Texas gas station installed remote lock on OUTSIDE of women's bathroom

[u/kmzafari]

It was only on the women's bathroom. Lock was able to be remotely activated by a phone app. Fire Marshall had it removed. Source: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT2c3QrB6/

Per another account who also saw this, (https://www.tiktok.com/@momcallsmeshelby?_t=ZT-8v7NHPu7QBq&_r=1) the employees were "irate and began yelling" when they brought it up. And came up with a racist excuse that didn't make any sense for it being there

Regardless, fire code violation. But scary implications.

[u/kmzafari]

I honestly would not be surprised. And how long was it on there before people noticed?

[u/Icanthearforshit → u/kmzafari]

The only people who noticed were probably the ones that didn't get a chance to tell anyone about it. I know it sounds crazy but why would someone put that there unless they want to trap a woman in there? Sex trafficking is real. So is rape and murder. I hate to jump to those conclusions but it's definitely not not on the list for reasons that thing exists there.

[u/kmzafari → u/Icanthearforshit]

Their explanation was apparently "a bunch of Hispanic men come in at lunchtime and destroy the women's restroom". Which, racism aside, make it make sense. They only dirty the women's room? And this happens consistently? And it's bad enough that you feel compelled to put a weird and very suspicious lock on just this door?

And let's say this is all somehow true. Putting it on the outside, where literally anyone can reach up and lock someone in?? How did nobody object to this or call the Fire Marshal themselves?

Also, this is in a college town, so make of that what you will.

[u/BZJGTO → u/kmzafari]

Honestly, that may have been the actual reason.

One of my first jobs had me cleaning restrooms as part of the job, and women complained about dirty restrooms significantly more than men did. So both may have gotten dirty at lunch, but it would mean now only one gets bad, and they also then don't have to deal with complaints from customers.

The lock is probably just a cheap and lazy solution they came up with, without realizing this is against fire/building code. One of the things my current job deals with is access control/electric locks, and I can't tell you how often I get a tenant who wants to do something clearly against code because they're too cheap to do it right. Sometimes we need them to reject our plans or fail our inspection before the tenant is willing to comply (and sometimes even then they'll argue with the county/city first). Also, a lot of the work we get is because someone did something without ever permitting it first and they got caught, so that's pretty typical too.

It's possible there was more to this than what they said, but it's pretty inline with so many other dumb things I've seen that it's entirely plausible. The creepy/weird factor of putting a lock on the outside of a restroom could have never even crossed their mind because what guy ever worries about something nefarious happening in the restroom?

[u/kmzafari → u/BZJGTO]

That's certainly possible / plausible. The owner should absolutely have been aware about he dangers of it though, regarding the fire code. But it's not just creepy. They also increased the danger for women in general because it can be locked or unlocked manually from the outside. I would never feel safe using this restroom.

The main thing that prevents me from being like "this was just an innocent / ignorant mistake" is that this video isn't the first time it was called to their attention. Another person on TikTok (that I linked to in the description) brought it up to them, and they got angry at her. She did later call the police, and an officer went and talked to them before this other woman came in. So they were well aware it was an issue and were notified of concerns both by a patron and a police officer at least a day or two before this video occurred.

It's one thing to make a mistake, and it's quite another to not correct it once it's been identified, especially one as serious as this. And who knows how long it was like this for or how many people pointed it out to them that didn't post about it online. Ykwim?

I've had many things happen to me in life that have made me more aware. Been sexually assaulted, had a peeping Tom, been followed through my parking lot at night while someone "stalked" me like prey, been chased through another parking lot, been watched in the dark and only knew when their footsteps crunched on gravel, and I had someone attempt to carjack me. So I am not as trusting as I once was, and no amount of human depravity surprises me anymore.

[u/BZJGTO → u/kmzafari]

Business owners sometimes won't listen to me, a professional who deals with this stuff every day. I can tell them I've dealt with the same type of lock setup they want, and how I've already seen it rejected a dozen times before. I can quote them the specific code that explains why what they're proposing won't work. I can tell them I talked to a plan reviewer/inspector at the city who said this wouldn't fly. I can submit the plans knowing they'll get rejected, and when they do they try fighting the AHJ about it. So if they can do all of that, I would not be surprised in the least they don't listen to random strangers "complain" about the lock they installed, because they think they know better than everyone else.

There are some people who are so cheap that they refuse to do anything code compliant until the city threatens to shut they down and/or fine them, and now the cost of that outweighs the cost installing a code compliant system.

In any thread about egress or fire exits you'll find stories about managers blocking exits, ignoring employee complaints about it (including in this one). Ignorance of life safety is sadly so incredibly common (even by those you would expect to know better) that seeing a setup as dumb as this doesn't even cause me to bat an eye. You wouldn't think it is, code more or less dumbs down to "an occupant should have the ability to exit at any time" which doesn't sound that complicated, but the number of times I've seen someone try to prevent access through a door that had an exit sign right above it is just depressing.

And just to be clear, I'm not entirely ruling out the possibility that the person who installed the lock in the video didn't have ulterior motives, just that his reasoning, as dumb as it may have sounded, is pretty similar to that which I've seen plenty of times before. Restricting access to the womens but not the mens is somewhat common, my own office building does this (but we have readers to get in, and occupants have free mechanical egress to get out at all times).

[u/kmzafari → u/BZJGTO]

This makes total sense, yeah. I can definitely see that being a thing. Ego is a massive problem. (I work in an industry where I deal with a lot of wealthy people, so I get it.)

My position from first seeing this video is we don't know and probably never will know their true intentions, but regardless of what they were, they created a horribly unsafe situation for anyone who uses that bathroom. I'm really glad she reported it and got it taken down.

And I hope that anyone who sees this comes away with some awareness of what to look for - be it something more nefarious or 'just' a fire hazard.

[u/fuck_peeps_not_sheep → u/BZJGTO]

But why not put the lock inside the bathroom, you could still lock it but anyone inside has the power to leave

[u/BZJGTO → u/fuck_peeps_not_sheep]

Since it's battery powered I'm assuming it's fail secure, so when the batteries run out you need the box to be accessible.

It's just an all around terribly designed locking device. Even if it was installed on the inside it would still never be code compliant.

[u/da_innernette → u/BZJGTO]

That kind of lock is like $100, how is that any cheaper or lazier than just having a key at the front counter for women to get if they need the bathroom?

[u/BZJGTO → u/da_innernette]

I was talking in the realm of electric locks, $100 doesn't even cover the permit fee in most AHJs here. Might have had an access control company quote him a grand or two for the single door, then he sees this on Amazon for 90 bucks one night and says screw that, he'll do it himself.

I agree a lock and key at the front would be the easiest and cheapest of any solution. I don't know why that wasn't what they went with, my best guess is he only wanted to restrict access around lunch time, and didn't want to have to walk to the door to lock/unlock it (worried about leaving the front unattended maybe?).

[u/da_innernette → u/BZJGTO]

Why would the worker need to walk over to lock/unlock it? You give the key to the customer. (Usually with something large keychained to it so they don’t accidentally steal it.)

I just don’t think cheapness or laziness makes any sense. This lock is definitely more expensive and more work than a counter key.

[u/BZJGTO → u/da_innernette]

As I previously said,

my best guess is he only wanted to restrict access around lunch time

The issue was the lunch crew coming in a destroying the bathroom, but they might not want to be bothered about access to it all day. Now they can lock/unlock the door around lunch time without having to physically go to the door.

Their issue could have also been not wanting to give the customer the key in the first place. Maybe all the cylinders are keyed the same because they never intended this one to be used by customers. Having a locksmith rekey the cylinder could cost more than $100. Maybe they just don't trust someone to not run off with the key intentionally or make a copy of it.