No Walgreens For You

[Cheburashka]

It's not just CA, it's everywhere and has been even before the pandemic.

While in college, my niece worked at Victoria Secrets. It was located in an outside mall and the street was about 10 steps from the door. Her first shift a group of 3 or 4 people dressed in black and had their faces covered jumped out of a car that parked in the middle of the street. They ran in with large trash bags and just grabbed anything and everything they could, shoved it in the bags, ran out and jumped in the car. It happened almost weekly in the year she was there and it still happens.

Same thing would happen at other stores - people would come in, fill bags with anything, and jump into a car. This is not a recent thing and it's happening in all areas, not just "crime-ridden" areas.

I've never seen it happen, or heard of it happening, anywhere in my area, and I've lived here all my life. I saw someone get caught shoplifting once in a boutique- the employees quietly told her not to come back- but I've never seen or heard of anyone doing what you described.

 

[Cheburashka]

It's a merchant problem, and the merchants are making a business decision that is very heavily influenced by the potential liability if their employees attempt to detain shoplifters for the police. They are afraid that a criminal will be injured, or an employee will be injured -- and they know that both would sue the employer.

It isn't the merchant's fault that they have to take those risks into account. That's a litigious society problem.

 

[bcla]

I've never seen it happen, or heard of it happening, anywhere in my area, and I've lived here all my life. I saw someone get caught shoplifting once in a boutique- the employees quietly told her not to come back- but I've never seen or heard of anyone doing what you described.

I live in the San Francisco Bay Area, and I've never personally witnessed an organized theft occurring. I have seen the occasional shoplifter get caught, but that was a long time ago. I mentioned seeing it once before in HS, but it was a friend where I had no idea he was about to do it. He stuffed items in a bag and as soon as he left the door a plainclothes security guard stopped him. Since I had nothing to do with it, I just kept on walking. I found out that they took him in, made him pay for the items he took, took back the items, and told him never to return to the store. I don't believe it was ever reported to the police. The night of the Rodney King verdict I was at school and saw police in riot gear getting ready. Then as I was heading back to my car I saw someone break a window and steal some T-shirts. Wasn't worth much, but who understands the motivation?

There have been all sorts of these things happening. This was one I remembered, which was a MAC cosmetics theft where the perp tried to give some of the stuff to her daughter and niece. And it was her car - not even a stolen car - used to pull it off.

https://www.berkeleyside.org/2013/12/11/authorities-link-woman-to-19000-berkeley-make-up-heist​

On Nov. 26, detectives served a search warrant at Hale’s home. They interviewed Hale’s daughter who said Hale had shown her and her cousin a box of MAC products the prior week and allowed them each to pick out several items for themselves. The items matched the description of some of the make-up that had been stolen from the MAC store, police said.​

​

Officers also said they found a range of stolen property — including credit cards, check books, bank cards, driver’s licenses and a planner listing “over 100 identity theft profiles” — in Hale’s home.​

​

Police said they contacted four victims who said their property had been stolen, and another five people from the planner who each said they had been the victim of identity theft.​

​

Police said Hale denied involvement with the MAC store burglary, but said she often lent her vehicle to other people. She told police she did not remember whom she had lent it to the night of the burglary, according to court papers.​

​

Hale admitted to police that she had committed identity theft, and said the day planner belonged to her, according to court documents.​

 

[bcla]

It isn't the merchant's fault that they have to take those risks into account. That's a litigious society problem.

I'm not sure that the biggest issue would be a perp getting injured. It would be an innocent third party getting injured, where Walgreens or another retailer have deep pockets.

 

[JimMIA]

I'm not sure that the biggest issue would be a perp getting injured. It would be an innocent third party getting injured, where Walgreens or another retailer have deep pockets.

If ANYbody gets injured, the retailer pays big bucks. That's just a fact of life.

 

[bcla]

If ANYbody gets injured, the retailer pays big bucks. That's just a fact of life.

I'm sure you're familiar with a hesitancy of police to engage in high speed car chases these days.

As for shoplifting, I've heard claims that a lot of large retailers just factor that in as a cost of doing business.

 

[jpakstis]

Like I said, retailers would disagree because it is true in CALIFORNIA. If they call with a shoplifter, they are told there will be new law enforcement response for the reasons several of us have mentioned whether you want to believe it or not. But it isn't LE or the DA's fault, the voters approved the law, and now have to life with their decision.

Where have retailers been told that the police will not respond to a call about shoplifter? Remember that the law is on the books. Shoplifting is a crime, passed by Prop 47. If the police don’t investigate or arrest or the DA doesn’t prosecute, that is either a tactical decision (don’t want to use resources on cases like these) or a policy decision (local authorities have decided not to investigate and prosecute cases like these).

It is not a legal problem. The voters decided to criminalize shoplifting by approving Prop 47.

 

[tvguy]

Where have retailers been told that the police will not respond to a call about shoplifter? Remember that the law is on the books. Shoplifting is a crime, passed by Prop 47. If the police don’t investigate or arrest or the DA doesn’t prosecute, that is either a tactical decision (don’t want to use resources on cases like these) or a policy decision (local authorities have decided not to investigate and prosecute cases like these).

It is not a legal problem. The voters decided to criminalize shoplifting by approving Prop 47.

Voters de-criminalized it. But lawmakers did pass a law to allow prosecution but only if they can link it to organized crime.

https://www.hoover.org/research/why-shoplifting-now-de-facto-legal-california
https://apnews.com/article/business...rus-pandemic-d0c6dc49ef4cd6d05f649a860bd72888

 

[JimMIA]

I'm sure you're familiar with a hesitancy of police to engage in high speed car chases these days.

Sure, but that's very old news -- at least here in South Florida. More than 25 years ago all of the local police chiefs in Miami-Dade County got together and agreed that there would be no more vehicle chases except for violent felonies.

The risk of injuring innocent bystanders far outweighs the benefit of catching the criminal. They'll come around again anyway.

As for shoplifting, I've heard claims that a lot of large retailers just factor that in as a cost of doing business.

Yep. In the case of Walgreens, shoplifting may have been one factor that led to the store closures, but I'm sure they looked at the whole picture. Big retailers like Walgreens have criteria for opening new stores, and closing stores, and I'm sure they don't close stores based solely (or even mostly) on shoplifting alone.

 

[bcla]

Yep. In the case of Walgreens, shoplifting may have been one factor that led to the store closures, but I'm sure they looked at the whole picture. Big retailers like Walgreens have criteria for opening new stores, and closing stores, and I'm sure they don't close stores based solely (or even mostly) on shoplifting alone.

I'm not sure how it works for Walgreens, but I've gone to stores where there are bonuses based on store performance. Once there was a special month long warehouse sale, and the employees said that they were kind of upset about it because their store sales just dropped like a rock for that month and affected their bonuses. But other Walgreens stores are really their biggest competitor.

Walgreens is absolutely overextended in San Francisco. They still have more than one per square mile. I'm frankly a bit surprised that none of the closed locations were in downtown, which is seeing a lot less traffic

 

[hhisc16]

Walgreens seems to compete with itself.
Our town of 30k residents has 2 within 1 mile of each other?

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Theft rate by state.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/232583/larceny-theft-rate-in-the-us-by-state/Well Well Well. California is well down the list under the national average. You'd never know it from certain media outlets.

It's OK. I'm sure we'll have a new program soon to address the "pharmacy deserts" in SF.

That may be but it won't be because of a lack of pharmacies in the area. The real reason Walgreens are closing is the same reason Walgreens are closing in several other cities. In fact last year they closed over 200. They and several others pursued a strategy saturating the market to drive local pharmacies out of business. It did work to some extent but other big players filled the gaps and did the same thing. And that left all of them including Walgreens with too many locations. In my city alone over 20 of these Walgreens and CVS type stores have closed. They were saturated. The article posted by the OP said that the stores in question were not victimized by theft all that much. But taking a swipe at San Francisco makes for better PR than, "yeah we drove moms and pops out of business all across the country after years of faithfully serving their communities by opening way too many locations and now we don't need so many so we're closing them, including these in San Francisco." And they have all too many news outlets ready and willing to repeat it without checking up on things. You'll never see these outlets taking a swipe at any of the other places they closed one. Unless of course it's New York. Seattle, Portland, LA, or Chicago.

Local city ordinances in those 2 cities are such that you can steal up to $900 of stuff and it's a misdemeanor.

The amounts needed for a felony are not inconsistent with other states. In fact 39 states are at or over $1,000. OOO. Everything really is bigger in Texas. Including the amount needed for a felony.

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/10/felony-thresholds/

Sure. I don't really see this as a problem that's specific to San Francisco. Organized theft rings happen all around the country. These seem to be more common at Walgreens, CVS, and other drug stores. It could be that they're generally smaller and easier to get in and out. In San Francisco most Walgreens and CVS stores are in neighborhood locations where there's a quick getaway. I'd think that something like a basement mall location (there was one Walgreens in San Francisco like that) would make exiting much more difficult.

They generally target high value items. I was surprised to see baby formula among the most stolen items. I occasionally bought some at drug stores in a pinch, and they often had hard to remove anti-theft stickers saying that it wasn't authorized for resale at any place other than that specific retailer.

It's also interesting that Costco seems to deal with theft far better. Now I have heard of thieves targeting their jewelry cases. I kind of question whether having $20,000 diamonds in a glass case is a wise decision, but then again Costcos are often designed to bottleneck at the exits. And getting out the parking lot can be a real challenge too, although my nearest one is unique in that there's street parking closer to the entrance than most spots in the parking lot.

And Apple Stores layouts are really weird. I know they've been criticized in law enforcement circles for their emphasis on appearance above all else.

The bigger stores also have loss prevention staff on site. I'm not sure about Walgreens. I do see the one way mirrors and cameras but I'm not sure they actually have people there for that purpose.

Voters de-criminalized it. But lawmakers did pass a law to allow prosecution but only if they can link it to organized crime.

https://www.hoover.org/research/why-shoplifting-now-de-facto-legal-california
https://apnews.com/article/business...rus-pandemic-d0c6dc49ef4cd6d05f649a860bd72888

Actually your article from Hoover, is a de facto argument. All they really showed is that thieves sometimes get away with it. And that has been true since the dawn of thievery. That is not even remotely the same thing as saying voters de-crimininalized it which would be a de jure argument. For such an argument to be correct, you would have to show that de jure, shoplifting has been decriminalized. You haven't shown that. In fact the opposite has been shown. Theft (which shoplifting is a form of) is still a crime and is a misdemeanor or felony depending upon amount. IE it has NOT been decriminalized. Prosecutors will use their discretion whether or not to prosecute any crime (up to and including murder) based upon how much evidence they have. A prosecutor refusing to prosecute a particular crime due to lack of evidence doesn't mean that the crime has in general been decriminalized.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-160551360299
And again, the amount that the law changed for a felony still leaves California able to bust someone on a felony rap at a lower amount than 39 other states. Most cases of shoplifting are in fact under $400 and the proposition didn't change a thing for those cases.

 

[VandVsmama]

I don't really care what the shoplifting laws are in every single state. But I do know that SF is not the city it used to be and I'm not the only one who is staying the heck away since it's turned into a disgusting urine & feces-ridden pool of filth and crime. I'm staying away from Portland, OR for the same reason.

 

[bcla]

Walgreens seems to compete with itself.
Our town of 30k residents has 2 within 1 mile of each other?

In my area it's CVS. It also got really weird because CVS bought out Target's pharmacy operations, but still operates inside of CVS. Even where there's was a Target store near a CVS store, the Target store still has a CVS Pharmacy inside. But there are still lots of Walgreens stores too although one recently closed around here too.

 

[bcla]

The bigger stores also have loss prevention staff on site. I'm not sure about Walgreens. I do see the one way mirrors and cameras but I'm not sure they actually have people there for that purpose.

Depends on the location, but many do have unarmed "observer" security.

The supermarkets in my area are a little bit different. There are two big ones in one small city, but in way different locations. One might have a single unarmed guard, plus they only allow access in/out hrough one sliding door. The other one is far different. They've gone to a single door too. They have multiple security personnel, and typically at least one armed guard wearing body armor. Police are there about half the time I visit. I haven't heard of an organized theft ring hitting that store, but I would think their biggest problem is with petty theft. Armed guards are usually authorized to use force, although I'd think they'd need to be judicious when there's the chance of hitting a bystander.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

In my area it's CVS. It also got really weird because CVS bought out Target's pharmacy operations, but still operates inside of CVS. Even where there's was a Target store near a CVS store, the Target store still has a CVS Pharmacy inside. But there are still lots of Walgreens stores too although one recently closed around here too.

I really haven't tallied it up but I think we have more CVS too though it might be a tad more even in ratio with Walgreens.

We also used to have Osco Drug which was bought by CVS. I used to get my disposable cameras developed at Osco Drug back in the day and my prescriptions there. I tend to shop CVS more on average probably in part to the Osco Drug part.

 

[bcla]

I really haven't tallied it up but I think we have more CVS too though it might be a tad more even in ratio with Walgreens.

We also used to have Osco Drug which was bought by CVS. I used to get my disposable cameras developed at Osco Drug back in the day and my prescriptions there. I tend to shop CVS more on average probably in part to the Osco Drug part.

My part of California used to be dominated by the regional drug stores. Thrifty, Payless, Longs. Walgreens had a few stores along with Rite-Aid, but it was hardly the behemoth that it is now. But then mergers and buyouts happened and now it's just CVS and Walgreens dominating the market.

 

[tvguy]

My part of California used to be dominated by the regional drug stores. Thrifty, Payless, Longs. Walgreens had a few stores along with Rite-Aid, but it was hardly the behemoth that it is now. But then mergers and buyouts happened and now it's just CVS and Walgreens dominating the market.

We have CVS and Walgreens but Rite Aid seems to have more locations in Sacramento.

 

[bcla]

We have CVS and Walgreens but Rite Aid seems to have more locations in Sacramento.

There aren't too many Rite-Aid locations around here, but they seem to have maintained the Thrifty ice cream manufacturing. There weren't too many Thrifty locations around here, and the ones I remember closed quickly after the Thrifty-Payless acquisition by Rite-Aid. However, I heard somewhere that they were generally pretty cheap - like a dime for a scoop?

 

[Moliphino]

We have CVS and Walgreens but Rite Aid seems to have more locations in Sacramento.

Around me, Walgreens has bought out Rite-Aid.