# Code Adam and storekeeper's privilege **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 18, 2018, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308 "2018-12-18T03:35:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/81 "2018-12-19T20:31:41Z")
> [@MDfive21](#): > > somewhat related: does LEO have to tell someone the RS or PC when they initiate the encounter? and is that the indication that the encounter has gone from consensual to detention? No. The officer is not required to tell the person if it is consensual or a Terry stop. The person can figure that out by asking if he or she is free to leave. If he is told “no” then it is certainly not a consensual encounter. That is one way to indicate a non-consensual encounter, but the other test, as stated but not really applied by the courts is: “Would a reasonable person, given the facts and circumstances of the conversation, believe that he or she was free to leave?” Some indicia of “not free to leave” is whether the officer has physically blocked your way of movement or showed some indicia of authority such as activating his lights and/or sirens. Words are important as well. If the officer says, “I would like to ask you a few questions” then that is nothing more than you or I may request. If the officer says “Stay there” or “Don’t move” then those are shows of authority which makes the encounter non-consensual. Where I make the argument (and lose) is in situations where the officer says something like, “You, sir, would you mind getting in the back seat of my patrol car? I need to ask you a few questions.” I argue that such a request made with a gun, a badge, a taser, and a patrol car are inherently coercive such that a reasonable person would not take that as a request, but a command. But the judge will invariably say that the officer said “would you mind” and that is clearly a polite request and not a command. And just because he “needed” to ask questions did not imply that you must answer them. My argument is that polite talk does not make words mean different things. If I am at your house and get drunk and start hitting on your wife and you say, “I’m going to have to ask you to leave” it is clear from the circumstances and how we use words in society, that you ain’t asking, you are telling. This doesn’t carry over to the consensual encounter rule. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/82 "2018-12-19T20:36:32Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > It would be an interesting case. As noted above, false imprisonment requires a complete enclosure in a confined area. But how is it any different if the store is locking doors, “delaying” people, and making them walking in circles until they get to a single exit where they must line up for police inspection? I was just thinking about this this morning before I saw this thread. What if an employee physically blocks you and keeps stepping in front of you as you try to walk out the door so your only means of exit is physically pushing past the employee. Is that false imprisonment? Can you be held for assaulting the employee if you push him out of the way with just enough force to get past him? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/83 "2018-12-19T20:38:58Z")
> [@MDfive21](#): > > somewhat related: does LEO have to tell someone the RS or PC when they initiate the encounter? and is that the indication that the encounter has gone from consensual to detention? RS? PC? Generally you have to ask “Am I free to go?” ---
**Author:** ![ZonexandScout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zonexandscout/32/544_2.png) [@ZonexandScout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZonexandScout)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/84 "2018-12-19T20:44:35Z")
> [@doreen](#): > > I think we are - and we aren’t at the same time. I think you are talking about something a little different than I am, in the sense that I am talking about stores as I see them commonly exist and you are talking about theory. There are a few different set-up for stores in my experience - and there’s only one set- up in which I think you couldn’t funnel all the customers through a single exit. And that set up is a store with multiple, separated entrances, like a Macy’s or a Sears. But in my experience , stores with that type of set up are a minority. Most stores either have a single customer-accessible exit, the “mall door/street door set-up” which probably exceeds the number of exits required by code and therefore allows the mall exits to be locked, or multiple doors adjacent to each other (like a Target), all of which serve the function of “forcing everyone to exit from a single location under supervision” even if that “single location” is four doors in the case of the Target. Yes, I think we are…to a point. What I’m saying is that egress doors in a store, whether they’re the minimum or “excess,” CAN’T have key-operated locks on them. If they CAN be locked, they are NOT exit doors per IBC and NFPA 101 and must have signs stating “NOT AN EXIT” if they appear to be exit doors. And I don’t know a single code official who, upon seeing an egress door with a key-operated lock on it, wouldn’t say, “Remove the lock immediately. If you don’t do it by the end of the day, I will revoke your Certificate of Occupancy.” The exception provided for in IBC is for the main doors, as previously cited. The requirement for egress analysis and design is a very important consideration in designing any building. It requires an entire page in most plan sets. It’s not theory. After all, drivers doing 45 MPH on my street don’t make it a 45 MPH zone. It’s posted for 25 MPH. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/85 "2018-12-19T20:52:13Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I was just thinking about this this morning before I saw this thread. > > What if an employee physically blocks you and keeps stepping in front of you as you try to walk out the door so your only means of exit is physically pushing past the employee. Is that false imprisonment? Can you be held for assaulting the employee if you push him out of the way with just enough force to get past him? Well, there is a lot to unpack here. Under common law you may use reasonable force to resist an unlawful detention or an unlawful arrest. Are you sure that there is no other way out? If not, are you sure that the employee does not have probable cause to believe that you committed a theft (note that I am not saying that you committed a theft, but did you do something to give him probable cause to believe it). Did you do something to give him probable cause to believe that you committed a felony or misdemeanor breach of the peace that he witnessed? If he has probable cause to detain you, then you are not fighting an unlawful arrest, but a lawful one, and that is bad. Next, I believe that we are up to 40 states which hold that you do not have the right to resist an unlawful arrest, you must submit to an arrest and then pursue remedies in court. I’m not sure if in any or all of those states that applies to citizen’s arrests or shopkeepers privilege. That I do not know as in my state, one is free to resist an unlawful arrest with reasonable force. Short summary: You may beat the rap in the end, you may not, but you won’t beat the ride. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/86 "2018-12-19T20:54:01Z")
> [@ZonexandScout](#): > > Yes, I think we are…to a point. What I’m saying is that egress doors in a store, whether they’re the minimum or “excess,” CAN’T have key-operated locks on them. If they CAN be locked, they are NOT exit doors per IBC and NFPA 101 and must have signs stating “NOT AN EXIT” if they appear to be exit doors. > > And I don’t know a single code official who, upon seeing an egress door with a key-operated lock on it, wouldn’t say, “Remove the lock immediately. If you don’t do it by the end of the day, I will revoke your Certificate of Occupancy.” The exception provided for in IBC is for the main doors, as previously cited. The requirement for egress analysis and design is a very important consideration in designing any building. It requires an entire page in most plan sets. It’s not theory. > > After all, drivers doing 45 MPH on my street don’t make it a 45 MPH zone. It’s posted for 25 MPH. Maybe I am missing something obvious, but if any door (no matter what you call the door) cannot be locked, what is to keep thieves out after closing time? ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/87 "2018-12-19T20:57:41Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > RS? PC? Reasonable suspicion (necessary for a detention) Probable cause (necessary for an arrest) ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/88 "2018-12-19T21:07:46Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > RS? PC? > Generally you have to ask “Am I free to go?” To which the officer does NOT have to answer yes or no. My question is if the officer does not say no explicitly e.g. Don’t you want to answer my questions? Sir, I’m conducting an investigation. Have you had anything to drink tonight? etc. Then can a reasonable person presume they are free to go? What if you ask repeatedly? What if you say (on video), “Unless you say you are detaining me I will assume I am free to go.” ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/89 "2018-12-19T21:10:43Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Next, I believe that we are up to 40 states which hold that you do not have the right to resist an unlawful arrest, you must submit to an arrest and then pursue remedies in court. If it is an unlawful arrest (by LEO or civilian) then do they face criminal charges such as kidnapping? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/90 "2018-12-19T21:16:13Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > To which the officer does NOT have to answer yes or no. My question is if the officer does not say no explicitly e.g. > Don’t you want to answer my questions? > Sir, I’m conducting an investigation. > Have you had anything to drink tonight? > etc. > > Then can a reasonable person presume they are free to go? > What if you ask repeatedly? What if you say (on video), “Unless you say you are detaining me I will assume I am free to go.” If you are so inclined, then very slowly turn around and leave. If he puts his hands on you or stops you, then you are not free to go. ---
**Author:** ![doreen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/858c86/32.png) [@doreen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doreen)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/91 "2018-12-19T21:45:18Z")
> [@ZonexandScout](#): > > Yes, I think we are…to a point. What I’m saying is that egress doors in a store, whether they’re the minimum or “excess,” CAN’T have key-operated locks on them. If they CAN be locked, they are NOT exit doors per IBC and NFPA 101 and must have signs stating “NOT AN EXIT” if they appear to be exit doors. > > And I don’t know a single code official who, upon seeing an egress door with a key-operated lock on it, wouldn’t say, “Remove the lock immediately. If you don’t do it by the end of the day, I will revoke your Certificate of Occupancy.” The exception provided for in IBC is for the main doors, as previously cited. The requirement for egress analysis and design is a very important consideration in designing any building. It requires an entire page in most plan sets. It’s not theory. But I don’t think anyone except you has mentioned key-operated locks- I know I haven’t. I don’t pretend to know if the doors that I have seen locked are key operated, or if there are bolts that slide up or down or between the two leaves of the door that lock the door. Or they might be like the doors at a place I worked 30 years ago, where a key operated the lock from the outside but a thumb turn opened it from the inside. None of which will stop someone determined to leave through that exit - but most people won’t bother. And I’m not at all sure what you’re talking about with respect to “main doors”, unless you’re distinguishing them from stockroom doors or something like that. If there is a three-story Macy’s in a mall that has two exits on each floor into the mall and two onto the street, which of the eight exits are the main ones and what makes them different from the non-main exits? ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/92 "2018-12-19T21:51:53Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > If it is an unlawful arrest (by LEO or civilian) then do they face criminal charges such as kidnapping? AIUI, citizens performing an unlawful citizen’s arrest can face serious consequences. Police officers acting in their official capacity have a large measure of immunity from personal liability for performing the same actions. > [@UltraVires](#): > > If you are so inclined, then very slowly turn around and leave. If he puts his hands on you or stops you, then you are not free to go. This is the advice I’ve heard for how to deal with a cop who won’t answer your question (although it usually also includes advice to issue a verbal declaration of your intention to leave before moving to do so). ---
**Author:** ![Tzigone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Tzigone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tzigone)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/93 "2018-12-19T22:07:13Z")
> [@](#): > > If you’re talking about me, I looked it up. In Arkansas if you’re asked to ID yourself or show ID, refusal can be taken into consideration whether to arrest or not. I’m not sure why any law abiding citizen would argue the point or refuse? Who wants to go to jail to prove a point? A point, I add, that gets you nothing. I wouldn’t have a problem showing my ID to anyone if it helps in the search or safe return of a child. Why would someone refuse? Well, firstly because it’s a right and people like to exercise their rights and should not need to have an excuse to do so. A person going about their business should not be asked unless the LEO can give a good - and specific - reason justifying asking. Secondly, because it most likely not about a missing child when you are asked. Thirdly, often because of targeting certain types (often based on race, sex, and age - young black men), the same person gets “asked” over and over and over again. It’s very annoying and is really a form of harassment and sends messaging saying they aren’t welcome (in the store, the neighborhood, the city, etc.). They get fed up with it, quite reasonably, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![jnglmassiv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f07891/32.png) [@jnglmassiv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jnglmassiv)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/94 "2018-12-19T22:46:35Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I was just thinking about this this morning before I saw this thread. > > What if an employee physically blocks you and keeps stepping in front of you as you try to walk out the door so your only means of exit is physically pushing past the employee. Is that false imprisonment? Can you be held for assaulting the employee if you push him out of the way with just enough force to get past him? I had a Walmart receipt checker demand to check my receipt at the exit doors. I declined and she aggressively grabbed my cart and wouldn’t let go and I wasn’t leaving without it. The argument escalated and, after a long few minutes, a manager-type told her to stand down. It wasn’t exactly [/r/publicfreakout](https://www.reddit.com/r/publicfreakout) material but a far more heated discussion with a stranger than I’d experienced in years. False imprisonment? I don’t know. I probably could have run past her but doing so would have meant abandoning my stuff. It seems to me that if you have to leave your possessions to leave, a case could be made. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/95 "2018-12-19T22:58:54Z")
> [@UDS](#): > > SFAIK the Code calls for (a) access to the building to be refused (i.e. you can’t come in) and (b) “reasonable efforts to be made” to delay the departure of any child answering the description of the missing child. > > Presumably the object will be to delay departure until it can be verified that the child is not the missing child, and presumably in most cases this can be done fairly quickly, since the person who reported the child missing is still on the premises. Those who insist on leaving can be directed to just one exit door, where there is located someone who will recognise the missing child. > > Another point to note is that the legal enforceability of a protocol like this is only a part - and, typically, a relatively small part - of its operation and efficacy. Most people will be motivated to respect the code and co-operate with it even if not legally obliged to do so, and those who distinguish themselves by insisting on leaving without co-operating can expect to be noted and remembered (and, these days, probably photographed, and perhaps followed and their car registration noted) which may deter them. > > But the bottom line is, yeah, in the absence of leglsiation to authorise it, a shopkeeper can’t forcibly detain you against your will in this circumstance. I was thinking along these lines as well; in one of these situations, you hope it’s just a case of a wandering child, and that things will turn out fine. If not…then making note of those who insist on leaving NOW! is just good sense. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/96 "2018-12-19T23:02:14Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > If it is an unlawful arrest (by LEO or civilian) then do they face criminal charges such as kidnapping? Generally not unless the action was completely egregious or done in bad faith. But according to the letter of the law it is possible. Civil damages are the real remedy in that situation, but: > [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > AIUI, citizens performing an unlawful citizen’s arrest can face serious consequences. Police officers acting in their official capacity have a large measure of immunity from personal liability for performing the same actions. Both agree and disagree. The reason why citizens get in trouble performing citizens’ arrests is that they have very little knowledge of what constitutes a crime, what constitutes probable cause, what constitutes a breach of the peace, etc. Like in this situation. If you get some store employee who thinks he is Rambo and tackles a guy for refusing to provide ID in a Code Adam situation, then he will face some serious troubles. LEOs are trained to know what PC is for a warrantless arrest and generally are not so impetuous. But the standards are the same. If an LEO arrests someone for something that clearly established law says that he is not allowed to arrest them for, he is subject to criminal and civil penalties, the same as a citizen. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/97 "2018-12-19T23:12:58Z")
> [@jnglmassiv](#): > > I had a Walmart receipt checker demand to check my receipt at the exit doors. I declined and she aggressively grabbed my cart and wouldn’t let go and I wasn’t leaving without it. The argument escalated and, after a long few minutes, a manager-type told her to stand down. It wasn’t exactly [/r/publicfreakout](https://www.reddit.com/r/publicfreakout) material but a far more heated discussion with a stranger than I’d experienced in years. > > False imprisonment? I don’t know. I probably could have run past her but doing so would have meant abandoning my stuff. It seems to me that if you have to leave your possessions to leave, a case could be made. My first inclination is to say that is a battery. She made an offensive contact with an object intimately associated with your person: the shopping cart. But again, before using force or otherwise becoming indignant, you have to make sure that she did not think that she saw you steal something. Not that you did steal something, but that her or another store employee did not think that they saw it. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2018, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/98 "2018-12-19T23:15:00Z")
> [@jnglmassiv](#): > > I had a Walmart receipt checker demand to check my receipt at the exit doors. I declined and she aggressively grabbed my cart and wouldn’t let go and I wasn’t leaving without it. The argument escalated and, after a long few minutes, a manager-type told her to stand down. It wasn’t exactly [/r/publicfreakout](https://www.reddit.com/r/publicfreakout) material but a far more heated discussion with a stranger than I’d experienced in years. > . I smile and wave and just sail on past. ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2018, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/99 "2018-12-20T00:48:16Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Maybe I am missing something obvious, but if any door (no matter what you call the door) cannot be locked, what is to keep thieves out after closing time? The school I volunteer at the doors are locked from the outside. The inside has bars you push down on and the door opens. I assume it’s the same in a lot of places. Malls and stores. ETA Wal-Mart has auto doors. Not sure how that works. ---
**Author:** ![BwanaBob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bwanabob/32/2985_2.png) [@BwanaBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BwanaBob)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2018, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308/100 "2018-12-20T13:19:00Z")
> [@ohiomstr2](#): > > While I suspect most folks would cooperate there is no legal requirement to give any information to a store employee, nor does the employee have the right to detain you unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime. The same goes for LE, the key words being _ **“probable cause” and " reasonable suspicion "** _ > > You may be a @#&% for refusing to cooperate but this is not a crime. Wait a minute. If a crime is committed in a building, isn’t everyone inside at the time by definition a suspect? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/code-adam-and-storekeepers-privilege/826308.md?page=6)