Comment by brookst
2 days ago
Are you saying you would continue shopping in a store where you regularly saw violence against people who might be thieves, on the assumption you’d never be mistaken for one?
2 days ago
Are you saying you would continue shopping in a store where you regularly saw violence against people who might be thieves, on the assumption you’d never be mistaken for one?
Yes. Thievery makes everything in the store more expensive. I have no interest in shopping at a store that has thieves in it and law enforcement does nothing to stop thieves in my area.
In the 1970s I saw a security guard or 2 chase a thief out of a store then tackle and detain him right in front of me. Didn't make me hesitate to go back to the store or cause any worry that guards might tackle me.
No, I’m saying that I would prefer to shop at a store that uses shopkeeper’s privilege to detain thieves using reasonable force.
The legal limits are very clear and simply enacting violence “against people who might be thieves” is not within them.
Generally agree with the sentiment but it can put you in a very hard place.
I was accused of shoplifting by a gigantic dude who moved in to detain me as I was going into my car. Could have gotten Walmart badge or paraphernalia from anywhere (most walmarts aren't that aggressive but this one was). I could have told him to eat shit and it was clear he was willing to get violent. At that point I would have had to decide whether to draw a weapon, because he clearly would have overpowered me and put me in imminent fear of death. I handed him my receipt with one hand while preparing for the possibility to draw a weapon with the other, thankfully he seemed satisfied and turned out to be a real Walmart employee.
I decided I didn't want to ever face that decision again so I never went back
I might be misinterpreting the situation, but the idea of going on a shopping expedition with a gun is absolutely foreign to me. The whole situation is wildly outside my experience.
I live in New Zealand.
4 replies →
The job of a security guard is to observe and report. Let the multi-billion dollar companies like walmart and home depot pay for actual law enforcement to be on hand when a security guard observes a suspected shoplifter. The security guard isn't paid enough or trained enough to get physical with customers.
Shopkeeper’s privilege exists as long-standing common law doctrine for a reason. No business should be forced to tolerate theft, or be forced to pay off-duty police officers to prevent it.
And no one is compelled to be a security guard; if the risks and pay don’t align, they’re free to walk away.
3 replies →