My Vent ahead...

[PollyannaMom]

Thanks for listening, I feel better just typing this out.

Sucks that it happened (and that conscience isn't enough to stop people from stealing ) but glad typing it out helped. Sometimes that's all you need to get to get past whatever it is.

 

[mikehn]

NYC has more pressing things to deal with right now

 

[fly girl]

Wait, if this automated camera is within NYC, then you may be able to fight this. The mayor had set up new cameras all over the city last week. It was all over the news. They are supposed to be set to not go off unless one is 10 miles over the speed limit. That camera wasn't supposed to ding you for 8 miles over. Write back and say the camera wasn't set correctly.

While one may say, yes, you were speeding. Even you admit to speeding. (Don't say that when you write in. Just say the camera is set incorrectly.) It's the principle of the new law. They are ALL supposed to be set at 10 miles over. Not some at 8 mph, some at 9 mph, some at 10 mph. That little technicality may get you off.

Manned radar guns with state troopers in cars in NY & NJ are also set at 10 mph over. Don't ask how I know.

Oh, good info! Never hurts to try, @rlk.

Cops typically don't pull you over at 8mph over (unless you are in an active school zone) and you weren't. $50 is fifty bucks! Worse case scenario ... they say you were still over and you have to pay. At least you tried.

And I totally understand the vent. I'd feel the same way.

 

[emmybee]

I think many companies (large and small) have decided it "costs more" to physically stop and/or prosecute shop lifters than the amount of loss from the product.

I agree with that assessment even while I acknowledge it would be annoying/distressing to witness. Do I really want an employee to suffer an injury or death b/c someone wants to steal? No, absolutely not! Would I want my hubby to intervene? No. These are things that aren't worth any honest person's life. And to be controversial, it's not worth the thief's life either. I agree with consequences, not with beatings or loss of life. It's about standards. Let the court of law decide, and advocate/vote for the society you want to live in.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Sorry today was not your day, that rots. Some days you will be the bat and other days you will be the ball, that is all I got.

 

[John VN]

.......................

Meanwhile, I get home, open my mail, and see I received a speeding ticket for going 8 miles over the speed limit. I will obviously pay because I did speed. It's just one of those things that makes me question everything.

Thanks for listening, I feel better just typing this out.

Sorry about your troubles, DW's undeserved ticket cost her HUNDREDS of $$$$.

She was driving on Cruise Control (guaranteed because she doesn't like to go over limit and was on an unfamiliar road) at posted speed limit and was hit by RADAR in a Police car driving towards her. He U-turned, lights and siren, pulled her over and issued. Turns out a motorcycle was flying up on her from behind and the cop shot him not DW but she got the ticket. Had to PAY because best friend's nephew is a BIG TIME ATTORNEY in that town and his FREE ADVICE/COUNCILING was pay fine and move on because to fight it would cost more and knowing the judge she would still not prevail.

 

[mrodgers]

I agree with that assessment even while I acknowledge it would be annoying/distressing to witness. Do I really want an employee to suffer an injury or death b/c someone wants to steal? No, absolutely not! Would I want my hubby to intervene? No. These are things that aren't worth any honest person's life. And to be controversial, it's not worth the thief's life either. I agree with consequences, not with beatings or loss of life. It's about standards. Let the court of law decide, and advocate/vote for the society you want to live in.

It's not the injury to the employee that is the problem (in the eyes of the business owner.) It's the lawsuit for one of your employees touching someone physically that is the problem. No corporate store allows any employee to stop someone because they would be liable for injury. Folks don't like this and get offended by me mentioning it, but it is the direct experience I have - At Lowes the security person isn't even allowed to do anything.

 

[Jimmy Mouse]

At Lowes the security person isn't even allowed to do anything.

My wife worked at Lowes for 12 years. One time she followed a person outside who had stole a drill. She snatched it out of his hand and was written up.

If it happens at my store I will take the item and feed it to the criminal.

 

[Dakota731]

Those who suck at life are well aware that most cities won’t bother to prosecute shoplifters for under a certain amount, say $500.

Or in California where you can steal under $950 and not be prosecuted. Seems like common sense that if you legislate stealing without penalty, then that’s what you’re going to get!

 

[emmybee]

It's not the injury to the employee that is the problem (in the eyes of the business owner.) It's the lawsuit for one of your employees touching someone physically that is the problem. No corporate store allows any employee to stop someone because they would be liable for injury. Folks don't like this and get offended by me mentioning it, but it is the direct experience I have - At Lowes the security person isn't even allowed to do anything.

At the beginning of the summer, a young man working at a local Safeway tried to stop a liquor thief and was shot and killed. I don't care if the store is concerned w/ liability. No employer should expect an employee to risk their life for stuff.

 

[mrodgers]

At the beginning of the summer, a young man working at a local Safeway tried to stop a liquor thief and was shot and killed. I don't care if the store is concerned w/ liability. No employer should expect an employee to risk their life for stuff.

I agree. I'm just pointing out I suppose my belief that with corporations, the safety of the employee isn't their concern. They don't give a hoot about the workers. It's only the liability they are concerned with when the one stealing gets injured by an employee as it seems a lot of folks here think employees should be chasing thieves down or something.

 

[JaxDad]

Sometimes I think it would be nice to have the lack of integrity and the brass spheres to just walk out of a store with several hundred dollars in merchandise. It would make Christmas shopping more economical and exciting.

 

[TLSnell1981]

It's sad that this has become acceptable for some. Thankfully others still have LEO arrest these thieves and prosecute them. The cost of stolen goods is passed to the customer. This is not okay.

 

[leebee]

For all we laugh, protein powder isn't a "low ticket" item. Depending on the brand and size, it can run $25-$60 a bottle and more- all passed on to the rest of us.

 

[mjkacmom]

For all we laugh, protein powder isn't a "low ticket" item. Depending on the brand and size, it can run $25-$60 a bottle and more- all passed on to the rest of us.

My son’s large container is $75.

 

[rlk]

For all we laugh, protein powder isn't a "low ticket" item. Depending on the brand and size, it can run $25-$60 a bottle and more- all passed on to the rest of us.

My son’s large container is $75.

My husband and son both use protein powder and it certainly has gone up in price.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I agree. I'm just pointing out I suppose my belief that with corporations, the safety of the employee isn't their concern. They don't give a **** about the workers. It's only the liability they are concerned with when the one stealing gets injured by an employee as it seems a lot of folks here think employees should be chasing thieves down or something.

Security or loss prevention is the only one who should be engaging with potential cases of theft. Even then security has their boundaries. Security is trained for this, employees are usually not (and I wouldn't want to be an employee of a place where I'm expected to go after thieves). On the liability I would agree but that also goes for the employee. A company usually doesn't want to open themselves up to liability issues when their employee says they put them in an unsafe situation. So either the policy becomes don't do anything alert the proper authorities or they have security or loss prevention whose job is to do this and even then they usually have to alert the proper authorities depending on the situation.

I remember when I worked at JCP loss prevention could not exit the store to chase anyone down but inside the store was a different story and it did happen. A common thing to do back then was have a car waiting and someone or multiple people would just grab up a bunch of clothing and run out. That was hard to stop. Now what they could do is get the vehicle details and tell the police but that was it. However something else that would happen was switching of price tags and that one was something they could more easily deal with as well as suspected shoplifting within the store.

 

[mrodgers]

Security or loss prevention is the only one who should be engaging with potential cases of theft.

Oh my word, I saw a censored word in your quoting of my post and had to check my post on that. Whew it was censored in my original also except it showed when I clicked edit. That word I typed definitely wasn't on purpose, LOL.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Oh my word, I saw a censored word in your quoting of my post and had to check my post on that. Whew it was censored in my original also except it showed when I clicked edit. That word I typed definitely wasn't on purpose, LOL.

lol that's the Boards filtering, but I get what you were feeling

 

[MrsCobraBubbles]

How is there a resale market for protein powder? Why do they bother? Isn't synthetic identify theft far more lucrative?

Crackheads will try to sell you anything. They will sell you the bag of refill soap they stole out of the gas station bathroom or the weed eater they took from your neighbor's shed.