Civil is in the eye of the beholder. As far as I can see, I find bald assertions of “strawmen” and your own correctness. But I think I’m done anyway, for reasons already stated: You’re comfortable with being an ass, if that in fact is what you were, and you don’t seem interested in actually considering whether your actions might have been ill-considered or fruitless. That doesn’t leave much to discuss.
I’m comfortable with being perceived as such, particularly by people I likely won’t ever interact with again. I don’t believe my actions are unjustified, rude, or assholeish in and of themselves (seriously – declining their request makes me an asshole? You must have a pretty low threshold), but clearly this is a divisive issue given the range of comments in this thread.
So you agree that their request to see your receipt is legal, but you choose to say no and keep walking. Please don’t pretend that it is because your hands were full that you refuse the request, you’ve made it abundantly clear that you don’t approve of the practice at all. It isn’t just when your hands are full.
That’s funny. Do you think they’ll preface it by saying “Here comes a question that I’m asking to determine if you are a nutter or not…” Sorry, but I have to laugh that you feel that someone who wants to get to know you during a date is not worth your time. A lot of what is said during a date is used to determine someone’s attitudes, personalities, and values so that we may compare them with our own to decide if said person is someone you want to get to know better. Is that really such a foreign concept to you?
Let’s say you were on a date and the girl said she’d like to stop at Target on the way home if you don’t mind. You take her and they ask to see your bag (you bought stuff too). Would you show them your receipt or would you keep walking in front of your date?
I didn’t “pretend” such, I was merely demonstrating that such requests can be “unreasonable” by even looser standards than I had previously stated.
That’s quite a stretch to take from my tongue-in-cheek jab.
I don’t think the bulk of this thread concerns itself with Sam’s Club, Costo, etc., that make receipt-checking a condition of membership. Bringing up such things as “well, you consented to their arrangement by walking into the store” is irrelevant. I’ve never been to Fry’s, but Best Buy, Target, and a host of other box stores have giant open doors. Maybe they have a sign somewhere that says they have the right to inspect any package, but that has about as much enforceability as a vague warning on the back of a concert ticket. Since it is not a pre-condition to my shopping there, and since it is not universally applied nor mandatory, at best one consents to being asked if they can check a receipt.
It is correct to note that this is not government action, so common notions of burdens and Constitutional protections do not apply. However, it is farcical to suggest that the analysis ends there. While there are exceptions and protections carved out in various jurisdictions, the company, acting as a private entity has much less power/authority to physically detain, lay hands, or otherwise hinder or disturb an individual’s movement or possessions.
Lastly, whether it stems from an overinflated sense of being in a rush, a persecution complex, a personal indignation at the mere suggestion of thievery, general misanthropy, or the most trivial of whims, there is absolutely no impropriety in politely (as civilly as one interacts with any retail clerk) declining the request. To suggest any unreasonableness is groundless.
Oh wow, you thought you were jabbing at me? Adorable.
Now, about my last question in that same comment?
The one you edited into your post after the fact? I don’t see how it’s relevant. Regardless, I’ll answer: Yes, I would.
Sorry doll, but I don’t think you and I were meant for each other.
Now, the reason it’s relevant (since you need it explained) is because you have stated you don’t find it to be unreasonable and you don’t care what people think who will probably never see you again. A date is someone you (usually) hope to see again. I was curious if you’d still find this to be reasonable behavior if you were with someone you would see again. You said yes, so there you go.
Oh believe me Stud, after reading your “woe is me” entries about dating, I can guarantee we wouldn’t even get to date #1. You know, it’d be another not-getting-the-phone-number situation. I don’t have to explain that one because I know you’re familiar. Now since you started this pissing match with your witty “jab” … want to keep this smartassery up or do you just want to discuss the topic? I can go either way, but since I haven’t posted about my dating desires, you’ll have decidedly less info to work with.
Are you flirting with Red Barchetta? 
Isn’t the result of your question completely arbitrary? That is, couldn’t you have phrased it “If you were on a date with someone and they mindlessly opened up their package for the security guard’s whim, wouldn’t that make you think less of them?” Either position is valid from the dater’s viewpoint.
Did anyone follow Ex Tank’s link?
What part of “voluntary” is not clear? Since when did it become impolite to decline a voluntary request? RB’s declination (can I make that into a word?) does not affect the store prices. Nor does it aggregate into higher prices for everyone. Giving him(?) the benefit of the doubt and granting that he’s polite about it – or even if he just keeps walking without flipping the bird or whatever – it changes nothing for your shopping experience, price or otherwise.
Again, for the sidetrackers out there, this is NOT Costco or Sam’s Club, and this is NOT a situation with an inkling of shoptlifting suspicion. This is presented as a routine after-purchase query. A voluntary query.
Is this really necessary? We’re not in the pit here, I would appreciate it if you didn’t drag in my other unrelated threads. Particulary since you “started it” with “Most people I know keep an eye on how a new date treats wait staff in restaurants, and this will be one of my “conversation pieces” to help grade someone’s sanity and PITA percentage.”
Says the guy with this sexist horseshit:
I know you’re thinking that you’re funny or witty or something, but it’s lame. You want to start with the bullshit but you don’t want bullshit back to you? You (by your own admission) started these jabs. Now, suddenly, you want to stop?
Unrelated though they may be, I’m starting to understand your other posts from your answers here. Don’t want what you consider to be below-the-belt answers? Don’t throw your sexist stupidity around.
Cite?
I don’t really understand what the big deal is here. They ask to see my receipt, I say “no thank you” and go on my way. I’ve got better things to do than wait, yes, even if it’s only 5 seconds. Obviously they don’t think it’s a big deal either, because they’re perfectly happy to take my money the next time. Stores often make all sorts of voluntary requests of their customers. Sometimes they want to know my phone number or zip code. Sometimes they’d like me to take a survey. Sometimes they wish to examine my personal effects, or sell me a service plan, or hand me coupons. If any of these interest me, I accept. If not, I’m on my merry way.
Sure, participating might theoretically benefit myself and others. Telling my zip code will help them know where their shoppers come from and help them to target advertising. A survey might help improve the store. Showing them what’s in my pants might make them feel better for knowing that I’m not stealing. That’s all fine and dandy, but if I’m not in the mood, I’m not in the mood. There’s no dickishness until someone starts acting dickish. e.g. demanding my zip code, screaming at me to show them my receipt, or “TAKE THE DAMN COUPONS” (ok that would make me giggle).
Again with the sexist horseshit. Not funny.
We’re talking about whether this dick waving “I don’t have to show you my receipt!” is reasonable or not. My question was whether you’d behave this way in front of a date, or your mother, or your boss? If you feel it’s something ok to do, it should be ok to do in front of anyone, not just people you don’t know and figure you’ll never see again as was alluded to above. Is that really so hard to understand?
Reread all of you responses to me. I’m not going to do the work for you. I’ll give you a hint though, start with #80 and then in #84 where you say it is a jab.
I requested a cite for where I admitted to starting it. Just because I acknowledge my comment as a jab doesn’t mean I started this “pissing match,” as I posted before.
Honest-to-goodness, continuing this with you isn’t worth any more of my time.
Sexist? Did you mean to post in the Fox news/Palin thread? Sorry, but I have no idea of either your or RB’s gender (it’s why I put a question mark after the pronoun in my last post), so random or projected ad hominems don’t really apply.
And where are you getting dick waving from? And why the exclamation point after “receipt”? No one here is pointing a clitoris at you. I haven’t heard any labia flapping. There isn’t a single penis peeking out from behind any post. On the contrary, everyone, or at least those who prefer not to stop and show a receipt have repeated stressed/stated that there is a calm politeness to it, sans any trace of machismo.
By the way, I have no idea if you’ve ever been in a long-term relationship, but if you have, are there things you do in front of your partner that you wouldn’t have dreamed about on the first date? Would you tell your grandmother that something she said was “horseshit”? Your boss? Your “date” paradigm fails for two completely different logical reasons (this and the un-noted reason in my last post).
You still have yet to say why not complying with a voluntary request is aberrant behavior.
I love it when people weigh in using loaded words like “farcical.” In fact, as should be abundantly clear, no one is talking about “physical detention” or the laying on of hands, so what is farcical is to act like that’s what we’re talking about. But it’s always easier to belittle and rebut the argument you wish people had made, rather than the one they actually did.
In point of fact, the retailer certainly may request to see your receipt and by refusing that request, you are not striking a blow for any particular right. You’re just being a bit of a pain in the butt to the people who work there. Whether that’s justified is of course in the eye of the beholder, but I refuse to act like it is some bold gesture against the erosion of rights – which is what the OP said – because it’s not.
I think that’s rather the point. Joe Shoplifter, deciding between Store A, where they are checking everyone’s receipts, and Store B, where they aren’t, chooses the latter because it’s going to be easier to stow his ill-gotten goods amongst some genuine purchases and waltz out the door unchallenged. He may be able to hide things on his person and slip out in Store A but it’s going to be far more difficult to take the DVD players and notebook computers mentioned by Martini Enfield earlier. It’s as much a deterrent as anything. There are probably a few who will try it anyway and get caught, and they may also pick up some genuine (or not) checker’s errors that may otherwise have slipped through the cracks.
When I was a teenager, I went for an after-school job as a checker in a local supermarket and did the training (though I didn’t end up working there). We were told about checking everyone’s bag as they passed through our register, and they said they would be able to tell if we’d been checking every bag or not because at the end of our shift, there should be a small pile of items at the end of the register than had been dumped by would-be shoplifters who were spooked to see us checking the bags of everyone ahead of them in the queue. Razor blades and condoms were the two most likely items, if I recall correctly. Anyway, the point wasn’t that we were expecting to find stolen goods in the bags but that we would deter would-be shoplifters who saw us looking in every bag.