Teens storm Georgia Wal-Mart in wild rampage of destruction

[VIDEODROME]

Black Friday will be much worse.

 

[fr33]

"It's OK because Wal Mart is a rich corporation that only pays minimum wage"

Don't try it on my property. We use violence to defend ourselves.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

The TV's probably cost like $10. Everything else is practically free.

Their TVs are only marked up one percent.

The money is in the accessories.

And, "practically free"? What does that even mean? Simply to ship shitty product would eliminate your "practically" as nothing more than empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart profits anywhere at 1 to 3 percent. They have to move billions of pounds of merchandise to even do that much. And as I mentioned, determine what it costs to simply ship a pallet and then come back to me and explain where the "practically" comes into play at.

 

[Ronin Truth]

50 kids went on a destructive bender, and only $2,000 in damages was the outcome?

That... doesn't add up.

Perhaps they just aren't very good at creating mayhem........yet.

Perhaps the cops showed up much quicker than they anticipated. ???????

 

[Carlybee]

Hey it was justified...cuz...slavery.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

Hey it was justified...cuz...slavery.

They did it because they're black?

 

[Slave Mentality]

50 kids went on a destructive bender, and only $2,000 in damages was the outcome?

That... doesn't add up.

Rumors say that they were in the $1 isles. They have been reported as saying "just like momma do".

 

[Carlybee]

They did it because they're black?

I was being sarcastic.

 

[Ronin Truth]

What else is there to do in Macon, GA on a slow Sunday afternoon? <shrug!>

 

[timosman]

Their TVs are only marked up one percent.

The money is in the accessories.

And, "practically free"? What does that even mean? Simply to ship shitty product would eliminate your "practically" as nothing more than empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart profits anywhere at 1 to 3 percent. They have to move billions of pounds of merchandise to even do that much. And as I mentioned, determine what it costs to simply ship a pallet and then come back to me and explain where the "practically" comes into play at.

The China manufacturing is a ploy to burn more oil moving this crap around.

 

[kahless]

Wish I had been in the sports section near the baseball bats when they dragged the man from his stroller. There would have been plenty of them for the cops to pick up once they arrived.

It would be the right thing to do for which you would be applauded for, at least here, on Conservative websites, FNC and talk radio. Yet the MSM and comments on their sites, Reddit, etc, would be labeling it as white supremist Paul supporter attacks black youths and demanding hate crime charges filed.

 

[fisharmor]

Simply to ship shitty product would eliminate your "practically" as nothing more than empty rhetoric. Wal-Mart profits anywhere at 1 to 3 percent. They have to move billions of pounds of merchandise to even do that much. And as I mentioned, determine what it costs to simply ship a pallet and then come back to me and explain where the "practically" comes into play at.

Thanks for injecting sanity into this discussion.... Danno, you go find me a business that counts losses based on wholesale cost.
That business doesn't exist.
Moreover, the law is going to consider retail cost, not wholesale cost.
If you walk into Wal-Mart and steal a TV that retails for $951.00, you're getting charged with felony grand larceny for an amount over California's $950 misdemeanor limit, regardless whether the wholesale cost is the $10 you think it is, or the $941.99 KC thinks it is.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

Thanks for injecting sanity into this discussion.... Danno, you go find me a business that counts losses based on wholesale cost.
That business doesn't exist.
Moreover, the law is going to consider retail cost, not wholesale cost.
If you walk into Wal-Mart and steal a TV that retails for $951.00, you're getting charged with felony grand larceny for an amount over California's $950 misdemeanor limit, regardless whether the wholesale cost is the $10 you think it is, or the $941.99 KC thinks it is.

Mark up on their TVs is literally about a percent. Mark up on coaxial cables, for instance, is near 60 percent.

They don't make their money selling TVs. They only carry them because it draws customers in.

If you see an employee with a Telxon, have them scan an item. It'll tell you the mark up.

Now if someone wants to argue that Samsung, for instance, makes a television for ten dollars, I might just say, "Okay, for argument's sake, they make relatively complex electronics for pennies and sell them for dollars." But it is not Wal-Mart that sees that profit, which was more my point. Though I seriously doubt that with the purchasing power Wal-Mart has, they are paying Samsung more than a couple points above manufacturing cost.

 

[Ronin Truth]

In general, WalMart stores easily manage to receive, stock and sell they're products even before the inventory gets updated or the invoices arrive.

Now that's turnover magic.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Kids will be kids.

You have written a response. It is, of course, a valid and welcomed point of view that we can all appreciate. Really, really wonderful response. Thank you so much for sharing with the class your unique version of what you think liberty is, Brian.

Hopefully it's just vandalism, and no violence on persons. Assault and/or battery is an entirely different story.

"Just" vandalism, oh yes, "just" vandalism! Would you rather be beaten up a little, no permanent damage, or incur a $50,000 loss? I'll tell you, for myself: give me the bruises and bloody nose. Theft, vandalism, etc., takes away the portion of the person's life that created that property. It is a crime against a person's life just as surely as karate chopping them. The karate chop may just lead to a few days, or even a few minutes, of pain. Vandalism, on the other hand, might undo the results of a year of hard work, or even of many years.

Of course, this is just one point of view and is probably wrong and yours is probably right and in any case your thoughts are totally valid.

Assault and/or battery is an entirely different story.

It is not a different story, it is the same story. Haven't you ever worked for something worth defending? Haven't you ever worked long and hard for something such that you're willing to stand up like a man and risk bodily harm to defend it? I have. Let me assure you: it is the same story. You only get one life. The fruits of your labors are not "just things." You have traded pieces of your life for them, pieces that you cannot get back. A man's property is an extension of his person. If you come vandalize my place and smash my stuff, it's like breaking my leg.

Unacceptable. Totally, outrageously unacceptable. These vandals are scum, they are human filth. And you say 'Ah, well, kids will be kids.' And I appreciate your sharing of that point of view and hope you feel safe to continue sharing those views, and know that you are accepted and loved here, regardless of your views on anything.

You are correct that reparation is always the best justice -- at least you've gleaned something from Rothbard. But reparation via "hard work"? Not from these worthless animals. I wouldn't want them "working" anywhere near anything I was doing. No, total 100% (or more) purely financial reparations are called for. And since these despicable detritus are probably void of any redeeming value whatsoever, they would likely have to come up with the funds through forced organ donations. Good.

But then again, kids will be kids, and I don't want you to in any way feel that that point of view might be anything less than fully and wholeheartedly accepted here on RPF. This is an emotional safe harbor for you. Your view is just as valid as anyone else's, and you deserve to have it validated. Consider that done.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Unbelievable response. Are you serious? Really, really stupid response. I find it harder and harder to relate to, or even comprehend, your unique version of what you seem to think is liberty, Brian.

Yeah, you do have a hard time relating to and comprehending other people. We all know that.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

Yeah, you do have a hard time relating to and comprehending other people. We all know that.

Thanks. You're such a good moderator.

An organized criminal mob intentionally and maliciously vandalizes and destroys private property. Oh, those goofy kids and their antics! Always acting so silly! Ah, youth. LOL!

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Thanks. You're such a good moderator.

I'm just another person posting in this thread at the moment. Generally, moderators would recuse themselves from moderating a discussion that they are actively involved in.

Now, if a moderator were to address you, they would probably remind you of the Forum Guidelines. Some relevant portions:

The site has established debate principles to help achieve productive discourse, the usage of these principles is always encouraged and required for dissent to site established efforts that are working towards the advancement of our Mission Statement. The principles are:
• Follow the site's Usage Guidelines, taking particular care not to use ad hominem attacks and insults against others. This means don't say "You're [some derogatory term]"
• Debate only in proper context; start a new thread if necessary.
• Present your position in an intellectual manner, provide reasoned supporting details.
• Maintain a respectful disposition.
• Do not claim something to be true/false without presenting proof.
• Work to get along with other participants, ask clarifying questions before casting negative assumptions.
• Use extreme care to not misrepresent what you are arguing against. Ask clarifying questions before casting potentially inflammatory misrepresentation.
• Remember to be respectful and work to achieve the purpose of advancing the site's Mission Statement.
...
Being respectful

Maintaining a proper decorum is essential for any group, and is critically important for online political forums, being respectful of others is an important part of that and required by the Site Usage Guidelines. Here are some examples of being respectful vs. not:
• "You're an idiot for thinking that." -- not respectful since you statement is based on an insult.
• "Here are the problems with your line of thinking..." -- respectful, you don't have to agree and can present logical counter-arguments.
• "Troll" -- calling other members a troll is not respectful and implies you know the intent of the member.

Religious context:
• "God does not exist" -- not respectful since you are declaring others' religious doctrine wrong without a proof.
• "I disagree with your beliefs" -- respectful, you don't have to agree, but you can still be amicable about it.
• "Your church services are stupid" -- not respectful, you can certainly think they don't have value, or think they are not at all of interest to you, but they may be important to others and there's no point in demonizing them - no public policy will change.
• For complete deals see this special instructional thread.
...
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?1989

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm just another person posting in this thread at the moment. Generally, moderators would recuse themselves from moderating a discussion that they are actively involved in.

Now, if a moderator were to address you, they would probably remind you of the Forum Guidelines. Some relevant portions:

The site has established debate principles to help achieve productive discourse, the usage of these principles is always encouraged and required for dissent to site established efforts that are working towards the advancement of our Mission Statement. The principles are:
• Follow the site's Usage Guidelines, taking particular care not to use ad hominem attacks and insults against others. This means don't say "You're [some derogatory term]"
• Debate only in proper context; start a new thread if necessary.
• Present your position in an intellectual manner, provide reasoned supporting details.
• Maintain a respectful disposition.
• Do not claim something to be true/false without presenting proof.
• Work to get along with other participants, ask clarifying questions before casting negative assumptions.
• Use extreme care to not misrepresent what you are arguing against. Ask clarifying questions before casting potentially inflammatory misrepresentation.
• Remember to be respectful and work to achieve the purpose of advancing the site's Mission Statement.
...
Being respectful

Maintaining a proper decorum is essential for any group, and is critically important for online political forums, being respectful of others is an important part of that and required by the Site Usage Guidelines. Here are some examples of being respectful vs. not:
• "You're an idiot for thinking that." -- not respectful since you statement is based on an insult.
• "Here are the problems with your line of thinking..." -- respectful, you don't have to agree and can present logical counter-arguments.
• "Troll" -- calling other members a troll is not respectful and implies you know the intent of the member.

Religious context:
• "God does not exist" -- not respectful since you are declaring others' religious doctrine wrong without a proof.
• "I disagree with your beliefs" -- respectful, you don't have to agree, but you can still be amicable about it.
• "Your church services are stupid" -- not respectful, you can certainly think they don't have value, or think they are not at all of interest to you, but they may be important to others and there's no point in demonizing them - no public policy will change.
• For complete deals see this special instructional thread.

Yeah, you do have a hard time relating to and comprehending other people. We all know that.

It's pretty tacky to insult someone else, even in response to a perceived or real insult, then run behind guidelines as a moderator.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It's pretty tacky to insult someone else, even in response to a perceived or real insult, then run behind guidelines as a moderator.

Point taken, but the Guidelines were brought up due to the Moderator reference, not before.