He needs a schematic to find his own penis, much less knowing where to put it should he ever get a chance to breed.
Is that one right next to the law that says “the customer is always right”?
More details, from another account:
From the same story:
This loser is 19 years old?! Someone needs to advise him to stop making statements to the police. :rolleyes: They’re not making him look sympathetic, just pathetic.
Let’s recap, shall we?
19-year-old student who begs and cries like a little girl when caught stealing, who thinks he can get a $150 piece of electronics for $5, who scopes out female cashiers who he thinks are too stupid to tell the difference.
How much you want to be there’s an inflatable doll somewhere in his dorm? Cuz dude ain’t never going to get a date with a real live woman if he doesn’t show her the money first. :rolleyes:
Exactly. He figured out that it was technically possible to fool the scanning equipment but it was morally wrong.
[EE student nerd voice] But jeez guys! Wouldn’t that be cool? You could, like, make up some tags and go to Walmart and, like, do your whole Christmas shopping list for under $5.00. Man if only we could use that technology to git girls to talk to us! [/EE student nerd voice]
I’m shocked at the frequency of this sort of thing. Hopefully his punishment really hertz.
Ah. He’s one of those. The more I hear about this kid, the more I hate him.
I laughed at that joke way more than I should have.
I knew a guy in college who did something like this as well. He made the fake barcodes (possibly with the same software, and knowing him, used a cracked version to go more than the 15 day trial period.) Instead of iPods, though, he bought the large, $100 DVD sets for things like Star Trek and X-Files for ~$5, then sell them on eBay. He said the trick was to go to the register that had the old lady at it, sicne they never know what things should cost. :rolleyes:
More importantly, what ipod is Target selling for $149? That’s $50 less than any price I’ve seen for the Nano and $50 more than the shuffle. I thought Apple wouldn’t let retailers sell the Nano for less than $199?
He was getting a good deal even without the scam! I want an ipod for $149!
$50 more than the 512 MB Shuffle, yes, but that’s the spot on price for the 1 Gig shuffle, I think.
Did he get caught?
And, if so, did he try the “I’m just a kid” defense? :rolleyes:
Those guys at the door at Best Buy that check your receipt at the door even though you just came from the register that everyone likes to bitch about (including people on this board) check for just this type of thing. When you hire 30 seasonal cashiers you can’t expect them to know models and prices of everything. The guys at the door check for this type of fraud.
FYI,a 1-gig shuffle goes for $129.00 on Apple’s site today, with free shipping.
I dunno, all the receit-checkers I’ve ever encountered just do a quick count of stuff, then swipe the receipt. I can’t imagine they’d do the totals in their head in a split-second. My understanding is that the receipt-checkers mark the receipt so it cannot be re-used by an unscrupulous employee to “return” a shoplifted item back to the store…?
My experience has been that they look at the obviously higher-priced merchandise in the cart, and then look for a corresponding entry on the receipt. If you have an iPod in your cart but the highest item on your receipt is 5 bucks, they are probably going to catch it.
Unfortunatly, no. It probably would have been good for him to get caught and learn his lesson. I doubt he still does this, seeing as he is now in CA working at a nice paying computer graphics job, but he did it for at least two yuears in college, on average of one DVD set a week. It’s actually a miracle he didn’t get caught.
Oh, and he had a “fool-prrof” plan if he got caught…claim ignorance.
“Gee, I had no idea this DVD set should be $100 and not $5! Someone else must have put the sticker on there!” :rolleyes:. Yeah, I’m sure the security guard will buy that.
How does that work? If an unscrupulous employee gets hold of a receipt and then shoplifts a corresponding item, the mark isn’t going to invalidate the return – a legitimate return would use the same marked receipt, after all.
In any case, the marking process is such a slap-dash application of a pen stroke that I can’t see any difficulty in reproducing it on a bogus receipt generated by an unscrupulous employee.
I suspect that the true purpose is simply to confirm that the bag was checked on the way out for any discrepancies (of the sort created by Our Hero’s bogus barcode scheme).