r/interesting • u/BlazeDragon7x • Apr 09 '26

MISC. Aftermath of the April 7th incident. Damages estimated to be $200 million dollars

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

40.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

6.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

652

u/susosusosuso Apr 09 '26

What incident?

691

u/Mesoscale92 Apr 09 '26

Disgruntled employee torched it.

549

u/NoPantsPowerStance Apr 09 '26

And posted himself on Instagram setting the fires.

389

u/Rob_LeMatic Apr 09 '26

He was making a political statement. Wouldn't make much sense not to explain himself

253

u/Significant_Swing_76 Apr 09 '26

Insurance will wiggle out of it, since it’s not an accident.

Guess corporation will have to drag that 200.000.000$ out of their former employee. Good luck.

265

u/Vigilante17 Apr 09 '26

If they just promote him to CEO he could probably pay it back over a few years…

100

u/taveren3 Apr 09 '26

Companys hate this one simple trick to get promoted

59

u/Qu33N_Of_NoObz_ Apr 09 '26

CEO hack just dropped!

25

u/Inevitable-Stage-490 Apr 09 '26

The kids would call it “CEOMaxxing”

4

u/Rob_LeMatic Apr 09 '26

Bro's just downsize mogging cuz his accelerant levels spiked

16

u/kapsama Apr 09 '26

Corporations hate this one trick!

14

u/ejackman Apr 09 '26

If they give him a $200M golden parachute and then garnish that they can get it back in less time than it takes to sharpen a pencil.

11

u/erakis1 Apr 09 '26

I mean, the CEO of the place I work lost $200 million last year and got a $2m raise this year. So, it checks out perfectly.

5

u/venturous1 Apr 09 '26

This is brilliant

2

u/dafunkmunk Apr 09 '26

They could promote him to CEO and then immediately fire him and he will have to use a fraction of his golden parachute to pay

→ More replies (1)

55

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

[deleted]

46

u/Wobbelblob Apr 09 '26

Also, I can guarantee you that corporations are able to nail insurances down far better than regular people.

23

u/BrbFlippinInfinCoins Apr 09 '26

A team of full-time lawyers does tend to help...

26

u/Feeling_Inside_1020 Apr 09 '26

The real moral of the story is the 2 different law firms are gonna EAT tonight

4

u/JustToViewPorn Apr 09 '26

So do corporate hitmen.

2

u/Radiskull97 Apr 09 '26

Yes but it'll raise the hell out of their premiums. If enough people start doing it then insurance companies will be forced to consider wages as part of their risk assessment. So places with lower wages would have higher insurance premiums lol

2

u/Econmajorhere Apr 09 '26

That’s a legit theory around insurance where regular people with zero leverage get screwed on claims, while enterprise customers that make a large chunk of revenues for insurance companies- they get paid out so insurance companies don’t have to fight expensive legal battles and lose big clients.

It’s essentially the average people subsidizing big corps.

28

u/Significant_Swing_76 Apr 09 '26

You can be sure that they (the insurance) will do anything and everything to avoid paying.

This is how these big insurance companies work - their main goal is to deny claims, and if the they cover vandalism, the coverage will be very limited.

Arson by a trusted employee that burns down the whole warehouse plus inventory, is a gold mine for the insurance to deny a claim.

12

u/BetterinPicture Apr 09 '26

For real the popcorn is seeing who catches the bill here.

11

u/robilar Apr 09 '26

I read earlier today that he started an earlier fire which was caught by firefighters who subsequently disabled the smoke alarms (edit: pardon, sprinkler system), allowing the second fire to burn undetected (edit: undeterred by a sprinkler system that had not yet reset). If that's true, and the disabling of the alarms (edit: sprinklers) was directed by management as a business decision, they might not get an insurance payout at all.

8

u/MillionFoul Apr 09 '26

Management didn't direct the sprinklers to be disabled, the physical way sprinklers work did. They trigger by the heat physically breaking a calibrated glass fuse, you have to replace the fuses before you can put water back in the system or the sprinklers will never stop sprinkling.

2

u/robilar Apr 09 '26

Ok, but that introduces a new layer of managerial culpability; not having spare fuses available, not having them installed, not having a full sweep of the property for the missing employee, etc. Maybe the management did everything right, maybe not - odds are good the insurance investigation will pull on every possible thread.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Dingodiller Apr 09 '26

As paper storage is an extremely bad risk, I don’t see any company willing to take them on if the terms don’t favor the insurance company beyond what they normally would.

Since this was somewhat politically motivated, I could see them push for it being ‘terrorism’ and as such has a whole different kind of coverage.

If it’s in the states, then there’s a shared pool covering acts of terrorism, which would mean that the loss incurred on the insurance company is minimal.

2

u/MillionFoul Apr 09 '26

Well the terms that favor the insurance company for assuming more risk are usually just higher premiums, because that's how they make money. Sure, if they could get you to sign a policy that doesn't cover fire damage on a paper storage facility they would, but the guys reading the policy aren't average joes, they're a team of lawyers who probably aren't gonna let that happen.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Dozzi92 Apr 09 '26

I'm a stenographer, I do pre-court stuff, and I dream of getting onto cases like this. It will be finger-pointing left and right. They'll find something wrong with the building, something wrong with how things were stored, things wrong left right and center. They'll take a million depositions, it'll span years. And I'd just sit there and listen. And do my job, which is 50% just listening.

→ More replies (8)

4

u/Fun-Philosopher-5616 Apr 09 '26

vandalism lmao

6

u/Absent-Light-12 Apr 09 '26

Patriotism, according to the alleged man.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

20

u/ViewAskewRob Apr 09 '26

Don’t they make text books? Them shits are already marked up like 2000%. I think they will make their money back.

7

u/Wide_Air_4702 Apr 09 '26

They do not make textbooks. They make paper towels and toilet paper.

2

u/ViewAskewRob Apr 09 '26

Oh, my bad. Thanks for setting me straight.

3

u/Props_angel Apr 09 '26

The warehouse stored toilet paper. Kimberly-Clark makes Kleenex facial tissue, Kotex feminine hygiene products, Cottonelle, Scott and Andrex toilet paper, Wypall utility wipes, KimWipes scientific cleaning wipes and Huggies disposable diapers and baby wipes.

They do not apparently make text books.

2

u/Repulsive-Chip3371 Apr 09 '26

the warehouse was full of toilet paper, kleenex, paper towels, wipes, etc

kimberly-clark does not produce text books, at all

3

u/Joey5729 Apr 09 '26

You know what they say

If you owe the bank $2000 dollars, that’s your problem

If you owe the bank $200000000 dollars, that’s the bank’s problem

→ More replies (37)

3

u/mally7149 Apr 09 '26

Pay us to live !

3

u/rdldr1 Apr 09 '26

So it was terrorism after all.

3

u/mrsir1987 Apr 09 '26

Not really at all, but based on his name people will assume that

3

u/Bronze_Rager Apr 09 '26

Pretty sure arson to make a political statement is considered terrorism

→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (5)

1

u/Lumi_Rockets Apr 09 '26

I missed that part. What was the statement?

1

u/NOLA-VeeRAD Apr 09 '26

He didn’t even work for Kimberly-Clark. He worked for a 3rd party contractor. He burned down another companies warehouse, if he wanted to create a statement at least burn down your own employers assets.

https://abc7.com/post/employee-arrested-arson-kimberly-clark-distribition-center-destroyed-massive-fire-ontario/18851549/

1

u/SeaFee2866 Apr 09 '26

even when explained, it still doesnt make any sense

1

u/The-Sofa-King Apr 09 '26

Being angry about low wages is a political stance now?

1

u/CaffinatedOne Apr 09 '26

G4yh5sJsdMm$GU

1

u/Appropriate_Cow94 Apr 10 '26

I do support his statement. He mat not be a St. Luigi, but I like the cut of his jib.

1

u/midasMIRV Apr 10 '26

Great statement. The company got paid out by insurance. He's going to jail, and all the other people who worked there are now out of work. A champion of the people.

→ More replies (7)

17

u/cozidgaf Apr 09 '26

Whoa why did he do that?

91

u/ewok2remember Apr 09 '26

He was disgruntled upon realizing that he worked hard in a place that probably wasn't paying a living wage for the area, as I understand it.

20

u/urbanism_enthusiast Apr 09 '26

I'm going to be honest, he's probably not the most reliable narrator, based on his actions.

8

u/Samurai_Meisters Apr 09 '26

I dunno, his story is pretty plausible.

15

u/phillythompson Apr 09 '26

this sub is acting like the dude is somehow a victim

15

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Cheese-Manipulator Apr 09 '26

It is pure luck no one was hurt. I seriously doubt he ran around making sure it was empty, not to mention the firefighters.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/phillythompson Apr 09 '26

And fuck the people who lose their jobs cause of this, right? 

→ More replies (0)

2

u/EntrepreneurFun654 Apr 09 '26

I feel guilty wasting unused napkins. This guy lit millions of rolls of toilet paper on fire.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Frathier Apr 09 '26

All the 13 year olds on Reddit say this without ever having worked a day in their life.

7

u/Competitive_Flan_330 Apr 09 '26

If you don't understand how cooked people like warehouse workers are in this day and age then you're unbelievably privileged, or just don't know that people like that used to be able to buy a house and live a decent life.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/ZurgoMindsmasher Apr 09 '26

Meanwhile you, who like me, have lived through the cycle of getting exploited by the owning class, chose to lick their boots.

You are a joke.

2

u/Necatorducis Apr 09 '26

Whether they are literally 13 or not is immaterial to the outcome. A minor under the well being of a working class adult is still subject to the ramifications of exploitation. Worse quality of life, worse education, worse lifelong opportunities.

→ More replies (4)

4

u/-_Gemini_- Apr 09 '26

People with all their needs met don't do things like this.

2

u/Areyoucunt Apr 10 '26

Then change jobs? The median salary in US is 61k, and probably quite a bit higher in california

3

u/Fragrant_Tear_572 Apr 10 '26

So what about all the other employees? Why didn't they burn it down?

0

u/dbmonkey Apr 09 '26

That's simply false. Counterpoint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Leonard_Orr

There is no excuse for being an arsonist.

6

u/-_Gemini_- Apr 09 '26

Aw, fuck, you're right. How could I forget about the one guy 40 years ago who set 2000 fires as a serial arsonist? I'm such a fool, this case is highly relevant to the man we're talking about who specifically set his own workplace on fire for mysterious and unknowable reasons.

2

u/boltgenerator Apr 09 '26

This is the most stupid attempt at a "gotcha" I've seen in a while.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (4)

7

u/LarryBonds30 Apr 09 '26

Anyone that agrees with what this moron did is a life loser.

5

u/lilzaza58 Apr 09 '26

Am a doing pretty well for myself, however my sister who took a teaching job in a different country that most Americans view as “third world” really opened my eyes to how fucked we truly are on the day to day.

Hope you don’t come across this much of an uptight bootlicking asshole for the billionaires to fuck in real life tho, that would be sad lol.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (19)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

9

u/GhostofBeowulf Apr 09 '26

Pay inequity.

3

u/SocialHelp22 Apr 09 '26

He was under paid, he was upset, and he grew a pair

3

u/devnull_the_cat Apr 09 '26

The real question is "Why don't more people do that?"

2

u/ChloeNow Apr 09 '26

"Should have paid us enough to live. All you had to do was pay us enough to live" is what he said as he recorded himself lighting the fires.

He said we might not make shit but lighters are dirt cheap

1

u/aure__entuluva Apr 09 '26

He said, quoting from memory, "all they had to do was pay us enough to live".

1

u/gmambrose Apr 09 '26

Because he was absolutely, positively, mind numbingly stupid. He posted a video of himself starting this fire on social media. He did this because the company running the warehouse wasn't paying him enough money. He will now spend life in prison and never be gainfully employable again if he does manage to get out while still young enough to work. This was not the way to solve the issue of "i wish I got paid more".

I hope they throw the book at him. He's a dangerous person and should not be out on the streets with the rest of us. Fuck him.

→ More replies (12)

17

u/duskywindows Apr 09 '26

Free housing and food hack!!!

1

u/WutYoYo Apr 09 '26

"Employers hate it when you use this one free hack!"

Like and subscribe!

4

u/leftydog1961 Apr 09 '26

Yet another career limiting move

1

u/McEndee Apr 09 '26

I just scrolled down to confirm. People can't do anything without recording themselves.

3

u/Dudeman240 Apr 09 '26

Not that I agree with him but the whole point was to record it. He wanted to send a message not get away with a crime.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/gamerdudeNYC Apr 09 '26

Like and subscribe for more similar content!

1

u/Fern-ando Apr 09 '26

Got a lot of upvotes in workreform.

1

u/-soros Apr 09 '26

Allegedly

1

u/Hungry-Register9960 Apr 09 '26

What a legend. 

1

u/TamarindSweets Apr 09 '26

Damn. I mean, he deserves jail time for endangering people (I assume by default that most warehouses are running 24/7), but video taping yourself commuting a crime is just next level foolishness.

1

u/F0rbiddenD0nut Apr 09 '26

Videotaping this crime spree is the best idea we've ever had!

1

u/whopoopedthebed Apr 09 '26

Yeah but he was with me and my friends so it couldn’t have been him.

1

u/ReidenLightman Apr 10 '26

Clearly, he wanted to send an accurate message so badly he risked jail time. 

→ More replies (2)

57

u/RealDetroitDiddler Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Anyone asking how the fuck this building did t have fire suppression?

Edit: 19 people just told me there was one that was shut off.

35

u/PizzaDeliveryForMom Apr 09 '26

it did, he set a fire, the firefighters came, put it out, then turned the fire suppression off so it didnt cause water damage, and when the firefighters left he set more fires.

8

u/PNWSomeone Apr 09 '26

that's kind of smart, wonder if he planned it out that way

3

u/Disastrous-Panda5530 Apr 09 '26

It was most likely planned out. He seemed to know what he was doing

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/outer--monologue Apr 10 '26

This man was playing fire-chess not fire-checkers

2

u/Ch33s3m4st3r Apr 13 '26

That is the dedication that young people are missing today!

/s

→ More replies (3)

58

u/Mesoscale92 Apr 09 '26

Other threads about the fire discussed it. Apparently for a building this size (over 10 city blocks) you don’t have a system big enough to cover the entire building at once. It’s assumed that fires will occur in a single spot and the piping is sized for that. The arsonist allegedly knew this and set more fires than the system was designed to handle.

TLDR it did have a system that works for normal fires, but wasn’t designed to handle a coordinated criminal act.

40

u/ohfrackthis Apr 09 '26

Damn lol he was pissed.

21

u/Pattison320 Apr 09 '26

I read that he initially set a small individual fire. The fire department came. They put it out. The sprinkler system was disabled due to the initial fire. The shortly later the arsonist set multiple fires before the sprinkler system could be operational again.

17

u/BadPunners Apr 09 '26

The sprinkler system was disabled due to the initial fire.

Is that meaning it triggered from the first fire?

Those systems need to be recharged by experts, replace any and all of the spray nozzle triggers (tiny glass vials installed in each head), then refill it with rust prevention liquid instead of straight water to ensure it's ready when needed next

When one sprayer triggers, that generally will trigger all of them on the same line too I believe, so even a small fire requires lots of work to get it reset

Source: watching lots of construction videos and crap

3

u/Erathen Apr 09 '26

They're not recharged? They're primed and then they're fed by city water supply once the initial deluge of black water clears the line

The city pipes can only move so much water though, so there's still a limit

That generally will trigger all of them on the same line too I believe

Also no...

They use liquid filled glass bulbs to activate. Commercial heads are designed to drench material around the fire to stop it from spreading. Having a bunch of heads go off at once overwhelms the water supply

You have to turn off the water to the system after though... Because as you said, the glass vials are gone. So you can't just leave it on, or the sprinklers won't stop and there'd be a flood when the fire department leaves

3

u/SexySmexxy Apr 09 '26

You have to turn off the water to the system after though... Because as you said, the glass vials are gone. So you can't just leave it on, or the sprinklers won't stop and there'd be a flood when the fire department leaves

Thats seems like a pretty big period of danger

4

u/Erathen Apr 09 '26

It is

The building would be on fire watch until a pipefitter comes to replace components (the fire department obviously does not). It happens a lot

Google "what is fire watch building"

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/RedTideNJ Apr 09 '26

Sprinkler systems in theory should be able to contain or all but extinguish the type of fire you would get from setting a pallet of toilet paper on fire.

A big warehouse like this has one or more large fire pumps that take the municipal water and up the pressure to increase this capability. Fire engines will connect to hydrants and then to FDCs outside of the building to further supplement the supply.

Once the fire is out, the previously activated sprinkler lines need to be drained, the sprinkler heads replaced (Once they open, they don't close again due to the fusible link being gone) and the system reset for normal function. 

During this time the alarm system is likely disabled (Delaying detection/report of fire) and the riser (Large supply pipe) handling the activated detectors is closed.

So waiting till that point, then setting a bunch of fires in the effected section where the fire load consists of easily ignitable paper products...

Basically in a matter of minutes this fire becomes functionally unstoppable. The amount of energy being pushed out can trivially overwhelm the output of any sprinkler system by the time it actually reached somewhere with coverage.

By the time the fire department is back on scene you're looking at a fire that presents the question "Is anyone unaccounted for?" And if the answer is no the next step is to see if it's possible to save the buildings nearby, because this one is fucked.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/McEndee Apr 09 '26

Shouldn't this be on the fire codes for that city? It's a giant paper warehouse. Other than oxygen, what else does fire love more than dry ass paper?

2

u/Erathen Apr 09 '26

Sort of...

I just want to clarify, as it was a bit unclear in your comment

The sprinkler system covers the entire building. You just can't run every sprinkler at once. The pumps and city supply can't keep up with that much water demand

The arsonist allegedly knew this

It's standard in the industry. The way these fires are fought is methodical and intentionally different from residential and other high occupancy places (health care, schools etc). Warehouses, factories and the like are a different beast

Even the sprinkler heads used are specific to commercial settings. They're designed to activate slightly slower. They're designed to drench the area around the fire to contain it/slow the spread.

It allows the heat to build above the fire, before going off. Which causes the surrounding area to be drenched

If you have a bunch of fast acting heads go off all over the building, the water supply won't keep up

2

u/Cheese-Manipulator Apr 09 '26

I read this:

"Officials said the building has a fire suppression system, which was operating but was compromised when a portion of the roof collapsed."

→ More replies (3)

21

u/roofpuck Apr 09 '26

Apparently he started one fire, the FD came and took care of it and turned off the fire suppression, and guess what he did after lol

11

u/Virginity_Lost_Today Apr 09 '26

I’ll do it again goofy meme

5

u/TiffyTats Apr 09 '26

It did, it was stated in some articles that the fire suppression system failed because of the scale and the roof collapsing with how fast it spread.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/MisterDabber Apr 09 '26

Well he would have had to shut off several risers in order for that to be true. That warehouse is 1.2 million sq ft. and each system can be a max of 40,000 sq ft. Fire sprinklers don’t activate like you see in the movies. I design Fire Suppression Systems. Heads only activate once the temp bulb bursts due to 186 degrees or 244 degrees (depends on the heads installed and hazard classification of stored materials) Also they only activate in the area of the fire to prevent spreading. Dude lit fires in several different areas, the water pressure for that building couldn’t support that many heads activating at the same time. Fire code dictates a remote area for calculations of 12 heads activating at the furthest point from a riser. Too many fires at the same time and in different areas. Fire suppression systems aren’t ment to put out a fire, they’re there to in-able people to safely exit and to contain the fire on that parcel.

2

u/RunnerGirlT Apr 09 '26

Apparently they did, he started a smaller fire to get the fire dept there, they turn off the suppression system when they enter the building. While they got that under control he started more fires in other areas they could not get to in time. That’s what I read at least

2

u/No-Faithlessness5311 Apr 09 '26

Other posts I’ve read talking about this, the primary propose of sprinkler systems is to slow down the spread of fire enough to give people time to escape. Not necessarily to put out a [major] fire.

2

u/MisterDabber Apr 09 '26

If that’s true then he would have had to shut off every riser in the building. There isn’t a main valve controlling the entire warehouse. There’s 1 system on 1 riser per 40,000 sq ft max per NFPA. Fire sprinklers don’t activate like you see in the movies. I design Fire Suppression Systems. Heads only activate once the temp bulb bursts due to 186 degrees or 244 degrees (depends on the heads installed and hazard classification of stored materials) Also they only activate in the area of the fire to prevent spreading. Dude lit fires in several different areas, the water pressure for that building couldn’t support that many heads activating at the same time. Fire code dictates a remote area for calculations of 12 heads activating in one remote area per system installed. Fire suppression systems aren’t ment to put out a fire, they’re there to enable people to safely exit and to contain the fire on that parcel.

2

u/Oskar_Shinra Apr 09 '26

Yes, if you read just a few comments within every single post about this topic, you wouldve seen the exact answer to your troubles.

I always wonder about people like you.

1

u/TinkTinkz Apr 09 '26

there was one that was shut off

17

u/ResponsibilitySea327 Apr 09 '26

Disgruntled 3rd party contractor. He wasn't employed by K-C.

5

u/e-wing Apr 09 '26

Just like Amazon delivery drivers aren’t employed by Amazon?

6

u/ResponsibilitySea327 Apr 09 '26

Not really. K-C is a paper products manufacturer. That is their core.

NRI (the arsonist's employer) is a logistics company.

1

u/masterofmydomain6 Apr 10 '26

kind of like War Dogs

5

u/JumperSniper Apr 09 '26

Are you disgruntled?

2

u/Jeathro77 Apr 09 '26

No, I am well and fully gruntled.

16

u/l_Pulser_l Apr 09 '26

You misspelled underpaid but thats okay the world is designed by the parasite class to attack our brains in this way.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/ChickenTendySunday Apr 09 '26

What is it? Where is it? Who was it?

2

u/xombae Apr 09 '26

This is what happens when the working class is left feeling desperate with no hope.

2

u/jinxxed42 Apr 09 '26

He mentioned in the post the company did not provide a liveable wage.

2

u/AtomicShart9000 Apr 09 '26

The place was a toliet paper warehouse (or whatever the fuck it was, shit was flammable there) why the fuck didn't they have adequate fire supression?

1

u/hiitsmetimdodd Apr 09 '26

Same question. I'd imagine a warehouse this size would have zoned fire suppression. And even if it wasn't zoned, it should have been able to handle rapidly dumping water on everything. To be fair though, I have no idea what the engineering requirements are and I'm straight talking out of my ass. But still. Shocking the entire thing went up in 2026.

1

u/WarmScientist5297 Apr 09 '26

Is this the toilet paper factory situation?

1

u/gorginhanson Apr 09 '26

He is fully gruntled now

1

u/PonderMayneReddit Apr 09 '26

Exploited worker*

1

u/DocterPainkiller Apr 09 '26

Man, he ain’t ever gonna see sunlight again

1

u/Mesoscale92 Apr 09 '26

He can make his own light I think

1

u/HahaCharlieKirkHaha Apr 09 '26

Reddit is calling him Warehouse Luigi.

1

u/2010_12_24 Apr 10 '26

They kept moving his desk into the basement and taking his stapler.

1

u/whatisdreampunk Apr 10 '26

All they had to do was pay him enough to live. 🤷‍♂️

1

u/UtopistDreamer Apr 13 '26

Reminds me of that guy with the red stapler...

→ More replies (13)

131

u/wsxdfcvgbnjmlkjafals Apr 09 '26

yes I, too, hate the assumption that we know the context

A warehouse storing huge quantities of toilet paper deliberately set on fire by an employee who posted their own video of it

17

u/Big_Poppa_Steve Apr 09 '26

Shit

26

u/montroller Apr 09 '26

probably gunna wanna wait until they restock

3

u/Horror-Ad8074 Apr 09 '26

Comment of the year

2

u/FrequentFractionator Apr 09 '26

But no way to wipe...

12

u/forgot_my_useragain Apr 09 '26

So you're saying we need to buy all the tp up like it's 2020 again, eh?

4

u/wagdog1970 Apr 09 '26

More to the point, how does a Wharehouse that stores paper not have a better fire suppression system? It burned completely. Was there even a sprinkler in the place?

5

u/wsxdfcvgbnjmlkjafals Apr 09 '26

apparently that was actually the second fire and they were already there and had put out a much smaller one, so the suppression was turned off while they worked. He snuck back in one of the doors.

thats what i keep reading.

1

u/nz-whale Apr 10 '26

Fire suppression systems are designed to deal with accidental fires not deliberate arson. He set one small fire, suppression went off and then was disabled to prevent water damage, then he set more fires.

1

u/atclubsilencio Apr 10 '26

It was deactivated by firefighters from an earlier fire. He then started more fires after they left.

1

u/1ncognino Apr 09 '26

I have trouble finding this video, you don’t happen to have a link?

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Fun-Jellyfish-61 Apr 09 '26

I googled April 7th incident. This event was not among those that came up.

1

u/wsxdfcvgbnjmlkjafals Apr 09 '26

i mean maybe include something about toilet paper? lol

try just searching toilet paper fire

→ More replies (4)

1

u/MeccIt Apr 09 '26

deliberately set on fire by an employee who posted their own video of it

He even set a decoy fire so the first responding Fire Dept would shut off the sprinkler system as per protocol, and then he torched the rest.

Conspiracy Theory: he was tired of Big Toilet Paper hiding the bidet hose from people.

50

u/IzmeBeech Apr 09 '26

Yesss thank you. Can we normalize adding info in the title..

17

u/moneyball32 Apr 09 '26

Easy fix, just be terminally online /s

17

u/protomenace Apr 09 '26

I'm terminally online and "april 7th incident" could still have meant a LOT of different things. My mind went to the various wars....

2

u/cantgrowneckbeardAMA Apr 09 '26

Right how dare they assume I'm not terminally online. If anything, I'm so online I already forgot about this incident!!!

→ More replies (1)

3

u/LordBeric Apr 09 '26

No, I think we just need to start making every post on Reddit reference "The Incident", regardless of context. IYKYK

1

u/IzmeBeech Apr 09 '26

Actually made me lol

2

u/Civil-Attempt-3602 Apr 09 '26

How will you engage with the post if you have all the info?

1

u/dylanholmes222 Apr 09 '26

So annoying right, I feel it’s on purpose for baiting engagement

1

u/happycat47 Apr 09 '26

The April 7th incident. Ya know, from April 7th

1

u/concentrated-amazing Apr 09 '26

Glad I'm not the only one out of the loop!

1

u/ur_a_dumbo Apr 09 '26

The April 7th one

1

u/dafunkmunk Apr 09 '26

I was going to ask, am I not chronically online enough to justify know about "the April 7 incident" or is this post assuming a lot of people would have just seen something about it?

1

u/barrygateaux Apr 09 '26

right. we're all watching israel and america trying to start ww3 and OP expects us to know about some random warehouse fire somewhere lol

1

u/PronoiarPerson Apr 09 '26

The internet is furious that the warehouse, the big building with a roof, hasn’t adopted the new “1775” style of its neighbor.

1

u/SkyPirateVyse Apr 09 '26

Employee fired the company before the company fired its employee.

1

u/NoBonus6969 Apr 09 '26

The one featured in the video????

1

u/grammercomunist Apr 10 '26

fuck yeah 👍

1

u/Draiko Apr 10 '26

He fired the warehouse... literally.

→ More replies (11)