It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"These incidents can turn violent, they can injure customers, they can damage the store and then there's the financial losses the retailers suffer," said Joe La Rocca, spokesperson for the National Retail Federation. The NRF estimates that about one in ten stores has been the victim of a of a flash mob invastion and robbery.
In July 2011, NRF polled retailers around the country to gauge the impact of multiple offender crimes. Over three-quarters (79%) of retailers report being a victim of a multiple offender crime in the past 12 months, some of these incidents (10%) involving flash mob tactics. No doubt, the trend is growing quite quickly.
The NRF report says that one in ten of multi-perpetrator crimes is a "flash mob." Not one in ten retail store locations being robbed by a flash mob.
... this seems like either incomprehensible negligence or outright fear mongering laying the groundwork for internet and social media limitations.
In July 2011, NRF polled retailers around the country to gauge the impact of multiple offender crimes. Ten percent of the 106 companies polled reported being victimized by multiple offender criminals who used flash mob tactics in the past 12 months. Half of these companies have experienced two to five incidents in the same period.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Open2Truth
The NRF report says that one in ten of multi-perpetrator crimes is a "flash mob." Not one in ten retail store locations being robbed by a flash mob.
Right. They also say 79% of retail store crimes are multi-perpetrator.
Foolow me here:
79% = .79
10% = .10
.79 X .1 = .079 (call it .08)
.08 = 8%
8% is about 1 in 12.
Why couldn't an MSM exploitation piece be expected to round-up 1 in 12 to "about 1 in 10?"
What did I miss, please?
jw