Oh, and Percy, it isn’t near the toy section, it borders it. I’m just saying why not expand or shift the camping section over just two isles to create more of a buffer?
And I’m not trying to say firearm education is a bad thing… Its good to tell your kids what a firearm is, why they shouldn’t fear it, and why they should respect it. I don’t believe that toys should be associated with guns in a young child’s mind and I think its the parent that should inform the child on guns, not have them find out about guns while looking for the latest toy and have them make their own conclusions alone. I am not advocating the “Oh my God! Jimmy saw a gun! We have to brainwash him!!” Rather, I’m pro gun education. As I’ve mentioned a couple times above, I used to teach gun safety.
And a side note… Mods, as this thread has evolved I see that I probably should have started it in GD. Its up to you if it should be moved.
clayton_e: You’re completely unreasonable. If I had to lock up everything that could cause harm, I’d have to lock up half my stuff. This would include ammo, knives, saws, nails, sharp objects of all kinds, drill bits, alcohol, gasoline, paint thinner, acetone, power tools, bicycles, riding mower, push mower, axe, air compressor, thumb tacks, staple gun, roller skates, laser pointer, batteries, oven, iron, mixer, ladders, clothes dryer, door jambs, steps, bath tub, paper (paper cuts!), concrete floors, hand tools, furnace, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. I would also have to install a whole house electrical isolation system to minimize the chance of anyone getting electrocuted, replace the glass in the windows with Plexiglas, and remove all the wood (so no one gets a splinter). While I’m at it, we should quit driving (driving is dangerous!) and move into a one-story house.
And you’re concerned about Wal-Mart locating its sporting goods section adjacent to the toy department. :rolleyes:
clayton, I don’t think you’re making much headway here. Loose bullets just aren’t that dangerous. How often do children (or anyone for that matter) get hurt by loose bullets? You need to completely mistreat the things to get them to go off, other stuff found in the typical house is much easier to get hurt with.
Anyway, that’s a little beside the point, the likelihood that random bullets will wind up in a childs hands at WalMart is miniscule, or should be. Are these people just opening the packages willy nilly and leaving bullets on the counter? If they are, then WalMart is doing a very poor job of managing that section, and deserves to be chastised for that.
I’d be more concerned with the fact that there was a loaded gun of any type on display anywhere in the store. Both unattended children and parents with children (and adults without children for that matter) could be injured by a loaded gun (BB gun or otherwise) no matter where it is displayed in the store.
clayton_e, I think there are probably a lot of people who agree with your common sense point, but just haven’t been motivated to join the conversation.
Why not locate it some other way? Even from a marketing perspective, the adjacency of kids’ toys and guns doesn’t sound like a revenue generator. See Paco Underhill, Why We Buy, for serious research on marketing layouts and the value of adjacency.
Instead of asking, “Why is the sporting goods department located adjacent to the toy department?” we should be asking, “Why is the Newport City Council comprised of idiots?”
Did they not understand that the location of the sporting goods department was not the problem? Did they not understand that the loaded BB gun was the problem? Hello?
I am beginning to doubt this. Seriously. Anyone who teaches firearms safety knows that the gun handler is completely responsible for the results of his (or her) actions with said firearm. The handler in the Wal-Mart case was obviously negligent. He/she should have been duly prosecuted, or at the very least sued in civil court. And that would have been the end of it. But no… we should blame the * spatial proximity* of the sporting goods department to the toy department instead of actually holding a human being responsible for their actions. :rolleyes:
clayton_e: Since it would appear you do not believe people should be responsible for their actions, perhaps you should run for Newport City Council…
Yes, Kat, if it could happen in one store it could happen in one of the other 3,200 other ones here in the states.
And next time it might be a rifle or a shotgun.
Just because 99.99999% of the people who buy firearms and an even greater percent of the people behind the counter are safety minded doesn’t mean that one person will make a mistake somewhere.
Just think, that BB could have hit something other than a kid… Maybe something like a big bag of fertilizer.
My Walmart don’t follow that floor plan but--------right around the corner from kitchen appliances was WOMENS PANTIES some was big and some small, none of them was locked away, right out in plain sight, I coulda run my hands thru em if I wanted.
I read this five times and I still don’t understand your point.
Look, I apologize if I’m coming across as a hot head. But it really irks me when people substitute symbolic, ineffective, “feel good” measures in place of reason and personal responsibility.
Do you really think separating the departments will be effective? For the cost of changing the blueprints, wouldn’t the money have been better spent educating the employees on firearm safety and the importance of ensuring unloaded firearms?
Not in today’s world. We want feel good solutions… :rolleyes:
Yes, I do agree that the loaded BB gun was a MAJOR part of the problem, as was the failure of safety guidelines in the situation, for whatever reason.
That should be addressed by the company.
I also believe that moving the gun section would help safety. If the sections were not together in that one store a kid probably would not have been shot. I don’t think that moving the section is a “feel good” measure. Rather, I think its a useful change that should not be “in place of reason and personal responsibility” but in additon to it.
And a large company that sells firearms in every one of its outlets should change its blueprints regardless of the cost. I’ve seen department stores move around sections before, its not a huge ordeal. And even if there is a cost to move the section Wal Mart should be glad to pay it, it’ll avoid a huge crisis when a kid gets more than a BB in the face.
This is a multi-billion dollar company. I’m sure that they have enough cash sitting around to not only move the sections but also train their employees effectively. We are dealing with firearms here. Nobody should be pinching pennies on the safety front.
Um, what’s the range of a BB pellet anyway? What in the name of the children (won’t somebody think of the children?) would moving the firearms section over by 10 or 20 feet do, in the described scenario where some imbecile leaves a loaded BB gun on display?
And what if it were some other gun? My box of .22’s, which are about the wimpiest ``real’’ round out there, have a dangerous range of a mile and a half. Decent centre-fire ammo can be dangerous out to what, 4, 5 miles? So following the logic (or lack thereof) that considers the placement of Wal-mart’s gun aisle to be the problem, we shouldn’t have any gun shops in the same town that children play in!
What of unchambered, loose ammo? I seem to remember my CFSC (Canadian Firearms Safety Course) instructor claim that loose ammo is safety tested by being baked until it fires; the bullets don’t even penetrate the cardboard box. But I’m willing to be educated, if anyone actually has reputable (or first-hand) experience of what actually happens if you smack a 22LR, or a 30-06, shell with a hammer.
So in the latter case, there’s no real danger either way. And in the former, moving that section over 20 feet is going to do absolutely nothing whatsoever to reduce it. This, I believe, is what Crafter_Man means by ``symbolic, ineffective, feel-good measures’’
A shell of whatever kind is contained in the chamber. When the firing pin hits the nipple it sets off a controled explosion. The gun barrel keeps the shell from exploding outwards, as there is no space for it to go. The side with the projectile is the easiest way for the expanding gasses to escape, so they do, pushing the projectile along with it.
A kid experimenting with ammo could harm themself with the shrapnel of an exploding shell.
And I’m sure that if the toy section were a few isles away there would be many projectile diverting objects blocking the way.
I just have to add, that this sentiment peeves me to no end. We live our lives surrounded on all sides by dangers of many sorts, and we could spend 100% of our income guarding against them. Of course, then we’d starve to death and die, but at least we’d die safely :rolleyes:
So you can’t just invoke the scary bogey-man of unspecified dangers and claim that makes an expense worthwhile and reasonable. No. You need to demonstrate how much reduction in risk you’ll get from a given expenditure, and see if you can get more of a reduction by spending that money elsewhere.
It would be impossible to test how much reduction in risk you are causing by moving that section just as it would be impossible to see how many lives a company can save by changing the font, location, and size of a warning or seeing if one daycare that is similar to another is safer. You do the best you can, you use common sense, and you save lives. Everything that helps can’t be quantified.
clayton_e, I’ve read this whole thing. Now, I’m not trying to be a smart-ass, but was just wondering if you were on that Newport City Council already and you’re here trying to find somebody to back up the Council’s opinion.
Ridiculous. In the one case where something has actually gone wrong as a result of the gun section being near the toy section, how would the situation have been any better if the gun section were near anything else? The BB would have hit an adult who was looking at furniture instead of a kid who was looking at toys… so what? Is that really something to strive for?
If Wal-Mart would just make sure that guns on display aren’t loaded, then no one will be hit by stray ammo at all.
A BB almost hit a kid. I’d be concerned.