>The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. Except for most people, it do

>The problem is, you aren't just delaying yourself by 1 second, you're also delaying the other 100 people behind you by 1 second. Except for most people, it doesn't take an additional second. Past experience in crowded areas with narrow aisles and few exits tells you that you're going to be standing around waiting awhile for a chance to move. What else are you supposed to do, flail your arms, scream, and panic? Trample the people ahead of you? Fling your bag randomly, hitting someone else and causing a trip hazard? All our lives we are taught that in an emergency you should remain calm and collected and exit in good order. Of course you shouldn't waste time going back for unimportant things or things that are hard to get to, but if your bag is right there and you can pick it up in the same motion as standing up, that seems perfectly reasonable, rational, and logical. Or if you're standing around waiting for your chance to exit, it makes sense to pick it up. The article uses hyperbole like "Materialism has been winning out over self-preservation", "when it's your money or your life, money wins", and "leave your bags behind. Yes, all of them. Laptops and purses, too." But urging people to panic and act counter to everything they've ever been taught and everything that they've experienced in life, especially in the middle of a stressful emergency, doesn't really make sense. As others have said, fining people for behaving the way that they are supposed to behave does not make sense. Intercepting people and delaying the evacuation to remove their things does not make sense. What would make sense would be to improve egress routes if that is a problem. More exits and wider aisles would be a lot easier than trying to force everyone to act irrationally and counter-intuitively during an emergency.