And that wouldn’t be identification ?
Good lord…this is the second time already people here seem to be unfamiliar with what I assume to be the native language. And I just got here.
Identification
:evidence of identity
The only reason I see to have someone check receipts at the door is to prevent cashiers from cheating by letting accomplices buy stuff for free or at reduced prices. Are they trying to prevent “customers” (i.e., people who just bought stuff) from stealing on the short walk from the cash register to the exit door? If so, they could just staple the bags shut.
I think it is justifiable to object to being scrutinized to prevent a store’s own employees from stealing.
No, it wouldn’t be identification. What you are missing is that identification, as presented to a law enforcement officer, is something which proves that the body in front of the cop purporting to be someone actually is that someone.
I let your earlier snide remark slide because you “just got here.” Save your “snappy comebacks” for the Pit, which is where you’re rapidly headed if you keep up those snide remarks.
You seem to forget there’s a lot more to it than just that. Sadly, I don’t have the time just now to give you a basic course in Semantics.
Not really. Certainly you could say that it’s the register person’s job to insure that the person has everything that he says he has when he comes up to pay. But factory lines show how it is that any time there is more than one task that a person has to do, there’s a potential increase in speed by splitting the tasks among people.
I.e. if there are task 1 and 2, and persons Alpha and Beta, it’s often faster to have Alpha do task 1 and Beta task 2, than having each of them do both 1 and 2.
So thinking of the logistics of a Circuit City store, or even your local supermarket, how much time would be spent if each time someone checked out, the cashier had to step out from behind the counter to check through your purse for shoplifted items? I suspect it would be a lot more.
You might still be inside their store, but once the money has been exchanged for the goods, the store no longer has any claim to them. They are your property, and you are under no more obligation to let the store inspect them than you are to let the store inspect your pockets or your purse.
So you don’t think that after you have paid money for something, and been given a piece of paper stating that you have paid for that item, the transaction is done? In that case, I want the signed credit card slip or the actual bills I paid with present at the bag check so that I can be sure that the cashier did not pocket either of them.
They have every right to ask. I have every right to say ‘No.’ And they have every right to request I not come back to their store. But they never do, because they don’t want to lose business.
If any store employee ever asked to look through my purse for shoplifted items I would immediately stop shopping there - by that, I mean if I had already purchased items I would return them that instant. And then I would write a letter of complaint to their corporate headquarters, as well as informing the local media of the intrusive and insulting behavior displayed by those in that store. If any employee actually touched me in an attempt to search my belongings, I would insist upon assault charges being filed.
Which is precisely how I’m feeling when I read this. Jeez, just show your bag and be on your merry way! But no, you prefer to waste a whole lot of time for several people and then involve the police. Asshole.
Fighting ignorance, a child born abroad of one American parent is not entitled to a birth certificate. What they get is a Consular Report of Birth Abroad. So not all US citizens by birth can get a birth certificate. Not that this is germane or anything to the OP.
And that’s how rights are eroded.
Depends on where the child’s born. I was born to two US citizens and the local law where I was born (Germany) required that a birth certificate be issued by the county or city government. I still have my Geburtsurkunde. Interestingly enough, that does not prove citizenship at all because (at least at the time I was born) Germany did not grant citizenship to those born on German soil; one needed to be born to a German citizen to have German citizenship at birth.
The federal government for the US does not issue birth certificates for its citizens born in another country, even if the child is born to two US citizens. The Consular Report of Birth Abroad, though, does function as one.
I’m curious. Which of your rights do you prefer to ignore the violation of on a regular basis? The person refusing to show the bag is not the one preferring to involve the police. That honor goes to the person who calls the police to report–falsely, mind you–that the person refusing to show a bag has probably committed a crime.
Personally, I don’t care how much of their time I waste if the persons whose time I’m wasting are violating my rights. The simple solution for them to not waste their time is to not violate my rights.
If the store wasn’t insisting on treating its customers like criminals, this guy would’ve been on his merry way a lot sooner. Because he refused to consent to being searched by store employees, those employees wasted a whole lot of time for several people.
They (the employees) are the ones who overreacted and caused the entire problem.
Stores know that most customers are not crooks. The number that are combined with a trend in temporary employees that work with someone on the outside make some measures necessary.
The indignant offended customer is the preferred ploy of these crooks. Years ago at Sears they had an elaborate security camera system and and a loss prevention staff. Other stores have used incognito security officers who pose as customers to watch customers and employees. Maybe those are better options.
Still, with all the issues in this country that need our attention this is a pretty petty one to make a special effort to protest about in the way the guy did. Why not just speak to management and tell them. “I find this offensive and prefer you find some other method of loss prevention, and,I won’t shop here if you keep doing this”
If enough customers did that they would find another method. If those who object are a very small percentage they won’t. As a shopper and as someone in retail I get it, so I don’t object.
Or, cosmodan, since all searches of a customer’s personal property by a store employee in Ohio have to be voluntary to be legal, you can just say ‘No, thanks’ and keep walking.
I do it in Pennsylvania. If I refuse to follow the store’s rules, they can ask me to leave. They can’t touch me or search me or detain me without actually having seen me shoplift.
Suppose you walk into the store wearing a brand new pair of sneakers, and upon leaving you are intercepted by an employee who demands to see a receipt for them? Is that reasonable? They *could *be stolen, right?
Anyone attempting to prevent me from leaving a store had better be prepared to charge me with shoplifting or get out of the way.
Ones that don’t matter. Like whatever imaginary right it was that vas “violated” in this case.
Seriously, this guy could have done something easy and quick that hurts absolutely nobody and doesn’t matter at all, but instead he chose to make trouble for himself, his family, the store employees, a 911 operator and a police officer. Way to fight for your rights. If this little rebel ever complains about police response time, he becomes the biggest hypocrit since Jacques Chirac complained about Pakistani nuclear weapons testing.
Hmm. I suppose it’s not the most crucial issue, but I can’t see why anyone should be villified for asserting their legal rights. And let’s remember, the Righi guy was illegally detained in the parking lot, and he hasn’t been charged with failing to submit to a search - only with failing to produce ID. Doesn’t that suggest even the police officer knew that he had every right to refuse the search?
I know that stores need to prevent loss from theft. But frankly, it isn’t my problem, it’s theirs. They can’t claim that they need to violate the rights of citizens in order to do this. They need to figure out a strategy for themselves, one that’s within the law.
So it doesn’t matter to you that, according to this precedent, you could be hauled off in handcuffs simply for walking down the street, if you’re unable to produce an ID which you are not legally required to possess, let alone show to a police officer?
I agree that an arrest was unnecessary. I imagine the officer was a little pissed to be dealing with this petty bullshit but he should have known the law and stuck to that.
After they checked his bag the officer should have just asked him why he made such an issue over this. Then perhaps he could have written him a ticket for using 911 for a non emergency.
It was a 911 call, for some indignant petty bullshit.
The store was wrong to try and detain him outside the store. The manager could have explained why they do that and asked him why he objected? The theory is that having someone check bags keeps a certain number of shoplifters and crooked employees from even trying. If the crooks eventually feel they don’t need to stop, just say “No thank you” and keep walking then stores will have to go to something else.
OTOH it is a community and lots of people don’t mind cooperating with their local merchant to help prevent theft. I really don’t understand this guys point or the way he decided to handle it.
That’s interesting. Does that mean he has grounds for false arrest, or are you saying that they can detain him temporarily as long as they don’t file charges? The article says his Dad had to post bail I think. Perhaps just a ride to the station would be enough to remind him not to call 911 over this stuff.
I think it’s also a right of merchants to tell asshole customers to take their business elsewhere. US customers are a bit spoiled by years of bad policies made because of competition. Over a generation or two this has caused a few problems that merchants are now trying to correct. Most customers are great but sometimes it’s had to take a customer who is blowing some minor issue out of proportion.
That’s what I think this guy was doing.