Posted on 12/29/2007 6:08:47 AM PST by madprof98
Whole Foods Market... That’s all I had to read and realize the worker is screwed and the thief was going to be protected.
The Fox News story about this said that ‘fishmonger’ was a Marine.
Apparently he likes the Whole Foods job, for whatever reason the rest of us can’t seem to fathom. But it IS in Michigan where jobs of any kind are hard to come by.
That being said, I just refuse to shop at a place as politically correct as Whole Foods. I leave that to my yuppy adult children.
“As much as I think this worker should not have lost his job, I still can’t help but wonder why someone would put his life on the line for such a job.”
I have a to agree with you. As much as a despise criminals, what if the guy had pulled a knife or a gun? Or shoved the employee into traffic?
Customer - one that purchases a commodity or service
CLEARLY - the shoplifter was NOT a customer. I'd sue to get my job back - just for the fun of it.
If you live in California, shop at Trader Joe's or Henry's. They have the same kind of merchandise as Whole Foods, and their prices are often considerably lower.
Shoplifting Costs U.S. Retailers $40.5 Billion Retailers Using More Integrated Security Technology
I sent my comments to Kate Klotz.
Maybe she should get this thread, too.
Yes, anyone who shops at Whole Foods must be a liberal.
Beats me. Almost all supermarkets have now installed an "overpriced groceries department" to compete with Whole Foods.
Really? There are companys that are now into this.
I must say that I agree with you but there are examples out there now of such conduct by a company.
b
a thief is transformed into a “customer.”
Unless one of those Klotz lodged in her tiny, tiny little brain, maybe she’ll rethink her exceedingly foolish firing of the hero. Best result, brain Klotz gets fired.
Couldn't you argue it the other way too? He punched out, so technically he wasn't an employee at the time.
To argue that the company can control your conduct 24-7, even off-work, is equivalent to slavery.
Sure. I hadn't considered this perspective.
Whether one is or is not "on the clock", the freedom to enforce the law is critical to a free society. Otherwise we get a police state, where their agents do not exercise caution and often operate in the blind putting many innocent people at risk.
Employers today make it a habit to coerce employees to "agree" to giving up rights as a condition of employment--the right of self-defense for example along with the ability to implement it.
So it's okay for the employee(s) to chase and to pretend that they would block the exit of the thief? That'll get you and any innocent bystanders just as shot dead.
Laws vary by states. As I understand some states don’t consider it stolen until taken out of the store. In my state it is considered stolen once concealed which allows the person to be apprehended inside the store. This is very good advise. I worked 5 yrs in a somewhat rough neighborhood. One manager spent a week at home rehabing after an encounter that occured outside the store. An assistant manager got his face slashed, the blade was meant for his neck but he dodged just in the nick of time. Another got hit it the head with a 6-pack of beer bottles. My point is that it’s not worth the risk. With the high quality cameras available now the evidence is there, we’ve just got to get law enforcement to use the evidence & go after shoplifters. At this point they only use the evidence after someone gets hurt.
BINGO! ...we have a winner.
I can't fault the logic in the no chase policy, given the realities of the legal system. I don't like it, and the public announcement of the policy in this way will surely influence my decision to shop elsewhere. In the same way I think it will draw the grab & run crowd like flies to a pile of excrement.
But the real fault and reason for this obvious invitation to theft and crime are the LAYWERS who over time, one suit and another, created the catalog of case law that demands that thieves be ignored, and heroes punished.
MINIRANT
This is disgusting. Any result, every result, should be on the head of the instigator and lawbreaker. If somebody is hurt, property damaged, or anything at all because they choose to commit a crime it's on them. You don't get 20 years for stealing bread, but you sure should if you assaulted the clerk to do it and shot at a passerby who tried to help.
/MINIRANT
Easy for you to say, friend...you weren’t the one run over and nearly killed over someone who’d stolen a bottle of white out. I’d say something else to your ridiculous response, but it’s not worth it.
You’ve got it.
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.