On average, at least 1 car crashes into a 7-Eleven every day, $91M settlement reveals
On average, at least 1 car crashes into a 7-Eleven every day, $91M settlement reveals
Over a 15-year period, 6,253 cars crashed into 7-Eleven storefronts in the U.S. – an average of 1.14 per day.
...
Over a 15-year period, 6,253 cars crashed into 7-Eleven storefronts in the U.S. – an average of 1.14 per day.
7-Eleven apparently fought in court to withhold that data from the public.
"They have not been producing that information for many, many years," Rogers said, "and that's what's important about this case - getting this information out about how frequently this happens."
Rob Reiter is co-founder of the Storefront Safety Council. He was retained as an expert by Carl's attorneys in this case.
"If you install bollards, you pretty much solve that problem," he said of the danger.
Reiter advocates for safety bollards or protective barriers being placed in front of storefronts – especially those with parking lots that face the front door.
...
You're viewing a single thread.
7-Eleven released a statement that read in part: "We are heartbroken by this tragedy…. It is important to note that this unfortunate accident was caused by a reckless driver who pled guilty, and this store followed all local building codes and ordinances."
"Of course it's not 7-11's fault, anyone but us"
Sounds like an argument in favor of mandating bollards to me.
So if a car hit your house and the postman gets hurt you'd hold yourself personally responsible and pay all his costs and stuff?
Strawman, you've changed too much in your scenario to be taken seriously. This didn't happen on residential property or to a federal on-the-job worker which would both have drastically different laws applied than a commercial property and their own employees and customers. You don't even touch on 1.14 crashes per day over 15 years. Go fabricate fights somewhere else.
So if you owned a 7-11 store and some dude ran his car into it, it's your fault?
Why do I have to argue any case except the article's? Reductionism will make us all look like fools and we'll deserve it.
Ok so if some bozo who can't drive double-amputees a dude in front of a store, it's the store's fault. They should install safety measures. Noted.
You're the second person to conveniently forget that this has happened statistically daily for 15 years.
At different locations. But even then, it's the fucking driver's fault. Every time. Unless cars are too hard for the general public and they should only be allowed for professionals, or banned entirely
There's commonalities that make a particular type of site a hazard. Parking a sidewalk's length from the building is pretty unique to these types of stores. People run over people or damage property all the time but why do you think these kinds stores are so targeted in this article? Because they built an environment where it's MUCH easier to happen than say apartments, grocery stores, hospitals, or most anywhere else. And then they didn't protect you from what is apparently a common enough danger that they have created and you don't have an alternative.
You should be able to walk into a 7-11 without fearing you're going to lose your legs.
"Who needs safety equipment when there's someone we can blame." Boy am I glad we invented seat belts before this every-man-for-himself mindset took over.
This isn't a 7/11 specific problem. In my area coffee shops tend to be the most common hit, and many of them seem to be a case of someone putting their car into the wrong gear and driving forward when they meant to reverse.
If they are going to demand that 7/11 needs bollards, then just about any business with a parking lot should need them too.