TexasCHLforum.com

sbrawley wrote:

Solaris wrote:

sbrawley wrote:

Solaris wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:I heard their stock is tanking in a market report yesterday... funny how they were trying to make it sounds like it was due to poor market conditions, not policies that are driving their customers away.

From 84 to 68 in last 30 days. DJI is down slightly over same period. So they are underperforming significantly.

Oddly, the S.O. and I were watching a television show on Hulu and at every commercial break, 2 out of the 3 commercials were for Target. Coincidence? I think not!

Yeah, not all advertising has its desired effect. They ran a non-English commercial several times during "Nashville" last week which was the final nail in their coffin for wife. She cut up her target card at that moment and swore she would never set foot in that store again.

Way to go wife. We took Target off of our list when their policy came out, but she's struggling with switching pharmacies. The pharmacists at our Target actually knew who we were which is making it difficult to switch.

That's the only reason we still go there at all. We've tried much closer Krogers, Walmarts, Walgreens', and CVS', but don't like any of them.

I may be in the minority here but I do not blame anyone other than the psycho for the girls injuries. Here are my thoughts.

My job as a parent includes the responsibility to keep my family safe. This is why I educate them on safety and why I carry a weapon when I am with them.

The police have a responsibility to investigate crime and punish perps so they do not hurt others later on, at some future date. The police do not protect me or my family.

A business has a responsibility to not create an unduly unsafe environment by doing stupid things like pouring water on tile floors, or creating a free fire zone through the posting of 30.06 / 30.07 signs. As long as the business doesn't actively create an unsafe environment through their actions, I don't believe they should be responsible for harm that comes to me or my family. I don't need every business to fill their establishment with armed security. Just let me have my gun and I will protect me and mine.

And blaming someone who "upset" a deranged criminal and "caused" them to harm someone else is just beyond ridiculous, IMHO. These guys were the victim of a crime, and they were just trying to keep the criminal there until the cops could arrive. This does not justify the criminal's assault of an unrelated, innocent little girl.

C-dub wrote:

sbrawley wrote:

Solaris wrote:

sbrawley wrote:

Solaris wrote:

Pariah3j wrote:I heard their stock is tanking in a market report yesterday... funny how they were trying to make it sounds like it was due to poor market conditions, not policies that are driving their customers away.

From 84 to 68 in last 30 days. DJI is down slightly over same period. So they are underperforming significantly.

Oddly, the S.O. and I were watching a television show on Hulu and at every commercial break, 2 out of the 3 commercials were for Target. Coincidence? I think not!

Yeah, not all advertising has its desired effect. They ran a non-English commercial several times during "Nashville" last week which was the final nail in their coffin for wife. She cut up her target card at that moment and swore she would never set foot in that store again.

Way to go wife. We took Target off of our list when their policy came out, but she's struggling with switching pharmacies. The pharmacists at our Target actually knew who we were which is making it difficult to switch.

That's the only reason we still go there at all. We've tried much closer Krogers, Walmarts, Walgreens', and CVS', but don't like any of them.

CVS bought Target's pharmacies. So, you will be getting used to using CVS...

Soccerdad1995 wrote:I may be in the minority here but I do not blame anyone other than the psycho for the girls injuries. Here are my thoughts.

My job as a parent includes the responsibility to keep my family safe. This is why I educate them on safety and why I carry a weapon when I am with them.

The police have a responsibility to investigate crime and punish perps so they do not hurt others later on, at some future date. The police do not protect me or my family.

A business has a responsibility to not create an unduly unsafe environment by doing stupid things like pouring water on tile floors, or creating a free fire zone through the posting of 30.06 / 30.07 signs. As long as the business doesn't actively create an unsafe environment through their actions, I don't believe they should be responsible for harm that comes to me or my family. I don't need every business to fill their establishment with armed security. Just let me have my gun and I will protect me and mine.

And blaming someone who "upset" a deranged criminal and "caused" them to harm someone else is just beyond ridiculous, IMHO. These guys were the victim of a crime, and they were just trying to keep the criminal there until the cops could arrive. This does not justify the criminal's assault of an unrelated, innocent little girl.

I must respectfully disagree with you. In my opinion, a business must assume the responsibility of protecting those customers that cannot protect themselves.

I am sure many businesses have customers too young to own a gun, veterans that cannot have a gun and many others that for one reason or other are unable to protect themselves.

If I invite you on to my property whether to sell you something or just socialize I am responsible to a certain degree for your safety. Businesses are too.

VoiceofReason wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:I may be in the minority here but I do not blame anyone other than the psycho for the girls injuries. Here are my thoughts.

My job as a parent includes the responsibility to keep my family safe. This is why I educate them on safety and why I carry a weapon when I am with them.

The police have a responsibility to investigate crime and punish perps so they do not hurt others later on, at some future date. The police do not protect me or my family.

A business has a responsibility to not create an unduly unsafe environment by doing stupid things like pouring water on tile floors, or creating a free fire zone through the posting of 30.06 / 30.07 signs. As long as the business doesn't actively create an unsafe environment through their actions, I don't believe they should be responsible for harm that comes to me or my family. I don't need every business to fill their establishment with armed security. Just let me have my gun and I will protect me and mine.

And blaming someone who "upset" a deranged criminal and "caused" them to harm someone else is just beyond ridiculous, IMHO. These guys were the victim of a crime, and they were just trying to keep the criminal there until the cops could arrive. This does not justify the criminal's assault of an unrelated, innocent little girl.

I must respectfully disagree with you. In my opinion, a business must assume the responsibility of protecting those customers that cannot protect themselves.

I am sure many businesses have customers too young to own a gun, veterans that cannot have a gun and many others that for one reason or other are unable to protect themselves.

If I invite you on to my property whether to sell you something or just socialize I am responsible to a certain degree for your safety. Businesses are too.

Yes, but not to this degree.

My wife had the same response to those ads.

Personally, I don't think any off us has enough information to comment on this case. The "hero" may be nothing more than a bully in this case. I haven't read what the original confrontation was about. By what authority does are supposed hero have the right to chase and hold someone while threatening with a ball bat( I would have shot him). The homeless man was found guilty but also mentally ill. After have been around mentally ill folks, they do not all have our rational or inhabit our same world. I do not know what time of day this occurred but if during the day, why wasn't our hero working. Does he live off the system and have nothing better to do than ride around looking for trouble with his cohorts? There are many versions which could have taken place which we have no knowledge of.

WTR wrote:Personally, I don't think any off us has enough information to comment on this case. The "hero" may be nothing more than a bully in this case. I haven't read what the original confrontation was about. By what authority does are supposed hero have the right to chase and hold someone while threatening with a ball bat( I would have shot him). The homeless man was found guilty but also mentally ill. After have been around mentally ill folks, they do not all have our rational or inhabit our same world. I do not know what time of day this occurred but if during the day, why wasn't our hero working. Does he live off the system and have nothing better to do than ride around looking for trouble with his cohorts? There are many versions which could have taken place which we have no knowledge of.

Your right we don't know the whole story. What we do know is that for some reason a mentally unstable person decided to stab a girl multiple times and someone was there to stop it.

Javier730 wrote:

WTR wrote:Personally, I don't think any off us has enough information to comment on this case. The "hero" may be nothing more than a bully in this case. I haven't read what the original confrontation was about. By what authority does are supposed hero have the right to chase and hold someone while threatening with a ball bat( I would have shot him). The homeless man was found guilty but also mentally ill. After have been around mentally ill folks, they do not all have our rational or inhabit our same world. I do not know what time of day this occurred but if during the day, why wasn't our hero working. Does he live off the system and have nothing better to do than ride around looking for trouble with his cohorts? There are many versions which could have taken place which we have no knowledge of.

Your right we don't know the whole story. What we do know is that for some reason a mentally unstable person decided to stab a girl multiple times and someone was there to stop it.

And quite possible the one who stopped it also instigated it.

WTR wrote:

Javier730 wrote:

WTR wrote:Personally, I don't think any off us has enough information to comment on this case. The "hero" may be nothing more than a bully in this case. I haven't read what the original confrontation was about. By what authority does are supposed hero have the right to chase and hold someone while threatening with a ball bat( I would have shot him). The homeless man was found guilty but also mentally ill. After have been around mentally ill folks, they do not all have our rational or inhabit our same world. I do not know what time of day this occurred but if during the day, why wasn't our hero working. Does he live off the system and have nothing better to do than ride around looking for trouble with his cohorts? There are many versions which could have taken place which we have no knowledge of.

Your right we don't know the whole story. What we do know is that for some reason a mentally unstable person decided to stab a girl multiple times and someone was there to stop it.

And quite possible the one who stopped it also instigated it.

That's true but the man grabbed a girl and stabbed her because someone had a confrontation with him. The man was mentally unstable. Instigating could if been accidentally bumping into him. What ever caused the guy to flip out like that, I am glad someone was there to stop it.

Bottom line: Turner and his friends had a violent encounter with Leon Walls on the street and they chased him into the store.

Target alleges this was the wrong action as it endangered people in their store,

Turner and his friends could have called police and waited outside the door. We have no way of knowing but that could have deescalated the situation and prevented the stabbing in the store. Target is simply asking the justice system to guess what may have happened and judge whether Turner's actions were appropriate.

Regardless of an individual's opinion about Target, the article quoted at the beginning of this thread is yellow journalism. The article even brings in the totally unrelated controversy over Target's restroom/dressing room policy announcement.

Here is the Snopes URL. It has some additional links to different stories about the incident. http://www.snopes.com/target-sues-hero-stabbing/

FCH wrote:Bottom line: Turner and his friends had a violent encounter with Leon Walls on the street and they chased him into the store.

Target alleges this was the wrong action as it endangered people in their store,

Turner and his friends could have called police and waited outside the door. We have no way of knowing but that could have deescalated the situation and prevented the stabbing in the store. Target is simply asking the justice system to guess what may have happened and judge whether Turner's actions were appropriate.

Regardless of an individual's opinion about Target, the article quoted at the beginning of this thread is yellow journalism. The article even brings in the totally unrelated controversy over Target's restroom/dressing room policy announcement.

Here is the Snopes URL. It has some additional links to different stories about the incident. http://www.snopes.com/target-sues-hero-stabbing/

In general, I think we have to be careful with stories like this. There isn't always someone to blame or to sue. The family decided to go after Target for a payday which is what caused all this. Target doesn't have armed guards. I am sure the family knew that before they walked in the store. I fail to see what anyone thinks Target could have done to prevent this incident. They can identify a problem and call the police. They can maintain surveillance cameras. I think the families lawsuit against Target should be dismissed.