

If Wal Mart calls the police and says "we have a crowd beyond our capacity to control - help!" and the police show up then the onus is on the police. If the crowd surges and people die it's the police who will be first called to account (in an earlier post I linked to one such incident where the police where held accountable). If, however, the police have done everything they can but the crowd was simply too big, well, it's just plain shitty. They might be able to pinpoint specific instigators in the crowd or not, but if not, well, shit happens. I realize that's an unsatisfactory answer but life can be messy.

I should also point out that the police could also attempt to bill Wal-Mart for the manpower required to handle a mob. Local authorities might also change local regulations to require Wal-Mart to do more to manage crowds, or might even sue them for causing an "attractive nuisance" that causes hazardous crowds to form.

Mike's example is quite pertinent - people should not drive in a hazardous manner, but sometimes they do. Regardless, emergency personal should not make the situation worse, and property owners are required to take certain steps to minimize hazards such as making sure landscape plants don't obscure traffic signs or line-of-sight for cross traffic. The driver who slams into a tree may be drunk as a skunk, but the paramedics are obliged to not make matters worse. On the flip side, if a paramedic injuries his back while extracting an unconscious drunk from a wreck that is not the drunk's fault even if the drunk is responsible for the circumstance requiring heavy lifting. This the parallel to the individuals in a mob who actually step on the fallen man - yes, their feet do the damage (just as the drunk's weight injuries the paramedic's back) but they can't stop the mob's movement, they do not willingly cause this damage, and attempting to buck the tide of humanity may cause them to be injured or killed. In some circumstances, where members of the mob are physically lifted off their feet, they may be every bit as helpless as those trampled underfoot.

If someone causes a mob reaction they could be held responsible, if they caught in a mob movement they are not, since at that point there's not a damn thing they can do. Here's the parallel: if you deliberately (not accidently) cause an avalanche then you are responsible for the damage done. If you are caught in an avalanche after it has started then there's not a damn thing you can do about it and you are not responsible for damage done.

[The Spartan]

This experience def lead me to believe that Walmart does not have the preparedness for this kind of day.

Is it just recently that Walmart has become that much of a focus for holiday shopping? I haven't had much experience shopping at Walmart in several years and generally don't go near any retail store during the holiday season unless I absolutely have to, but it occurs to me that Walmart may not be used to this sort of thing, if focus has shifted to them from, say, Best Buy, for this sort of event. Consequently, they've yet to adequately train all of their store management level employees in how to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

This doesn't absolve them of responsibility, of course, if that is the case, but it's something that occured to me to ask.

[JCady]

If the police were present and the mob formed, is the onus on the police or Wal Mart for properly dealing with the crowd?

I hate to say it, but... it depends. Really, context counts.

If Wal Mart calls the police and says "we have a crowd beyond our capacity to control - help!" and the police show up then the onus is on the police. If the crowd surges and people die it's the police who will be first called to account (in an earlier post I linked to one such incident where the police where held accountable). If, however, the police have done everything they can but the crowd was simply too big, well, it's just plain shitty. They might be able to pinpoint specific instigators in the crowd or not, but if not, well, shit happens. I realize that's an unsatisfactory answer but life can be messy.

The police were called at 3 AM, at which time there were about 400 people milling around with no store security present and no line markers. The responding officers had the people form a line and then left, as the crowd was not unruly and there was no reason for them to remain on scene.

A news article posted this morning states that the mob rush was triggered when a bunch of people who waited in their cars instead of in the line rushed the door in an attempt to bypass the line.

[Ryan Thunder]

[...] The whole conservative ideology is built on the idea that inaction and the "status quo" by default cannot lead to moral culpability, only positive acts can.

So clearly, by extension, all we need to do is [...] intimidate everyone - with the full endorsement and aid of the state - into behaving as we see fit down to [our religious] beliefs.

Since when does "We need to teach kids to wait their bloody turn to get in so they don't form an unruly mob when left to their own devices" mean "We need a theocracy"?

I'd hate to live in a "Christian" theocracy. The concept is unworkable, anyways.

I fail to see the connection, so I hope you weren't trying to say I think like that.

[Graeme Dice]

Ryan Thunder has a typical kiddie's view of responsibility, where it's just another word for "blame". He clearly has no concept whatsoever of the notion of duty of care.

I had a friend who quit a high paying job as an electrical engineer with an oil company here in Alberta because that view of responsibility was so common. He couldn't stand working in close proximity to those people on the rigs.

[Graeme Dice]

And if you are evacuating a store "securing the doors" is low priority - doors should, in fact, automatically unlock, at least from the inside, so people may exit unimpeded through as many points as possible. Crowd crush is, in fact, why emergency doors in the US are supposed to have "panic bars" that unlock and allow the doors to open when pressed.

Unfortunately, those bars often only work if they are pushed on when the door itself doesn't have any force on it, and often don't work well when they are pushed down on.

[KrauserKrauser]

The police were called at 3 AM, at which time there were about 400 people milling around with no store security present and no line markers. The responding officers had the people form a line and then left, as the crowd was not unruly and there was no reason for them to remain on scene.

A news article posted this morning states that the mob rush was triggered when a bunch of people who waited in their cars instead of in the line rushed the door in an attempt to bypass the line.

First, good info but a link or a quote of the article would be good to include.

With more detail blame can be more accurately applied. The cops arriving and the situation that they found definitely speaks against Wal Mart's claims that there were barricades, rope lines, etc that would indicate prior planning with respect to crowd management, which would indicate that Wal Mart is definitely not as blameless as they would like be believed.

If the crowd was relatively manageable until the last memebers arrived and then suddenly got out of control there is a good chance the police would not have been able to arrive quickly enough to deal with the mob.

Proper training of the employees would have prevented the human wall and the employee death but would possibly have resulted in the death of that pregnant lady that he was trying to rescue, which would be an arguably greater tragedy as two lives might have been lost going by tragedy vs. body count.

If the investigation reveals that the situation escalated rapidly, it might just be one of those situations that you can't plan for, shit happens as Broomstick so eloquently stated.

[Broomstick]

This experience def lead me to believe that Walmart does not have the preparedness for this kind of day.

Is it just recently that Walmart has become that much of a focus for holiday shopping?

There has always been a certain amount of holiday shopping at Wal-Mart, but with the shitty economy and people out of work or worried about being out of work their rock-bottom prices would probably attract a greater crowd than in prior years.

Consequently, they've yet to adequately train all of their store management level employees in how to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

No, you don't train management, or at least not just management. It's the front line employees who really need to have a plan and the knowledge to control crowds because they're the front-line troops, so to speak, and will be the first to encounter the problem. You also need a number of bodies doing crowd control and again there are more non-management than management employees.

At the high-rise I was at just after 9/11 when we formed the safety teams it was assumed management would be the logical leaders. It did not work out. What worked most effectively were low level employees, the ones who never traveled on work trips but were always at the office, that were most effective as "safety officers".

[K. A. Pital]

I fail to see the connection, so I hope you weren't trying to say I think like that.

No, I merely said you failed to acknowledge the concept of neglience, i.e. damage by inaction, instead preferring to shift the blame to the party which was a positive actor in the place... regardless of whether inaction or positive action party is guilty.

[Darth Wong]

I fail to see the connection, so I hope you weren't trying to say I think like that.

No, I merely said you failed to acknowledge the concept of neglience, i.e. damage by inaction, instead preferring to shift the blame to the party which was a positive actor in the place... regardless of whether inaction or positive action party is guilty.

Minor nitpick: negligence is more about incompetence than inaction per se. It is possible for inaction to be considered negligence, but it is also possible for positive action to be considered negligence.

[K. A. Pital]

Minor nitpick: negligence is more about incompetence than inaction per se.

Yeah, it can also be not taking into account some consequences when acting, like a man operating an industrial crane recklessly and killing someone with it.

However, neglience applies mostly to people who break professional regulations or safety regulations which they are obliged to follow. The customers of Wal Mart were not obliged to form in a row, neither did they read any safety regulations to that effect. On the other hand, there are direct statements in the documents which ensure operation of stores and other facilities, about ensuring safety of humans moving in the facility.

Basically, if those people in the crowd would've been workers who have been instructed to wait but they still formed a massive crowd and killed a person in the process, they would be guilty of collective neglience. But customers aren't workers here.

[Darth Wong]

On the other hand, duty of care is typically assessed based on industry standards and history, not an expectation of infallibility. In other words, if this particular Wal-Mart store did nothing out of the ordinary for retail outlets on this curiously named "Black Friday" event, then it would be difficult to argue successfully that they were negligent. Particularly in light of the fact that such deaths are so exceedingly rare. Can anyone recall a previous event in the US where something like this happened?

Mind you, the duty of care might change in future, based on this incident. Even if Wal-Mart is not negligent in this case, if the same scenario were to play out a month from now at a different Wal-Mart then I think the accusations of negligence would be impossible to drown out.

[Terralthra]

In other words, if this particular Wal-Mart store did nothing out of the ordinary for retail outlets on this curiously named "Black Friday" event, then it would be difficult to argue successfully that they were negligent.

The typical explanation bandied about is that retail establishments spend most of the year operating at a loss or barely breaking even. It is on this huge shopping day that retailers finally go from being "in the red" to "in the black."

[Broomstick]

On the other hand, duty of care is typically assessed based on industry standards and history, not an expectation of infallibility. In other words, if this particular Wal-Mart store did nothing out of the ordinary for retail outlets on this curiously named "Black Friday" event, then it would be difficult to argue successfully that they were negligent. Particularly in light of the fact that such deaths are so exceedingly rare. Can anyone recall a previous event in the US where something like this happened?

The only prior events involving deaths that I can think of off-hand in the US are situations involving concerts and the sale of tickets. There have, however, been injuries on prior Black Fridays and during other retail promotional events. Hence, so many retails stores to utilize crowd-control techniques for promotions even if they themselves have never had such incidents. I would argue that the potential for at least injury was known and that there are commonly used techniques for avoiding them. If Wal-Mart did not use at least those tools then, even if a death during such a stampede was unprecedented, they should have had to foresight to realize such situations posed some risk and they should have taken steps to minimize it.

[Darth Wong]

If other retail stores take proactive measures which could have prevented this, then the accusation of negligence becomes much harder to ignore.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Walmart's always been about the bottom line, at the expense of just about everything else. yes, there are simple measures to stop incidents and such meyhem from occuring, but that requires giving a shit about your personell, including the temps you hire just for the holidays.

[mr friendly guy]

Here in Canada, we have our own version of Black Friday. It is called Boxing day and it is on December 26. While there's usually huge numbers of people rushing to the stores, I do not recall anything close to the Black Friday fiasco.

Oh, you guys have those too? We see the post Christmas rush as well, with people pushing each other to get to the bargain, although I from memory we haven't had any deaths, just minor injuriies.

I like getting bargains as much as the next guy, but seriously, why the hell would you rush and push just for what, getting something a few dollars cheaper? To use Olrik's examples, its not like some wolves were chasing you.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Oh, you guys have those too? We see the post Christmas rush as well, with people pushing each other to get to the bargain, although I from memory we haven't had any deaths, just minor injuriies.

I like getting bargains as much as the next guy, but seriously, why the hell would you rush and push just for what, getting something a few dollars cheaper? To use Olrik's examples, its not like some wolves were chasing you.

They have that in the UK as well, but I'm not sure how much of a rush of a crowd in the morning. When I visited London a year ago, the crowd was pretty thick.