I am not a Wal-Mart shopper. In fact, except for our nine-month exile in Marble Falls, I've pretty much stayed away from Wally World and that's hard to do in our part of the country.
So, I wasn't close to a Wal-Mart last week when a contract employee at a Long Island store was trampled to death after he opened the doors to a tidal surge of Black Friday shoppers. And here I thought the South had a monopoly on that sort of Wal-Mart crowd.
It's not that I don't like shopping in big, soul-sucking steel boxes. After all, I braved the Black Friday crowds in search of a bargain on an elusive 37" flat screen LCD HiDef television. While I love to shop for electronics, I really don't like those kinds of intense, high stakes shopping excursions.
I tracked down that tv to Best Buy, a big, soul-sucking steel box. Saved 200 bucks on that sucker and I'll probably go back for the BlueRay thingy and the home theater system every large, flat-screen tv machine screams for (yes, I can hear it screaming -- in perfect counterpoint to the voices in my head -- and it wants digital sound ... ).
So, no, it's not Wal-Mart's big, soul-sucking steel box. It's that I'm politically, economically and morally opposed to Wal-Mart and have been for for a dozen years or so, long before Black Friday became a blood sport for intrepid Wal-Mart shoppers.
Given my background as a publisher of small, weekly newspapers, I could sing chorus after chorus on the evils of Wally World. It destroys local, mom-and-pop businesses, it drives down the cost of labor, most of its employees are on welfare, it imports most of its cheap, shoddy merchandise from China*, will not seriously advertise in local newspapers (a deadly sin, in my book).
Well, as I said, I could go on. And on. And on. But I won't.
But I do wonder this ... not about Wal-Mart but about what happened this Black Friday past and what it says about us. The poor fella in Long Island wasn't the only shopping-related fatality that day. There was at least one other and a dozen or so reported injuries.
Will the reporting on future Black Fridays include a death toll? Is this destined to become our uniquely American version of soccer game riots? This is only the second or third Black Friday I've been involved with (well, as a consumer, that is) and I found the experience less than satisfying. Except for the part about saving 200 bucks. That was satisfying.
Much like I avoid Wal-Mart, I think I will avoid Black Friday in the future. It seems to speak to a dank, dark part of the American psyche that is best left to the professionals like Stephen King to write about. Stephen King scares me so I'll not be seeing you in the soul-sucking steel box next Black Friday.
Unless I can save 200 bucks ... in which case, I'm there!
(*Wait a minute ... considering how much we've borrowed from the Chinese ... and how much Wal-Mart buys from them, does that mean Wal-Mart is the new General Motors [as in "What's Good for Wal-Mart is Good For America]? oh, shit, oh dear ... I"ll have to explore THAT pernicious concept in another post ... shudder.)
Showing posts with label fatality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fatality. Show all posts
Friday, December 5, 2008
Thursday, February 5, 2004
Editorial: Close it. Now!
Tuesday's accident that killed two Cameron teenagers wasn't the first fatal collision on that stretch of railroad.
In June of 2000, two Mexican laborers were killed while crossing that intersection. It's unfortunate that the men were neither popular nor particularly well known. Had they been, someone in this community would have pushed hard to upgrade or close that crossing a long time ago. Instead, their deaths were largely ignored and the manner of their passing was chalked up to inattention or alcohol or drugs.
Had someone pushed four years ago, that crossing would have either been closed or adequately signed when those young men tried to cross it last Tuesday afternoon.
Just as nobody took responsibility for the accident four years ago, no one wants to take responsibility for last week's accident.
As we've reported in our page-1 story, three entities -- the Texas Department of Transportation, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and the City of Cameron - have been discussing since May 2002 upgrading the warning signals at the Houston Street rail crossing (the crossing is listed as the Cedar Street crossing, # 022924R, in an inventory maintained by the Federal Railroad Authority).
But the sequence of events that, on one hand, listed the intersection as the 26th most dangerous rail crossing in Texas as of December 2001, then declared the intersection a private crossing in August 2002 (which dropped it off the federal list of dangerous rail crossings needing improvement) has a hard time passing the smell test.
Further, it gives credence to the conspiracy theorists who insist that state rail authorities are in cahoots with railroad companies to avoid marking any crossing they don't have to.
The three entities met, looked over the crossing and decided that the road opposite Houston Street is not a dedicated city street. Since it's not a city street, the crossing is not eligible for federal funds.
TxDOT insists that it can't advance the project any further until the issue of public-private ownership is resolved.
BNSF officials won't "speak to public or private" issues, even though the railroad actually owns and pays taxes on the property.
For its own part, the city has said it would do whatever is necessary to upgrade the crossing but has been waiting around for either TxDOT or BNSF to tell it what to do.
In other words, everyone's been sitting on their hands waiting for someone else to do something.
That's not good enough. It shouldn't have been good enough and it certainly isn't good enough any more.
Only one of these three entities has the authority, mandate and responsibility to correct this dangerous situation. Only one of these entities is charged with protecting the safety and welfare of the citizens of this town: The City of Cameron.
The city is the only one of the three entities responsible for railroad crossings in the city limits that can and must harass TxDOT and BNSF until something is done.
Make no mistake, this is a public safety issue. Our elected city council members can no longer stand by while more powerful interests dither. It is up to our elected representatives - and the professionals they employ - to cut through the chaff and protect us and our children.
The city council must close the Houston Street crossing - temporarily but immediately, regardless of any protest - until a permanent, safe solution can be found.
Anything less is negligence and places other lives at risk.
This was originally published Feb. 5, 2004 as an editorial in The Cameron Herald. It was part of a package that won awards for editorial writing from the National Newspaper Association, the Texas Press Association, the South Texas Press Association, the Texas Gulf Coast Press Association and the North & East Texas Press Association.
In June of 2000, two Mexican laborers were killed while crossing that intersection. It's unfortunate that the men were neither popular nor particularly well known. Had they been, someone in this community would have pushed hard to upgrade or close that crossing a long time ago. Instead, their deaths were largely ignored and the manner of their passing was chalked up to inattention or alcohol or drugs.
Had someone pushed four years ago, that crossing would have either been closed or adequately signed when those young men tried to cross it last Tuesday afternoon.
Just as nobody took responsibility for the accident four years ago, no one wants to take responsibility for last week's accident.
As we've reported in our page-1 story, three entities -- the Texas Department of Transportation, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and the City of Cameron - have been discussing since May 2002 upgrading the warning signals at the Houston Street rail crossing (the crossing is listed as the Cedar Street crossing, # 022924R, in an inventory maintained by the Federal Railroad Authority).
But the sequence of events that, on one hand, listed the intersection as the 26th most dangerous rail crossing in Texas as of December 2001, then declared the intersection a private crossing in August 2002 (which dropped it off the federal list of dangerous rail crossings needing improvement) has a hard time passing the smell test.
Further, it gives credence to the conspiracy theorists who insist that state rail authorities are in cahoots with railroad companies to avoid marking any crossing they don't have to.
The three entities met, looked over the crossing and decided that the road opposite Houston Street is not a dedicated city street. Since it's not a city street, the crossing is not eligible for federal funds.
TxDOT insists that it can't advance the project any further until the issue of public-private ownership is resolved.
BNSF officials won't "speak to public or private" issues, even though the railroad actually owns and pays taxes on the property.
For its own part, the city has said it would do whatever is necessary to upgrade the crossing but has been waiting around for either TxDOT or BNSF to tell it what to do.
In other words, everyone's been sitting on their hands waiting for someone else to do something.
That's not good enough. It shouldn't have been good enough and it certainly isn't good enough any more.
Only one of these three entities has the authority, mandate and responsibility to correct this dangerous situation. Only one of these entities is charged with protecting the safety and welfare of the citizens of this town: The City of Cameron.
The city is the only one of the three entities responsible for railroad crossings in the city limits that can and must harass TxDOT and BNSF until something is done.
Make no mistake, this is a public safety issue. Our elected city council members can no longer stand by while more powerful interests dither. It is up to our elected representatives - and the professionals they employ - to cut through the chaff and protect us and our children.
The city council must close the Houston Street crossing - temporarily but immediately, regardless of any protest - until a permanent, safe solution can be found.
Anything less is negligence and places other lives at risk.
This was originally published Feb. 5, 2004 as an editorial in The Cameron Herald. It was part of a package that won awards for editorial writing from the National Newspaper Association, the Texas Press Association, the South Texas Press Association, the Texas Gulf Coast Press Association and the North & East Texas Press Association.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)