Posted on 03/11/2011 7:51:18 PM PST by Daffynition
"Don't fight it son. Confess quickly! If you hold out too long you could jeopardize your credit rating."
Your wife’s bonus is made a lot safer by W*M heading off lawsuits by training their door people that they have no authority to detain you.
Just keep out my way and all will be good.
I'm sure you feel the same eh!
Let’s scrape away all of the BS here. Your premise is flawed to begin with.
When you walk through the front door of that store you have made a tacit agreement to abide by the rules set forth by Wal Mart. If not they have the right to refuse you service.
When you purchased the TV, you again agreed to a set of rules set forth by Wal Mart called a purchase agreement. It includes the return policy etc. They are a private business, and therefore can set whatever rules they want to conduct business. You as a free American can choose to, or not to obey those rules. If you choose not to then you can choose to shop at another store whose rules you do agree with.
You do not have any “right” to shop at Wal Mart, and you do not have the “right” to break Wal Mart’s rules, immediately after you entered an agreement to abide by those rules when you made your purchase.
It’s the same argument we conservatives have been using for years abut the anti-smoking nazis. These are private businesses. If they want to allow smoking , and you don’t like smokers, then your right ends with your decision to go to an establishment that doesn’t allow smoking where you’ll be comfortable. You don’t have a right to go into the smoking business, and start demanding that everyone put out their cigar, or cigarette because you’re there and don’t like smoking.
So, my wife’s bonus aside, you are still off base. If you don’t like Wal Mart’s door policy, shop elsewhere. That sir is your “right”.
Safeway puts an orange tag on water bottle flats that’ve been rung up.
You absolutely would lose your job. Partly because it's not the greeter's job to stop suspected thieves anyway -- you'd be violating Wal-mart policy by detaining him; Wal-mart has security people for that.
And also because in the described scenario, there's no evidence of theft, so even if you were W*M security instead of a greeter, you'd still be guilty of criminal false imprisonment (and W*M would throw you under the bus so fast it'd make your head spin, since you were not following their procedures).
I think what you mean, is more than *prevent* a theft...it is to ingrain the policy that *everyone* is being watched and to make sure Mr. Six-Pack gets the message. ;)
Your misperception of someone "harassing the help" is in reality, someone who has the courage and conviction to stand up for their (and your) rights.
Pity you don't see the connection and apparently lack the personal courage to do so for yourself. Sure you want to be a member of a Conservative forum, where standing up for one's rights is to be APPLAUDED, not to be considered a nuisance?
Stop right there. That sentence is only good as long as Wal-Mart abides by the law.
That is not the case here, as has been demonstrated.
OK. But it appears you are wrong on the facts. Wal-mart has a policy encouraging ITS EMPLOYEE at the entrance to ask for a receipt for large/unbagged items, etc. Wal-mart DOES NOT have a rule that obligates customers to furnish a receipt upon exiting. I challenge you to find such a rule anywhere. Could they make one? Yeah. But they haven't. You're defending a fiction.
Just checking to see where receipt checking is against state law ~ in Virginia ~ and it’s not popping up. However, in Virginia if a merchant suspects you of shoplifting they can keep you for up to 1 hour awaiting the arrival of the police. Check this site: http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52469&page=1
I guess I've lived to long, for the freedoms I enjoyed have progressively been taken away while I was busy making a living and not paying attention. It must be why the ruling elite wants to hasten the demise of my generation for we remember to much that they want forgotten.
The whole concept is ridiculous to begin with, just put a goddamn red or orange or yellow dot sticker on the box, change the color daily, problem solved.
The article we are discussing has false information regarding the state of the law in this state.
Reserve your anger for the government's jack booted thugs.
End of story Br'r Sloth.
That’s true, but I’m not sure how it’s relevant to either me or the person I was replying to, as neither of us was badmouthing Wal-mart.
When we get seminar posters in here all following the same party line, and most of them attack Wal-Mart that usually means UNION AGITATION.
This guy is a jerk. Just show the receipt. It’s standard practice, to keep shoplifters from stealing stuff thus increasing costs. It’s not an invasion of privacy, it’s just demonstrating that you’ve purchased something.
It’s my understanding that some employees facilitate theft for other employees, allowing them to pass through the checkout lanes without paying for certain things. Checking a receipt is proof that something has been purchased, and not stolen.
P.S. Disconcerted means that I am saddened by all the Freepers who are saying “Submit ... It's easy ... just submit .... do not resist”
I know it's an old book full of old ideas but "1984" is a short read.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.