From Black & White city paper:
Read that last line. Again. Again. Wax on, wax off. Do you understand, grasshopper? They cannot hold you once you have paid.
Read the rest of the article. It is amusing like a good Pit thread, only longer and with less swearing. But that bolded, italicized line of mine is the only relevant point.
Does this guy have a regular collumn in this paper, or is he some kind of “freelance” dude?
I read the whole thing, it’s pretty good. Funny, and very easy to relate with.
That’s nice. Wrong, but nice.
How many times have we done this thread in the last year?
Chapter and verse from relevant law, please.
No. But only because we’ve done this at least 4 times before. It gets tedious.
Read this thread, and the earlier threads that I cite in that thread.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=381724&highlight=detain
You’ll find cites to applicable law from several states in my posts and those of others.
Wow.
Just… wow.
How deeply some of us cling to what we apparently wish to believe.
It’s Night Of The Living Detention Thread IV!
But there’s still hope. Even the gry thread posters gave up eventually.
I don’t know what the local law is, but if I found myself in such a situation I think I would submit to a check of my receipt against my mechandise. I would expect to be treated courteously and to receive an apology after things checked out. If it went beyond that I would seriously consider contacting an attorney to explore the possibility of a law suit.
I do find Randoms repeated beratings to be condecending and tiresome. Random if you can take the time to look up the previous threads, why can’t you just post the legal references? It is unreasonable to expect that the average member reads all the threads, or even most of them. I, or anyone else, might easily overlook a particular topic and later bring up the same subject. I don’t see why it’s a problem and I have to wonder why anyone would get so upset about it. I suggest that Random either post something informative and helpful, or chill out. 
Well, the article cited by the OP was from a Birmingham, AL paper.
Here is the relevant section of the Alabam Code:
It’s clear that, in Alabama, the merchant does have the right to detain someone if there is probable cause to suspect a theft has occurred.
The question, then, is whether an alarm sounding is, in Alabama, sufficient to establish probable cause. I couldn’t find anything about this in the Code (i’m not sure whether that’s even the right place to look), but i’m willing to bet that the alarm does establish PC.
Despite the fact that the legal issues seem fairly cut and dried here, i still feel, viscerally, that they give far too much leeway to the merchant in terms of detaining people, especially when the alarms in these stores so often seem to sound without cause.
For example, i walked out of a bookstore once and the alarm sounded. All i had in my bag were two library books that i had taken out of my university library. The clerk, upon seeing them, gave a smile and said, “Sorry, library books set it off ALL THE TIME.”
Now, why the fuck is it my problem, and why should i be treated like a thief, just because they can’t program their anti-theft device to recognize only their own merchandise? Pisses me off.
Is this truly an issue? I’ve set off the alarms before, and more often than not, nobody does anything and I just keep going. Sometimes I’ll look back at the cashier and they’ll wave me on. Rarely does anyone actually stop me and check my receipt, etc., except for places like Best Buy, where they do it to everybody, anyway. I’m not a terribly patient person, but this just fails to bother me.
I’ve never, not once, anywhere, been “treated like a thief” or even looked at the wrong way in the situation. Maybe it’s because I’m a middle-aged white guy, but profiling wasn’t the issue raised here.
There was one shopping situation where I wish I had been detained.
At lunch one day I headed over to the mall to buy a pair of jeans. I didn’t have much time, so I found the ones I wanted, tried them on, went to checkout, paid, they put them in a bag, and I left the store. In retrospect I guess I remember hearing the klaxon sirens sounding as I walked through the doors, but in Macy’s you hear them frequently, so I didn’t think anything of it.
A few days later I grab my new jeans and put them on- and notice that they still had the plastic “theft deterrent” tag stapled to the waistband. You know, the thing that sprays dye all over you and the clothing if you try to remove it, or whatever it does.
So I have to go back to the store to get it removed. I definitely noticed the sirens as I entered the store, then had to wait in line at checkout for 15 minutes before I got to the counter.
Yeah, that’s a good question. If the person at the exit sees you heading from the checkout counter to the door, do they really need to enforce the alarm.
I don’t think it’s a good idea. And not whether or not it’s the law.
First of all if you’re concerned about people staring at you like you’re guilty, walking out will make you look more guilty. Secondly when I did it, I never harrassed anyone. I just apoligized for not demagnatizing something, offer to take it back, check the bag and demagntize it. Thirdly, if you don’t go back you’ll probably set off the alarms at the next store you go to. And then look guilty all over again.
And who wants that?
Not that anyone that I’ve ever encountered checks, but why not? Just because you purchased X number of items does not mean you haven’t picked up X+Y items, and have secreted some on your person.
Exactly. In point of fact, it’s a common tactic for shoplifters to steal an expensive item, but purchase one or more cheap items to appear less suspicious.
The subject of store theft has been in our media lately probably due to Christmas shopping. Apparently the amount of dollars lost from theft is millions and millions and guess who pay for this - yep, the consumer. So maybe cut the shops some slack for your own benefit?
They should start with the beam in their own eye, then. The bulk of theft losses are due to internal theft. We’re also paying for the failure of retail establishments to control their own employees.
We’re paying because, as a race, we can’t be entrusted not to lie, cheat, and steal from anyone or anything at any opportunity.
The legal issues might be cut and dried if not for the twofold problem that in the OP’s story, he (1) was complaining about retailers (e.g. Costco) who check every receipt, alarm or no alarm; and (2) the merchant employees in question were at pains to assure him that nobody suspected him of theft.
Despite the apparently shaky legal argument, that article amused the hell out of me. I think, however, that there is a distinct difference between Wallmart and Costco. You have to have a membership to shop at Costco and also sign a membership agreement. I didn’t read all of the fine print on mine but I would be willing to bet that there is a stipulation that you have to do the stupid receipt thing before you leave.