Reply #1

In the discussion thread: I have to side with Wal-Mart on this one - Wal-Mart sued for prank pulled by 16 year old customer [View all]

Response to liberal N proud (Original post)

Wed May 16, 2012, 07:36 AM

Meiko (1,076 posts)

1. The store should

have controlled the access to their PA system better. It's hard to believe that they don't have any better security than to allow anyone to make announcements unchecked. What if this kid would have yelled "fire" and panicked everyone, possibly causing injuries to someone. This is Walmart's fault.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

44 replies	Author	Time	Post
I have to side with Wal-Mart on this one - Wal-Mart sued for prank pulled by 16 year old customer [View all]	liberal N proud	May 2012	OP
The store should	Meiko	May 2012	#1
A but they do	liberal N proud	May 2012	#2
It depends on the system	Forward2012	May 2012	#4
at the two wal marts I worked for	Maine-ah	May 2012	#35
"Attention, Walmart shoppers!"	randome	May 2012	#37
You hang-out near the phone and watch an employee enter the code. n/t	Ian David	May 2012	#20
It's Walmart's 'fault' perhaps.	randome	May 2012	#3
Wow, people like you disappointment! n-t	Logical	May 2012	#10
Why?	Meiko	May 2012	#44
Possibly so, however, they should subrogate against the boy and his family.	Baitball Blogger	May 2012	#22
The kid is a jerk and...	Cave_Johnson	May 2012	#5
I00% agree! This is NOT walmarts fault! Wish I was on the jury!!	Logical	May 2012	#8
no sympathy here...	lame54	May 2012	#6
LOL, this was not walmarts fault! Jesus, people are not logical!	Logical	May 2012	#9
missing the point...	lame54	May 2012	#12
I think your point is very clear	liberal N proud	May 2012	#13
and i'm not responsible for who wrongfully sues them...	lame54	May 2012	#16
You're not responsible because you have no power one way or the other.	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#23
Go Walmart	lame54	May 2012	#32
So, because I don't support Stalinism I must be a Czarist	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#36
Ok - I'll go with that...	lame54	May 2012	#39
It means you're relying on a false dichotomy.	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#40
you are standing up for the defendant...	lame54	May 2012	#43
you are defending them	qazplm	May 2012	#18
Then let it play out in the courts and see what happens.	Bake	May 2012	#28
Well, now HERE'S a lawsuit that's destined to go a long way.	Buns_of_Fire	May 2012	#7
Your avatar causes me emotional distress.	randome	May 2012	#15
My team of lawyers has advised me to accept your settlement.	Buns_of_Fire	May 2012	#17
Your username mocks those with hemorrhoids. Expect a class action suit!	Kaleva	May 2012	#24
I will gladly serve as a class representative!!	Bake	May 2012	#29
Count your blessings. At least you didn't end up with AWSD...	pinboy3niner	May 2012	#31
Store-wide speaker systems are easy to use, it just	LeftinOH	May 2012	#11
why even sue?	Blue_Tires	May 2012	#14
Because there is money to be had	Amaril	May 2012	#30
As much as it pains me to admit, I agree	obamanut2012	May 2012	#19
That Mitt Romney is getting out of control with his pranking. n/t	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#21
They've got the money	sharp_stick	May 2012	#25
Have to agree that Walmart isn't at fault here -	lynne	May 2012	#26
This is BS, the definition of a frivolous lawsuit,	hifiguy	May 2012	#27
Stupid prank, stupid lawsuit.	Remmah2	May 2012	#33
Wanting free money isn't a psychological disorder	4th law of robotics	May 2012	#34
Plaintiff is a sad, opportunistic POS.	-..__...	May 2012	#38
Wal-mart has a burden of limited responsibility in providing a safe environment for customers	jp11	May 2012	#41
I remember that incident. frivilous law suit.	Liberal_in_LA	May 2012	#42

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.