So Who REALLY pays?

[ThirdOfFive]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

[Arctic Fox]

We occasionally get stopped and have our receipt checked when leaving Walmart because we use our own bags, but they are always very polite and we'd rather undergo that than pay more.

I suspect they have security cameras, but whether they look at the footage...

[Two Bills]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

Same here in UK. Theft from stores is so bad, even meat has security tags on it. Many supermarkets have increased security personnel, as attacks on staff are daily occurrences, both verbal and physical.
Shoplifting is endemic, and the perps are as bold as brass, because 99% of the time they know there will be no retribution.
It is all built into the final cost to the customer. :shrug:

[Rainger99]

[/I]=Two Bills;2280161]
Shoplifting is endemic, and the perps are as bold as brass, because 99% of the time they know there will be no retribution.

That is the issue. Why aren’t prosecutors going after these people?

[Dusty_Star]

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

I think this is a good, thoughtful question & I don't know the answer.
I did read recently (December 4th issue) in the online news site (I believe banned from this site), that a Walmart employee was arrested in her home for stealing snacks. She took items like Pepsi & consumed them in the break room & then when her shift was over she left without paying for them. I am not supporting her, I think theft is wrong & if she has memory issues, (forgetting to pay), then she should try to pay at the time she took the snacks.
But what does this say to your question? Is Walmart only going after low hanging fruit, regardless of cost? Is Walmart more stringent with employees than customers? Is there any consideration of the price of the stolen items? The article says they have video of six incidents. Are some of these questions decided solely by in store security personnel? Was the lady you spoke to right about the $400 theft, or did she not know the anwser & gave her opinion?
I don't know any of the answers. But am looking forward to the discussion.

[ThirdOfFive]

I think this is a good, thoughtful question & I don't know the answer.
I did read recently (December 4th issue) in the online news site (I believe banned from this site), that a Walmart employee was arrested in her home for stealing snacks. She took items like Pepsi & consumed them in the break room & then when her shift was over she left without paying for them. I am not supporting her, I think theft is wrong & if she has memory issues, (forgetting to pay), then she should try to pay at the time she took the snacks.
But what does this say to your question? Is Walmart only going after low hanging fruit, regardless of cost? Is Walmart more stringent with employees than customers? Is there any consideration of the price of the stolen items? The article says they have video of six incidents. Are some of these questions decided solely by in store security personnel? Was the lady you spoke to right about the $400 theft, or did she not know the anwser & gave her opinion?
I don't know any of the answers. But am looking forward to the discussion.
Thought-provoking comment about the Wal-Mart employee getting nailed for essentially stealing snacks.

Did some quick research on the topic of employee theft: statistics current as of this past September indicate that Wal-Mart employees are responsible for 28.85% of Wal-Mart losses due to theft. That is more than one in four. Again, this is most likely based on the number of workers actually being caught: the actual loss percentage is probably much greater due to the employees having at least some idea how to circumvent "the system" when engaging in theft. Wal-Mart certainly isn't alone in this, being followed closely by Home Depot and Target.

One unsettling stat I ran across was that the average retail theft by a "shopper" was around $100, while the average loss per employee incident leading to dismissal and/or legal action was over $400. This isn't exactly apples to apples though: a case against an employee may have been built up over several weeks, while the "per shopper" would logically be per incident. In any case, a quarter or more of the total retail "shrinkage" (love that word!) is huge.

A few years back, I remember a whole lot of animated discussion about the efficacy of employee background checks prior to hiring. Several advocacy groups maintained that such checks would disproportionately target minorities as statistically speaking the thought was they they'd be more likely to be involved in the sort of petty crime, leading to a criminal record, than would Caucasians. I'm not sure I agree with that--all ethnicities, if one checks police data, seem to be adequately represented when it comes to retail theft--but that outcry did have some effect, notably "Ban the Box" policies implemented by several states which effectively removed any questions relating to previous criminal activity when employees filled out applications for employment, and employers "encouraged" to first consider the prospective employee's qualifications for the position regardless of any criminal history. Federal regulations took things even further, through implementation of the "Fair Chance Act (2019) which prohibits federal agencies and contractors from requesting criminal background information from job applicants prior to extending an offer".

So...on the one hand America seems to be in pretty significant need of better screening for employees, while on the other we seem bent on hamstringing the very methods needed to assure those better screenings!

Answer?

[Topspinmo]

Not bold to me. I would never think of five finger discount. I was at Lowe’s yesterday brought some landscaping products. Watch lady ring it up, two items that she scanned didn’t total up on ticket. I knew exactly how much I was buying. I immediately said something didn’t ring up cause it don’t match what I brought. She looked over the recipe and found the two bags that beeped, but didn’t total. Majority of us are honest. Yes, I believe that.:22yikes:

[Two Bills]

[QUOTE=Two Bills;2280161]
Shoplifting is endemic, and the perps are as bold as brass, because 99% of the time they know there will be no retribution.
That is the issue. Why aren’t prosecutors going after these people?


To be honest I haven't a clue. It probably has to do with costs all round. :shrug:

Half the shops will not press charges.
Courts give offenders a slap on wrist, if shop does prosecute.
Lawyers to prosecute is a cost added to stores.
State will have to pay culprits lawyers costs, as they will have no income in majority of cases.
Judges, court officials, police, jail etc. all add to cost and a law of diminishing return.
Better to let store suck it up, and shoppers cover the increases in costs!
JMO.

[cjrjck]

The key element is whether local prosecutors will pursue convictions for those accused of shoplifting. In many locations, especially some big cities the answer is no. So that is why some police departments and some retailers have given up on pressing charges against shoplifters. I doubt very much that is the case here in TV or the surrounding areas. I can't imagine any of the local district attorneys turning a blind eye to this problem. Also, the lines at the doors of the nearby Sam's Club, and BJs Warehouse as well as other retailers tell me they are serious about deterring theft.

[ThirdOfFive]

Not bold to me. I would never think of five finger discount. I was at Lowe’s yesterday brought some landscaping products. Watch lady ring it up, two items that she scanned didn’t total up on ticket. I knew exactly how much I was buying. I immediately said something didn’t ring up cause it don’t match what I brought. She looked over the recipe and found the two bags that beeped, but didn’t total. Majority of us are honest. Yes, I believe that.:22yikes:
I would hope you are correct about honesty. But there again--just how far does that go? Clicking around this morning I found several websites that had "employee theft" up in the 80% range. Those numbers are suspect (as I believe most statistics have come to be, in this day and age) if for no other reason "theft" could be an innocent a thing as sticking a pen in your pocket from the office supply room and forgetting it there when it comes time to go home. But there seems little doubt that, overall, dishonesty and stealing is a significant concern in America (and probably a lot of other countries) today.

I can't say I would never shoplift. I did once--12 years old--and felt so guilty I went back to the store the next day and surreptitiously left a quarter on the counter to (more than) pay for the package of licorice I had swiped. I certainly wouldn't do it today. But far too many others, apparently, would.

[Blueblaze]

The obvious disintegration of American society was one of the main reasons we retired to this relatively remote corner of Florida, surrounded by 100,000 baby boomers rather than millions of angry children.

Why is it happening? Lots of reasons come to mind, but mostly I think it's just entropy. 200 years seems to be the limit for any civilization that achieves any degree of freedom from the standard human condition of poverty under the heel of some tyrant. By the 10th generation, the population typically becomes too fat, dumb, and happy to pass on the values that led to general prosperity in the first place -- or for that matter, bother to defend themselves from the jealous invaders who ignorantly believe that freedom and prosperity have something to do with geography. It's a sad scenario that has played out over and over throughout history.

Entropy is the property the universe that causes order to disintegrate to into disorder. The common word for it is "evil".

[ThirdOfFive]

"By the 10th generation, the population typically becomes too fat, dumb, and happy to pass on the values that led to general prosperity in the first place -- or for that matter, bother to defend themselves from the jealous invaders who ignorantly believe that freedom and prosperity have something to do with geography."

Scary thing is, you're probably right.

“Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.” That quote from G. Michael Hopf’s novel “Those Who Remain” sums it up pretty well. The values needed to CREATE a solid society are apparently not the same ones needed to maintain a solid society: when survival is replaced by "keeping up with the Joneses", in whatever form that is manifested, then things like petty (and not-so-petty) theft becomes common--and, apparently, excusable. That is proven, I think, by the fact that only about 15% of shoplifting is due to economic need. The overwhelming majority of it is, bluntly, greed. Yet for the most part we look the other way, because our well-being is not directly and immediately threatened by it.

Another good indicator of that is crime during the great depression. One would think that it would have been a crime-ridden time, but except for a slight increase in violent crime during the first couple of years, the depression actually saw a DECREASE in overall crime. Barry Latzer's book "The Roots Of Violent Crime In America: From The Gilded Age Through The Great Depression" points this out. Apparently people, when adherence to law is needed for the common good, make sure that such adherence is accomplished. It is a fact that vigilantism increases during periods of hard times, such as the great depression.

I sometimes wonder if "The Greatest Generation" would instead have been this generation. Would we have withstood things like ten years of economic upheaval followed by four years of the most destructive war in the history of mankind? I doubt it.

[alwann]

When someone shoplifs snacks or cheap items, I believe it's a feeling of entitlement or retribution. When it's a 1000s worth of stuff, it's likely to be fenced for drug money. I just paid $2 for 5 minutes worth of free air for my tires. Sure made me angry at "The Man."

[ElDiabloJoe]

Very interesting topic. I agree with the Wal-mart employee that stated YOU are paying for it. Shrinkage (theft/loss/damage/etc) is factored into most retail pricing, especially at large places.

A lot of shoplifters find the easiest way to leave a location with misappropriated goods is via the garden center if a store has one. They appear to be less monitored and since customers often step outside with their full carts to look at the flower arrangements, etc that are outside the front of the store, shoplifters feel less conspicuous when absconding with their ill-gotten goods.

There is a reason you will find most big box stores put their Health & Beauty sections far away from the garden centers. Health & Beauty is a frequent target of theft because the goods are easily re-sold, always in demand, small and easily stolen, and generally fairly expensive.

Many stores, like Wallymart and Target, that have loss prevention officers will often focus their attentions and video cameras on these two areas, as well as the Electronics department.

This is the way of society I'm afraid. They are less interested in catching criminals than preventing theft. In fact, I know of a large national chain bank (rhymes with Chase Bank) who has a policy (perhaps unwritten) that when the bank is robbed, they will not call the police until a full 5 minutes have elapsed since the bank robbed have fled. They care less about losing a grand or two (the average bank robbery take) than the liability and bad publicity caused by a hostage situation. From a corporate perspective, a smart move. From a societal perspective of wanting to capture and punish criminals, not such a smart move.

[jimbomaybe]

Thought-provoking comment about the Wal-Mart employee getting nailed for essentially stealing snacks.

Did some quick research on the topic of employee theft: statistics current as of this past September indicate that Wal-Mart employees are responsible for 28.85% of Wal-Mart losses due to theft. That is more than one in four. Again, this is most likely based on the number of workers actually being caught: the actual loss percentage is probably much greater due to the employees having at least some idea how to circumvent "the system" when engaging in theft. Wal-Mart certainly isn't alone in this, being followed closely by Home Depot and Target.

One unsettling stat I ran across was that the average retail theft by a "shopper" was around $100, while the average loss per employee incident leading to dismissal and/or legal action was over $400. This isn't exactly apples to apples though: a case against an employee may have been built up over several weeks, while the "per shopper" would logically be per incident. In any case, a quarter or more of the total retail "shrinkage" (love that word!) is huge.

A few years back, I remember a whole lot of animated discussion about the efficacy of employee background checks prior to hiring. Several advocacy groups maintained that such checks would disproportionately target minorities as statistically speaking the thought was they they'd be more likely to be involved in the sort of petty crime, leading to a criminal record, than would Caucasians. I'm not sure I agree with that--all ethnicities, if one checks police data, seem to be adequately represented when it comes to retail theft--but that outcry did have some effect, notably "Ban the Box" policies implemented by several states which effectively removed any questions relating to previous criminal activity when employees filled out applications for employment, and employers "encouraged" to first consider the prospective employee's qualifications for the position regardless of any criminal history. Federal regulations took things even further, through implementation of the "Fair Chance Act (2019) which prohibits federal agencies and contractors from requesting criminal background information from job applicants prior to extending an offer".

So...on the one hand America seems to be in pretty significant need of better screening for employees, while on the other we seem bent on hamstringing the very methods needed to assure those better screenings!

Answer?
We are seeing the result of Virtue signaling Compassion laws being passed, its called reality, and of course we pay for it

[huge-pigeons]

Here in Florida we need to prosecute every crime that is committed or it will blossom to what you see from California and Illinois whereas hundreds of criminals ransack a store then flee, then eventually the store closes. Check out San Francisco or portland, Oregon, these towns look like a 3rd world country, all from not prosecuting crimes. If Florida cracks down hard, these criminals will flee to the other states that don’t prosecute.

[ROCKETMAN]

Biggest loss is self checkouts. Easy to buy 10 items and only scan 5. Walmart has lots of self checkouts and I know from working a Publix there is one security just aimed at the self checkouts.

[Sandy and Ed]

Yup. I had my credit card compromised. I knew when, where, how and who did it (bartender at restaurant the night before who needed to go to another register for about five long minutes to cash us out). Bottom line the card company made me whole but was not interested in pursuing it further. Cost too much for them. Just pass along the loss diluted among the other 98% of honest people.

[Sandy and Ed]

To costly to prosecute?? Easier to just include in pricing?? Just another cost of doing business?? As long as the simple question of morality doesn’t get into the mix, why bother? Maybe that is the answer. Maybe if making it a point to do the “Right Thing” instead of the expedient or less risky option was more popular in the corporate world? Gee, in some countries you could lose a hand if guilty of theft. Just saying.

[retiredguy123]

Yup. I had my credit card compromised. I knew when, where, how and who did it (bartender at restaurant the night before who needed to go to another register for about five long minutes to cash us out). Bottom line the card company made me whole but was not interested in pursuing it further. Cost too much for them. Just pass along the loss diluted among the other 98% of honest people.
That would never happen to me because I pay cash at restaurants. I never allow a restaurant employee to take my credit card into another room. The credit card companies could easily solve this problem by requiring merchants to bring a credit card machine to the customer.

Also, I am frustrated that very few merchants use state-of-the-art, tap-to-pay, machines that prevent the use of skimmers to steal credit card information. Why don't the credit card companies require this technology?

[Bill14564]

To costly to prosecute?? Easier to just include in pricing?? Just another cost of doing business?? As long as the simple question of morality doesn’t get into the mix, why bother? Maybe that is the answer. Maybe if making it a point to do the “Right Thing” instead of the expedient or less risky option was more popular in the corporate world? Gee, in some countries you could lose a hand if guilty of theft. Just saying.

If the merchandise costs $300 and it is not recovered then the company needs to roll that $300 into the cost of doing business.

If instead they do the "Right Thing" and went after the thief they might spend what, 100 hours with paperwork, interviews, appearances, and negotiations plus paying for lawyer time? That would all cost money as well and likely much more than $300. Then they would roll this higher amount into the cost of doing business.

We, the customer, will pay either way. I don't like the idea of the thief getting away but I can understand a business evaluating the tradeoff and calculating that it will keep their costs/prices lower if they do not prosecute.

Yes, there is a point where the losses to theft are just too high and a different decision has to be made.

[mickey100]

A lot has to do with personal and societal values. Look at what this country idolizes and condones - material wealth and corporate greed. American society's standards and personal status are arbitrary, set by the constant advertising and consumerism. People try to live up to these unrealistic standards when they can't afford to, because everyone wants to, and is constantly reminded to, keep up. Material wealth is valued above all else. People will swoon over persons in power who are bullies, self-serving and un-truthful, simply because those people have great wealth. Those people who are struggling financially are looked down upon, while those who are rich and are exploiting the populace are seen as successful.

[RickyLee]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

As a Walmart vendor, I know for a fact they have security people that their job is watching the cameras live. They know who's in their store and where they're at usually it's repeat offenders and they know who they are. They watch and they know who's doing what. I agree with a lot of what the op says and believes, but trust me, Walmart is not oblivious to what is going on in their stores. They do what they can, but a lot of times that's not much. Vote to get drugs off our streets is the best thing you can do to protect yourself from overpaying.

[Billy1]

This theft is not new, people have stolen from markets since the beginning of time. Convenience stores especially ones located near a school or school bus stop, have regular candy theft every school day. Remember the old movies, where children would steal fruit from open markets. Things haven't gotten worse, it's just that people haven't changed.

[Robnlaura]

Many years ago I worked in “shrinkage dept” in a large store. Yes theft was 80% staff in some form. Today it’s the staff plus the new “diverse gangs” plus normal shopper theft. Some communities will lose a lot of stores soon and it’s happening fast..

[retiredguy123]

Many years ago I worked in “shrinkage dept” in a large store. Yes theft was 80% staff in some form. Today it’s the staff plus the new “diverse gangs” plus normal shopper theft. Some communities will lose a lot of stores soon and it’s happening fast..
The biggest threat to retail stores is not shoplifting, it's Amazon.

[Wondering]

Really? How is it our responsibility? Obviously, the Walton family doesn't care. They could hire guards. Find a hobby to take up your time.

[Maker]

When the store accepts theft as a cost of doing business, and does nothing to fight against it... Then it leads to more theft. Eventually theft loss grows to the point where the store is going to go out of business. Or they will have to raise prices so much, paying customers go elsewhere.

A store that gets aggressive and goes after all theft will certainly have more costs initially. As word gets out the criminals will go elsewhere. The business loss due to thefts will go way down, the total cost to prosecute will go down, and profits will soar. They can lower prices and make more profits because sales will soar.

However in a place like California police won't respond to thefts under $1000. Stores have mobs doing smash and grabs because they know there is no consequences. Even if they tripped and fell in front of a cop they won't be arrested.
Huge problem with that policy.

[TVTVTV]

Here in Florida we need to prosecute every crime that is committed or it will blossom to what you see from California and Illinois whereas hundreds of criminals ransack a store then flee, then eventually the store closes. Check out San Francisco or portland, Oregon, these towns look like a 3rd world country, all from not prosecuting crimes. If Florida cracks down hard, these criminals will flee to the other states that don’t prosecute.

Agree. These thugs who cover themselves with hoodies and masks make them hard to identify. It's terrible that many brick and mortar stores are closing some of their stores because of fear of being ransacked. Unfortunately, if they have security guards posted, it's generally not a deterrent because most don't carry guns. A guard hired (off duty law enforcement?) with a legal license should taze or shoot some of these criminals so they might have some fear in their robbery career.

[JoelJohnson]

I used to work for a loss prevention software company that took register transactions and analysed them for employee theft.
The software was expensive, but the companies that bought it made their money back in a few months.

Half of theft is employee theft and half of that was at the register. One example is that one grocery chain that offered customer loyalty discounts started offering gas points. One customer complained that they weren't getting the gas points. After looking at the transactions I saw that there was a loyalty card scanned, several items and then a different loyalty card was scanned. As you might have guessed, the employee scanned their card after the customer had scanned theirs, so that the employee was getting the gas points.

[nn0wheremann]

[/I]=Two Bills;2280161]
Shoplifting is endemic, and the perps are as bold as brass, because 99% of the time they know there will be no retribution.

That is the issue. Why aren’t prosecutors going after these people?
Because you and I and the next guy do not want to pay taxes needed to pay for the arrest, processing , trial, conviction, and incarceration of shoplifters.

[nn0wheremann]

That is the issue. Why aren’t prosecutors going after these people?
Because you and I and the next guy do not want to pay taxes needed to pay for the arrest, processing , trial, conviction, and incarceration of shoplifters.[/QUOTE]
I do remember there was a judge in St.Clair County Illinois back in the 80s who got tired of misdemeanor recidivists. He started sentencing them to 30 days in jail, to be served from 6:00 PM Friday to the same time on Sunday, for 15 weeks.

[JGibson]

Attorney Generals are starting to file charges against companies who don't deal with looting as they have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.

[Bill14564]

Attorney Generals are starting to file charges against companies who don't deal with looting as they have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.

This has the potential to be expensive Govt interference and to shift the blame away from police, prosecutors, and judges. Need more information. Do you have a link handy?

[Joecool]

Don't fool yourself there is tons of cameras. More than you could imagine. zoom in on everything that goes on. like a casino. there is undercover personnel patrolling the store Watching. then there are the detectives that go through the video Turn in suspects for further investigations. Personally arrested hundreds at Walmart over the years. Once convicted the may do jail, most get fine and probation for first offence. Then tresspassed and will be arrested if ever step foot in any walmart or sams club.

[jimjamuser]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?
I was walking into a Walmart in Tn. when I saw a teenager grab one bicycle out of the many parked in front and he rode off on it. I ran into the store and told the customer service people which way he was riding. I thought that they would call the Police. Wrong. They told me that there was NOTHING that they could do. STRANGE, I thought.

[jimjamuser]

Same here in UK. Theft from stores is so bad, even meat has security tags on it. Many supermarkets have increased security personnel, as attacks on staff are daily occurrences, both verbal and physical.
Shoplifting is endemic, and the perps are as bold as brass, because 99% of the time they know there will be no retribution.
It is all built into the final cost to the customer. :shrug:
I wonder if Amazon makes more profit because they have less stolen?

[jimjamuser]

The obvious disintegration of American society was one of the main reasons we retired to this relatively remote corner of Florida, surrounded by 100,000 baby boomers rather than millions of angry children.

Why is it happening? Lots of reasons come to mind, but mostly I think it's just entropy. 200 years seems to be the limit for any civilization that achieves any degree of freedom from the standard human condition of poverty under the heel of some tyrant. By the 10th generation, the population typically becomes too fat, dumb, and happy to pass on the values that led to general prosperity in the first place -- or for that matter, bother to defend themselves from the jealous invaders who ignorantly believe that freedom and prosperity have something to do with geography. It's a sad scenario that has played out over and over throughout history.

Entropy is the property the universe that causes order to disintegrate to into disorder. The common word for it is "evil".
Yes, I have heard so many people say, "Entropy made me do it"!

[jimjamuser]

A lot has to do with personal and societal values. Look at what this country idolizes and condones - material wealth and corporate greed. American society's standards and personal status are arbitrary, set by the constant advertising and consumerism. People try to live up to these unrealistic standards when they can't afford to, because everyone wants to, and is constantly reminded to, keep up. Material wealth is valued above all else. People will swoon over persons in power who are bullies, self-serving and un-truthful, simply because those people have great wealth. Those people who are struggling financially are looked down upon, while those who are rich and are exploiting the populace are seen as successful.
Good post !

[Bwanajim]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

It’s not the store’s fault, the cops do what they can, but the stupid liberal politicians let them out of jail. Look at what’s going on in California with 10 gangbangers going into Nordstrom‘s and running out with tens of thousands of dollars worth of merchandise.
It’s happening everywhere, there is no more fear for the law because it’s not enforced. Sad that has come to this. And yes, we pay for it with higher prices.

[DDToto41]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

Being an ex employee of both Walmart and Publix they both said if you see someone taking something tell you manager, as they don't want the employee getting hurt, and the manager will let security know so they can apprehend the culprit. I had seen a few times at Walmart where they stopped a person and had called the police to get them arrested. They have an employee checking the cctv all the time. They do a pretty good job but sometime things slip between the cracks.

[Salty Dog]

When I was a young man, back many years ago. The store I worked at gave random lie detector test to find out if employees had stolen or taken anything from the store that they weren't supposed to...

[Robnlaura]

That would never happen to me because I pay cash at restaurants. I never allow a restaurant employee to take my credit card into another room. The credit card companies could easily solve this problem by requiring merchants to bring a credit card machine to the customer.

Also, I am frustrated that very few merchants use state-of-the-art, tap-to-pay, machines that prevent the use of skimmers to steal credit card information. Why don't the credit card companies require this technology?

After being scammed I now use the Revolut card everywhere.. my phone is the real answer the card has what I need to use and that’s that..

[LizzieBorden]

When I was in walmart the other day, doing the self checkout, I had to have clerk assistance for the wine I was buying…the clerk came over and while there we were chatting…and now the items also have weight associated to the price, and supposevily if you buy more than what you scanned, it wont let you check out….just a thought and I thought that was a good idea…..

[mlmarr]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

thank the current government ... for this nonsense

[Marmaduke]

That is an interesting question. I read an article recently that said WalMart is re-thinking its self-checkout.
They know that they are losing big bucks with people who are swiping their own items, either innocently or deliberately in their many self-checkout lines.

Aldi's just added many self- checkouts, and that was a mistake too, imho.

[retiredguy123]

After being scammed I now use the Revolut card everywhere.. my phone is the real answer the card has what I need to use and that’s that..
As I understand it, a Revulot card is a prepaid debit card, not a credit card. So, you cannot dispute a charge and get the Government mandated resolution process. I use a debit card for a few online purchases, but I use a credit card for almost everything else, especially for large purchases, so I can take advantage of the Government mandated dispute process. In restaurants, I only use cash.

[kkingston57]

Interesting thing happened this past Sunday. My wife and I were shopping at Wal-Mart just off 466. Because of the small parking lot and the glut of church-crowd shoppers we didn't park in the lot but on the side by the service bays and entrance. After we checked out, instead of going out the front doors and circling around to the service bays, we exited through the customer door by auto service. We had a cart full of stuff (in bags) and traveled through the store to the side entrance, exiting without anybody saying anything.

Lesson: we could have picked up a dozen other items on our way out and stuffed them into our bags, and nobody would have been the wiser.

I've had several conversations with Wal-Mart associates these past few weeks. One with a lady in electronics just this week revealed that she stopped a person with over $400 worth of stolen merchandise. When I asked what happened, her response was "probably nothing". Another time at another Wal-Mart I stopped to buy a flash drive. After the associate unlocked it and checked me out I commented that the store must be losing a lot of money to the shoplifters. He just smiled and said "Wal-Mart isn't losing a dime--YOU are!"

It got me thinking. If I could waltz out of the store the way I did, how many others, probably far more knowledgeable about the "art" of ripping off stores, are doing it too? Wal-mart is the undisputed leader when it comes to shoplifting targets but other stores are certainly not exempt. Retail stores have about a 3% profit margin and shoplifting must be cutting into that pretty well. But...if the stores' responses are merely to raise prices, along with the occasional shoplifting arrest hitting the papers...are they really motivated to do any more than that? We TV'ers are targets in many ways, and this is one of the more insidious, in my opinion.

Unless the stores do more to stop this, aren't we in effect subsidizing a criminal (petty, to be sure, but still criminal) enterprise? And what can be done to further motivate the stores to actually implement measures that REALLY work--and stop penalizing their customers for their inaction?

Small part of the problem. Most of the problem is when a gang of people come in and do the smash and grab. Had a friend who was a Wallgreens manager in a middle class neighborhood. It was a common occurrence.

[jimbomaybe]

Good post !
No doubt about it it's all societies fault , societies that have provided an incredible standard of living for the average person, anytime and any place on the globe and now we can be complacent about casual theft because some think they are entitled

[jimjamuser]

Small part of the problem. Most of the problem is when a gang of people come in and do the smash and grab. Had a friend who was a Wallgreens manager in a middle class neighborhood. It was a common occurrence.
I would treat someone caught being involved in a, "smash and grab" robbery as much more seriously GUILTY than an individual stealing some items. It seems to me that "smash and grab" is PRE-PLANNED GANG VIOLENCE and also robbery. The whole idea is to threaten VIOLENCE and I would want greater punishment for GANG VIOLENCE than the less significant shoplifting by an individual.
.........Catching the "smash and grab" TYPES may be more difficult, but when they ARE caught they should get "the book thrown at them"! Also, it seems like a good INDICATION that MORE Police are needed in a city.