[HN Gopher] Retailers are spending millions to combat organized ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from
       stores
        
       Author : juokaz
       Score  : 135 points
       Date   : 2021-09-03 13:16 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
        
       | kneel wrote:
       | Going to CVS is a timesink now that I have to walk around and ask
       | employees to open cases for me.
       | 
       | Why can't they use vending machines?
        
         | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
         | Hang on, we've had literally thousands of years with stores
         | where you could pick up an item and run away, but don't.
         | 
         | There is now are organized shoplifting crime groups, and your
         | solution is to design specialized vending machines for teeth
         | whitening strips, phone chargers, etc?
         | 
         | I'm not saying it is a net good to deploy violence on poor
         | people. But don't you suppose that society would benefit
         | overall if there were physical and clear legal consequences to
         | shoplifting?
         | 
         | Or do you really want the world to use vending machines for
         | everything? Aren't you concerned about climate change? Where do
         | you suppose all those vending machines would come from what how
         | are they powered?
        
           | kneel wrote:
           | I found vending machines on amazon, problem solved
        
             | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
             | Initially I was considering this would be farming more
             | senseless production to China where you can feel good about
             | the pollution because it isn't seen, it isn't tallied, and
             | they won't conform to economic policies designed to curb
             | it. Ignoring the potential for slave labor and poor working
             | conditions. Then you have the shipping of vending machines
             | from China to all over the USA. Power, parts, these are
             | made cheaply to fail so probably while more replacements
             | than parts.
             | 
             | All to treat 99% of people like criminals because we lack
             | the conviction to actually do something about a shoplifting
             | problem.
             | 
             | But I have changed my mind. I was not aware vending
             | machines are available on Amazon.
        
         | wwweston wrote:
         | Online order for pickup is close, at least if you can wait 6-8
         | hours for the order to process.
         | 
         | Had this same experience with a Walmart a week ago, btw -- it
         | took me 15 minutes to _find_ one item I was looking for, and by
         | the time I realized that it was behind a glass door I 'd
         | already seen the lines of 8 people waiting for an employee to
         | help them get what they wanted. At that point, I did the math
         | on sunk vs further costs, set down the rest of my purchase, and
         | went on to pay twice as much elsewhere _and_ consider it a
         | bargain.
         | 
         | The pandemic really created conditions that helped me realize
         | how much of retail shopping is a waste of time.
        
       | adamqureshi wrote:
       | Boosting has been going on since the 90's in NYC. Back in the day
       | i used to work on 34th/7th ave in NYC s selling leather jackets
       | in a rinky-dink store about 500 square fee. The boosters came in
       | groups some from Brooklyn some from uptown. They would boost
       | across the street from Macy's and sell the stolen goods right
       | across the street or on the streets. They would go store to small
       | shops and sell Georgio armani , versace to the employees who
       | worked there and to tourists on the streets ( those brands where
       | hot back then) some boosters even started taking orders,. there
       | were independent operators( not with the pack) and others who
       | would roll with the pack. Each booster specialized in boosting a
       | product. Some would only do designer clothing while others would
       | lift electronics and they would sell to tourists on the street or
       | store clerks working in shops, I even bought a nice Armani suite
       | from them one day. They had figured out how to beat all security
       | alarms in macy's and someone then figured out that you could
       | return what you stole from Macy's without a receipt during the
       | holidays so boosters then started to return what they stole back
       | to Macy's and Macy's would cut them a check for it. This was
       | around 1995. Some boosters tried to lift stuff from the store I
       | was working in and I had to go and stop them , one time we had
       | throw down right in front of our store to get the leather jackets
       | back. I even had to go run after a few. Macy's security guards
       | can't do jack. The cops had more important things todo I guess.
       | The boosters would grab and bag and just run out the door and
       | into the train and vanish. They had some aluminum foil around the
       | bag they put the stuff in so the alarms did not go off. They
       | would go downtown. Uptown and after the city got to HOT they
       | started going to the suburban malls. It was like a syndicate. I
       | guess it's still happening now.
        
       | canada_dry wrote:
       | Right before the pandemic the gov't run liquor stores in Ontario
       | were being robbed of stock in the middle of the day. Staff called
       | police and then stood back. If police bothered to appear it was
       | usually hours later.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_t5WHvPv1g
       | 
       | Possibly organized boosting, but as soon as word spread it became
       | wildly popular for a few weeks.
        
       | jellicle wrote:
       | Nobody working on wage theft by employers, by far the largest
       | organized theft ring running.
        
         | EarthIsHome wrote:
         | Wage theft reported in Iowa using unpaid overtime as an
         | example:
         | http://www.iowapolicyproject.org/images/150818-wagetheft-Fig...
         | 
         | EPI has some good articles as well:
         | https://www.epi.org/publication/wage-theft-bigger-problem-fo...
        
           | missedthecue wrote:
           | I wonder what the value of the inverse of this is - time
           | theft. How many employees are paid to be on the clock but are
           | not working? I bet it's in the hundreds of billions per year
           | nationwide.
        
           | conductr wrote:
           | The EPI article gives some interesting & specific examples of
           | wage theft. However, I think that term and the discussion
           | around it gives the impression that large corporations are
           | looking for opportunities to steal employees wages. When I
           | skim these examples I see a few honest mistakes / bad
           | policies but mostly small likely bankrupt/distressed
           | companies trying to keep the wheels from falling off their
           | business. It's like a ponzi scheme falling apart, payroll
           | checks bounce, tips get stolen, employees are asked to do
           | something while clocked out, etc. Because many businesses
           | have insufficient working capital, this just happens.
           | 
           | Let's take a relative look at the problem
           | 
           | > wage theft is costing workers more than $50 billion a year.
           | 
           | $50B / $6.5T [0] = 0.77% of wages are "stolen"
           | 
           | While not good and $50B is a huge amount, I'd argue this is
           | not much of a problem but a rounding error. Unless we require
           | some level of capitalization or reserves by small businesses,
           | a large portion of this will never go away. I would be
           | shocked if even half the restitutions were paid, this forced
           | bankruptcy for most of these businesses I would guess.
           | 
           | [0]: https://www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-
           | wages-an...
        
             | noasaservice wrote:
             | If employee steals from store, they're fired and arrested.
             | 
             | If store steals from an employee, they're told to pound
             | sand at a state level office and hope and pray that some
             | mid-level bureaucrat looks into the issue and writes a
             | "stern letter".
        
         | throw_m239339 wrote:
         | > Nobody working on wage theft by employers, by far the largest
         | organized theft ring running.
         | 
         | Wage theft is absolutely a reality and an injustice that needs
         | to be punished as much as petty theft if not more. But 2 wrongs
         | don't make a right. Both kind of theft need to be prosecuted,
         | especially when it's an organized group, and all the businesses
         | that allow fencing stolen goods need to have the book thrown at
         | them if they don't take serious measures to limit these
         | practices.
        
           | dls2016 wrote:
           | Unfortunately one has been deemed a "civil matter" and you
           | won't read any reporting about it in WSJ or Forbes.
           | Hilariously, wage theft is much more organized than any
           | shoplifting conspiracy.
        
       | bko wrote:
       | > The target was no ordinary shoplifter. He was part of a network
       | of organized professionals, known as boosters, whom CVS had been
       | monitoring for weeks. The company believed the group responsible
       | for stealing almost $50 million in products over five years from
       | dozens of stores in Northern California.
       | 
       | The story isn't about people selling stolen goods on Amazon. It's
       | about organized theft operations. One way to stop theft is to
       | reduce the ability to sell stolen goods, but that infringes on
       | ownership rights of a large number of people that want to sell
       | things online. I'm sure large corporations would love it if you
       | can't buy their goods second hand.
       | 
       | At the end of the day, protecting property rights is a job for
       | the state. Since it sounds its being organized, the criminal
       | organization might be exploiting recent changes in sentencing and
       | prosecution:
       | 
       | > Retail investigators blame changes in sentencing laws in some
       | states for an uptick in thefts. In California, a 2014 law
       | downgraded the theft of less than $950 worth of goods to a
       | misdemeanor from a felony. Target recently reduced its operating
       | hours in five San Francisco stores, citing rising thefts.
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | A simpler way -- just put all merchandise behind the glass. Any
         | touching only with supervision of a store manager.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | Then you need more staff.
           | 
           | I was trying to buy some allergy spray at CVS, and couldn't
           | get anyone to unlock the case. So I left and ordered it
           | online from Costco, at 1/3 the price.
        
           | ganoushoreilly wrote:
           | Sadly a lot of the more risky chains do this pretty
           | regularly. I was in a best buy a few years ago where almost
           | everything was behind glass. I wonder what that does to the
           | minds of locals shopping and feeling like they're always
           | under lock and key. It can't be healthy.
        
             | incone123 wrote:
             | Also requires more staff to get the goods to the customer.
             | It used to be normal for everything in a store to be behind
             | the counter, and you got served. But self service is
             | cheaper for the store, unless/until we reach a tipping
             | point regarding thefts.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | For many customers that eliminates the only advantage of
           | shopping at a brick & mortar store. If you have to ask store
           | staff for everything then it's easier to shop online.
           | 
           | Cities are destroying their own business districts and losing
           | sales tax revenue by refusing to enforce shoplifting laws.
        
         | Gunax wrote:
         | I think it's okay to mention the effect Amazon is having
         | without blaming them. Ultimately online person-to-person
         | trading is making fencing items easier and the people buying
         | probably don't know they are purchasing stolen items. Amazon
         | isn't the thesis, but it is disrupting the stolen goods market
         | in the same way automoboles and highways lead to a spike in
         | bank robbery.
         | 
         | I grew up in a poor area and we had a neighborhood fence. Let's
         | call him 'Casey' since that was his name. Everyone knew Casey
         | was selling stolen items and there was sort of a joke in the
         | town about getting a 'Casey discount'. It sounds like Casey is
         | probably operating an Amazon store now.
        
         | kevinpet wrote:
         | I'm concerned about lawlessness, but if the only alternative is
         | that $950 theft is a _felony_ that's messed up. This seems more
         | like a case of not being able to deal with crime than lax
         | sentencing.
        
         | bushbaba wrote:
         | If each item had a unique id. And the stores could indicate
         | unique ids that are stolen. The. Amazon & eBay could monitor
         | and prevent stolen merchandise
        
           | literallyaduck wrote:
           | You could probably get some milage with just a local store id
           | and date on the box. If you want to get cute you could change
           | the pill stamp.
        
           | nitrogen wrote:
           | Everything is easy if you assume a panopticon.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | We already have the panopticon, we might as well get some
             | fucking benefits from it.
             | 
             | As it is I'm paying both for hard drives in Utah for the
             | NSA to store my contacts and photos and track logs, then
             | again (formerly) for iCloud to do it a second time. It's
             | inefficient.
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | If it's actually organized crime, then they can be prosecuted
         | under RICO statutes, which allows for much stronger sentencing
         | than shoplifting ever would have. Robbery is one of the 35
         | crimes included under the "racketeering" umbrella.
        
         | floren wrote:
         | The SF city government seems to have realized that there's
         | another way to make crime "go down": refuse to prosecute for
         | anything, ideally make it pointless for the cops to even show
         | up, until people stop bothering to report crime. Wow,
         | shoplifting is at record lows!
        
           | nikanj wrote:
           | Same with bike theft in Vancouver. Nobody bothers reporting
           | it, so the statistics aren't too bad
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | Isn't there any incentive for your claim on your theft
             | insurance?
        
               | blacksmith_tb wrote:
               | It's fairly uncommon to have insurance specifically for
               | your bicycle, so most people would be filing claims
               | against their renters' (if they have it) or homeowners'
               | insurance. Given the size of those deductibles ($500 is
               | the US average for homeowners', I would think Canada is
               | similar [1]) lots of people would just buy another bike
               | that costs less.
               | 
               | 1: https://www.insurance.com/home-and-renters-
               | insurance/home-in...
        
           | pvtprop wrote:
           | Corporations want taxes cut to nothing and complain when the
           | public doesn't want to protect their private property.
           | 
           | Funny how that works.
           | 
           | I notice it's WSJ complaining.
           | 
           | More "government is inept" sentiment to justify private
           | armies.
        
           | neither_color wrote:
           | We're approaching a strange post-empirical world where the
           | right chart or graph can be used to justify any public
           | policy, and often changing how the data for the chart is
           | collected, analyzed and presented is easier than solving the
           | issue. The collective anecdotes of thousands/millions of
           | people can be dismissed because the chart says otherwise.
           | 
           | Disagree that crime in your neighborhood has dropped? Just
           | because your car has been broken into and your neighbor got
           | robbed doesnt mean there's a trend. Anecdotes arent data. Do
           | you have a source for that?
        
             | seph-reed wrote:
             | This is a toughy.
             | 
             | People who don't believe in covid vaccines -- for instance
             | -- are living in a world of anecdotes, untrusting of easily
             | manipulable data.
             | 
             | But it's where we're at. In a world where you can't trust
             | the data and your friends are addicted to consuming
             | propaganda, what the fuck is truth?
        
             | ZeroGravitas wrote:
             | In your opinion, did the multi-decade drop in American
             | crime, regularly discussed by academics who have some
             | tentative theories to explain it, happen or was it all
             | faked?
             | 
             | https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-
             | opinion/amer...
        
               | sabarn01 wrote:
               | murders are hard to fake. The rest of crime data is more
               | subjective than people realize. I was robbed at gunpoint
               | for 1$. I did not report the crime.
        
               | sizzle wrote:
               | That's really scary, over a damn dollar?!?
               | 
               | What was the context here if you don't mind sharing, why
               | one dollar and not your whole wallet? Why pull a gun??
               | Isn't that a felony? Won't police respond immediately to
               | the report of someone threatening your life via
               | brandishing a gun in public (more people in danger if not
               | caught)?
        
               | rahimnathwani wrote:
               | Usually robbers pull the gun _before_ determining how
               | much money the victim has in their wallet.
               | 
               | They could ask the potential victim first, and then, if
               | the value is too low, not bother pulling a gun. But all
               | potential victims have an incentive to lie and say they
               | only have $1. Knowing that, a rational robber would pull
               | a gun without requesting the info first.
               | 
               | Regarding police responding immediately: you can't call
               | the police until after robber has lowered their gun
               | and/or left the scene. So by the time you call the
               | police, you're no longer being threatened.
        
               | sabarn01 wrote:
               | They walked up and indicated they had a gun in their
               | pocket. They had a buddy that was across the street. They
               | asked for 1$ which is what I gave them. Other people I
               | knew in the area were also robbed at gunpoint for 1$, but
               | on their porch. They did call the cops.
               | 
               | As for why I don't know.
        
               | sabarn01 wrote:
               | Also the police don't come quickly in most places. My
               | wife was pistol whipped and it took 30 minutes to get a
               | car to our house 1 mile from the station. Also I lived in
               | a bad neighborhood for a long time so this may not be
               | typical.
        
               | scythe wrote:
               | > In your opinion [...] was it all faked?
               | 
               | Please don't flamebait. The poster is talking about year-
               | on-year changes in a neighborhood, not decade-on-decade
               | changes in a whole country. The relevance of personal
               | experience is drastically higher in the first case.
               | 
               | But I think it's worth noting that "crime is rising" and
               | "crime is not rising" tend to be aliases for the real
               | opinions: "crime is too high" and "crime is not too
               | high".
        
               | 908B64B197 wrote:
               | It's all real.
               | 
               | Violent crimes had a multi-decade drop. SF is a very
               | localized anomaly in regards to property crimes.
        
               | adventured wrote:
               | Definitely not localized.
               | 
               | Los Angeles and New York to name two other prominent
               | cities, are drowning in an epic ongoing crime wave.
               | 
               | SF, LA, NYC all have the same malfunction in terms of
               | city governance.
               | 
               | LA -
               | 
               | LA Mag, July 2021: "'It's a Puzzle': Experts Are Trying
               | to Figure Out What's Causing L.A.'s Crime Wave"
               | 
               | A puzzle. Experts. Ha ha ha ha. Ha. Bullshit.
               | 
               | https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/crime-in-los-angeles/
               | 
               | NYC -
               | 
               | "NYPD Announces Citywide Crime Statistics for May 2021"
               | 
               | "For the month of May 2021, overall index crime in New
               | York City rose 22% compared with May 2020, driven by a
               | 46.7% increase in robbery (1,182 v. 806) and a 35.6%
               | increase in grand larceny (2,848 v. 2,101). Felony
               | assault saw a 20.5% increase compared to May 2020 (1,979
               | v. 1,643), and shooting incidents increased to 173 v. 100
               | in May 2020 (+73%)."
               | 
               | https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/news/pr0603/nypd-citywide-
               | cri...
               | 
               | Some of that is Covid reductions in 2020 (year over year
               | comps), and some of it is still up considerably over 2019
               | figures. Murders in May were up 100% vs 2019 for example,
               | burglaries were up around 17%. Felony assaults were up
               | slightly vs 2019. Grand larceny was up about 25% vs 2019.
        
               | j_walter wrote:
               | That was real and everyone can agree on that based on
               | what they see as well as the data. However you can't go
               | to a single SF neighborhood and find people that think
               | crime has dropped recently. There are boatloads of
               | articles about people having their cars broken into so
               | often they leave them unlocked because replacing windows
               | was so expensive. Videos of people shoplifting while
               | security stands by and does nothing because of the laws.
               | Articles about criminals that kill someone but had been
               | in and out of the system for years with fairly severe
               | crimes but always let off by a rouge DA or out on bail
               | (or without bail because bail is racist).
               | 
               | https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/sf-da-announces-
               | homici...
        
               | CardenB wrote:
               | ??? A couple of months ago I literally saw a man get
               | tackled for stealing ties from a high end store in SF
               | nearby union square.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | Unintentional consequences of the California three strikes
           | law perhaps? Prosecutors unwilling to hand out mandatory 25
           | year sentences for petty theft?
        
             | liber8 wrote:
             | This is not how the three-strike law works. You don't get a
             | life sentence for petty theft.
             | 
             | Under Penal Code section 667(e), you can receive a life
             | term if you are convicted of a serious or violent felony
             | AND you have twice before been convicted of serious and
             | violent felonies. See https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa
             | ces/codes_displaySectio...
        
             | Stronico wrote:
             | Nice catch actually
        
           | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
           | Shoplifting is at record lows. Shoplifting is at record
           | highs. Ah, forced perspective.
        
           | neutronicus wrote:
           | Baltimore, too
           | 
           | But the nice neighborhoods are hiring private security and in
           | some cases threatening tax revolt
        
           | babyshake wrote:
           | In The Wire, this is called juking the stats.
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | You can do the same thing in education by closing down
           | magnets schools and lowering the bar for everyone...
        
             | rahimnathwani wrote:
             | You don't even have to close them. Just remove merit-based
             | admission, in the name of equity.
             | 
             | Then, because many students won't be able to keep up, the
             | 'magnet' school will lower standards.
        
           | hncurious wrote:
           | I don't know if that was the intention or not, but that is
           | precisely the outcome of SF policies.
        
             | nitrogen wrote:
             | It seems to apply to traffic, too. Sabotage the road system
             | to prove that driving is terrible. A few extremely major
             | streets were basically off road driving for a year while I
             | was living there. Light timing is terrible at several
             | intersections, guaranteeing gridlock. Traffic cops get
             | stationed at the next intersection over, so nothing
             | changes.
             | 
             | Mission accomplished: fewer cars on the road! But no money
             | coming in either.
        
           | BitwiseFool wrote:
           | I will never not share Goodhart's Law when the opportunity
           | arises: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a
           | good measure". You couple that with redefining what counts as
           | a 'crime', and bam, you get the situation SF is in right now.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
        
           | eplanit wrote:
           | Exactly. Stop calling criminal activity "crimes", and then
           | the stats look great. And, the local SF media participates
           | and pushes the "crime is actually down" narrative:
           | https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/stats-
           | sh...
        
           | AtlasBarfed wrote:
           | That is a bad idea. It leads to vigilantism, or even worse,
           | local organized crime steps in with attendant protectionism
           | racketeering.
           | 
           | With the American System each year failing a larger and
           | larger percentage of the population, while the upper elites
           | continue to hoard wealth and starve the government, then it
           | makes more and more poor people turn to illegal means to make
           | money.
           | 
           | Much like drug gangs in the inner city. However this will
           | also turn into the nasty spiral of gang-controlled
           | neighborhoods chasing out legit economic activity and
           | becoming even more poor.
           | 
           | What we need is a decent civil society. But America is an
           | oligarchy and they've figured out how to use social media to
           | block any meaningful populist progressive reform by
           | organizing a sufficient opposition with astroturfing and fake
           | news.
        
             | floren wrote:
             | Yep, but if the police aren't going to do anything I find
             | it hard to blame the people in SF Chinatown who started
             | doing their own patrols:
             | https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-Chinatown-
             | patr...
        
             | dantheman wrote:
             | Do you think the government is starved? At what level of
             | spending would it not be starved?
        
             | jokethrowaway wrote:
             | The government is incompetent at protecting people. Call
             | the police and you'll see how it goes. And this is
             | happening while the government is spending 13B per year. I
             | wonder, where does the money go, if basic services are not
             | provided?
             | 
             | I'd rather spend my money on a network of competing private
             | protection companies if I didn't have to pay taxes for the
             | police. Once the system is in place you can create all sort
             | of charity based options - or tax funded, if you like the
             | idea of forcefully stealing money from citizens' profit -
             | to grant protection to those who can't afford it.
        
               | floren wrote:
               | > I'd rather spend my money on a network of competing
               | private protection companies if I didn't have to pay
               | taxes for the police.
               | 
               | I'd prefer to fix the cops rather than sign up for a
               | MetaCops subscription in my burbclave.
        
         | tyoma wrote:
         | The felony theft limit for Texas is $2,500, but their retail
         | establishments do not report massive shoplifting sprees.
         | Clearly there is more than misdemeanor/felony classification at
         | work here.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure in CA it's that police do not respond to
           | calls for anything less than felony theft.
           | 
           | So it creates a situation where you can walk in the store,
           | grab what you want, and then walk out with out having the
           | police called or anyone legally allowed to stop you.
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | "They were robbing the store, and I think one of them had a
             | machine gun!"
        
               | keeganpoppen wrote:
               | "i think they had some counterfeit $100 bills as well"
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | > So it creates a situation where you can walk in the
             | store, grab what you want, and then walk out with out
             | having the police called or anyone legally allowed to stop
             | you.
             | 
             | Walmart and Target, among others, reportedly monitor small
             | thefts and let you get up to the felony threshold over
             | multiple incidents before swooping in.
        
               | everybodyknows wrote:
               | An option not available to small businesses, as the
               | shoplifters have no doubt already learned. Another hidden
               | tilting of the playing field against small business.
        
               | hpkuarg wrote:
               | Yes, exactly.
        
           | ErikVandeWater wrote:
           | My guess is it's the same situation as Seattle; Prosecutors
           | in California refuse to prosecute these cases, meaning the
           | cops refuse to waste time trying to apprehend them.
           | 
           | Here's an excellent clip about a famous criminal living free
           | in Seattle that happily expounds on his illegal activity:
           | https://youtu.be/bpAi70WWBlw?t=868
        
             | crazy_horse wrote:
             | There are plenty of things about my state that get hated on
             | all the time, and deservingly so, but I'll never get how
             | the West Coast is happy driving productive people away and
             | coddling those that have no intention other than to fuck
             | over society.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _how the West Coast is happy driving productive people_
               | 
               | The evidence for this happening in economically-
               | meaningful numbers is scarce. What we _do_ see happening
               | is those productive people disengaging from that broken
               | society--civically, physically and emotionally.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | _The evidence for this happening in economically-
               | meaningful numbers is scarce._
               | 
               | It doesn't take numbers meaningful to California to have
               | a meaningful effect on other states, where housing costs
               | are massively skyrocketing due to an influx of new
               | residents.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | What does that have to do with crime? Could be people
               | just getting priced out. Land in the western US is still
               | more expensive and still getting more expensive than
               | elsewhere, clearly it is in demand even more than it is
               | not in demand.
        
               | rconti wrote:
               | I grew up in Washington, where people were whining about
               | Californians moving there and driving up property prices
               | since at least the 80s, but I'm sure long before.
               | 
               | This doesn't prove someone's opinion that criminals are
               | being coddled and productive people are being driven
               | away.
        
               | crazy_horse wrote:
               | I mean about a decade ago I would have loved to live on
               | the West Coast. I'm sure I'm no great loss to you but
               | there are a lot of people that you just will never get.
               | Not to mention, compared to a decade ago, the cities in
               | my home state are starting to adopt these policies.
               | 
               | I don't see how not prosecuting repeated offenders is not
               | coddling, as pointed out, the guy ended up murdering.
               | There's very much a cultural difference.
        
               | Cd00d wrote:
               | I grew up in Colorado, and complaints about housing costs
               | and traffic increases due to the influx of Californians
               | has been a constant since the 1970s. At least.
               | 
               | I'm going posit that it's perception more than any actual
               | changes due to _fleeing 'fornians_.
        
               | a9h74j wrote:
               | Could be, but one hears of a multiplying effect: numbers
               | of households moving from California _times_ the absolute
               | housing price differences, in terms of money flowing into
               | local housing markets.
        
               | amznthrwaway wrote:
               | It's a common right-wing narrative that has literally
               | nothing to do with the data. It's just a thing that
               | right-wingers repeat at all times, regardless of the
               | data.
               | 
               | HN is a site for right-wing extremists, so the nonsense
               | is particularly prevalent here.
        
               | codezero wrote:
               | Prices are rising in California too, so an exodus can't
               | be the explanation, probably inflation and investors
               | driving prices up?
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | ahepp wrote:
             | This guy went on to kill is girlfriend then (possibly
             | accidentally) himself.
             | https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/too-much-
             | jai...
        
               | keeganpoppen wrote:
               | wow, that article is actually a really interesting take
               | on the whole situation, and how there are no easy answers
               | (both in this case and, i suspect, in many others (in sf
               | and beyond)). these sorts of tragedies really highlight
               | the need for a society-wide rethink on how to balance
               | freedom/liberty with the ticking time bomb of negative
               | externalities that certain, highly-justice-system-
               | involved (especially when serious drug abuse issues are
               | in play) offenders represent. at what point is someone
               | "broken" enough from the pov of the rest of society that
               | the humane solution necessitates a more interventionist
               | approach? (not that forcible commission is at all a
               | panacea, or even necessarily a viable/effective approach,
               | of course). i think everyone would agree that letting
               | these sorts of problems fester until they get bad enough
               | that we can justify locking them up and throwing away the
               | key is not a good solution for anyone.
        
           | bko wrote:
           | That's a good point. I don't think the felony theft limit is
           | the only consideration the deters organized theft. One
           | obvious difference between Texas and Bay Area is Texas has a
           | lot of guns.
           | 
           | > In TX can You Legally Shoot & Kill a Shoplifter? The short
           | answer is...not unless they somehow injure you in the process
           | of committing the theft, making it a robbery. "During the
           | process of committing the theft" would include while trying
           | to escape with the property... One thing that is UNIQUE to
           | Texas is the ability to use deadly force to protect property,
           | even if you are not in fear for your life.
           | 
           | Even though I doubt CVS security guards are trained the shoot
           | shoplifters, the preception that this is a possibility would
           | deter low level criminals tasked with shoplifting
           | 
           | http://legas.legrandelaw.com/criminal-justice/in-tx-can-
           | you-...
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | And what happens if you check the receipt on the body and
             | find out that the item wasn't stolen? How many years do you
             | face for murdering a customer?
        
               | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
               | I can point to where firearms have stopped shoplifting
               | crimes.
               | 
               | Can you point to where your scenario has happened?
               | 
               | Because I'm all for hypotheticals, so long as we admit
               | the rarity and precedent before saying there is a
               | problem.
        
               | Hizonner wrote:
               | Difficulty: It would take maybe, shall we say, ten
               | thousand of your "firearms stopping shoplifting" cases to
               | offset even ONE "innocent person getting shot" case.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | I grew up in NH which is a gun-happy state.
             | 
             | My mom worked at Macy's and reported endless problems with
             | organized shoplifting in the 1980's and 1990's. One time a
             | whole family came into the Men's clothing department after
             | her shift, the dad kept the clerk distracted, the mom and
             | the kids took a few racks of suits and loaded them into
             | their car.
             | 
             | She said that the security guards were loathe to use force
             | on anyone because Macy's could get sued; that didn't stop
             | shoplifters from running over a security guard in the
             | parking lot.
             | 
             | I worked at a supermarket where the security was entirely
             | undercover (probably because they were more afraid of us
             | stealing than the customers) and I knew nothing about the
             | security until the day I saw a massively overweight woman
             | tackle a man who was leaving the store.
             | 
             | I read this book
             | 
             | https://www.amazon.com/Black-Mafia-Ethnic-Succession-
             | Organiz...
             | 
             | which describes similar organized theft organizations
             | working in the 1970s, how the goods were fenced, etc.
        
               | paulpauper wrote:
               | The 70s 80s and early 90s was the golden age of crime.
               | Short sentences, much more lenient recidivism laws, poor
               | security, a culture that really didn't care that much, no
               | digitsliazation and no tech to easy track stolen goods or
               | id suspects, no smartphones . Multiple types of crimes
               | thrived in that era: bank robbery, drug
               | dealing/distribution, shoplifting, auto theft, and so on.
               | It was pretty bad, even worse than now. The noticeable
               | decline of crime since the 90s according to steven pinker
               | seems to confirm this.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | conductr wrote:
             | > Even though I doubt CVS security guards are trained the
             | shoot shoplifters, the preception that this is a
             | possibility would deter low level criminals tasked with
             | shoplifting
             | 
             | I've never once seen a security guard in a Texas CVS. It
             | actually sounds preposterous to me. Charging $3 for a 20oz
             | soda is the real crime.
        
             | nonameiguess wrote:
             | These comments are ridiculous. Have any of you people
             | saying these things ever actually lived in Texas? Minimum
             | wage chain store employees are not carrying guns. I would
             | discourage you from trying to rob someone's actual house,
             | sure. My wife once called me home to say she thought
             | someone was in the house, and I cleared every single room
             | with an AR-15, and you can believe I would have shot an
             | intruder without a second thought. But a convenience store?
             | No one is taking it personally enough to shoot you for
             | stealing corporate property. If anything, the employees are
             | probably the people most likely to be doing the stealing.
        
           | jcims wrote:
           | I think CA is an outlier. Super lax enforcement + huge
           | population just puts up big numbers.
        
           | valdiorn wrote:
           | but in Texas, how likely is the staff or the store owner to
           | be armed, and actually confront you? No way that would happen
           | in California.
           | 
           | I keep thinking of this event that happened to me in the UK,
           | where laws are equally useless at preventing theft, and staff
           | are just powerless to do anything about it. I chased down a
           | shoplifter. I cornered him in an alley. He stopped, looked at
           | me, and this brief conversation took place. (and nobody ever
           | believes me, but I don't care; this really did happen)
           | 
           | Him: What are you doing?
           | 
           | Me: I'm chasing you
           | 
           | Him: why?
           | 
           | Me: Because you're a fucking thief!
           | 
           | Him: (confused)...nobody's ever done that before.
           | 
           | Me: (shocked) ... well, I AM, so fucking run!
           | 
           | He dropped the bag (which contained mostly expensive meat and
           | cheese and some other expensive-ish items - apparently really
           | common theft targets) - and ran off. I took the bag back to
           | the store.
           | 
           | Now, I didn't give a shit about a 100 pound loss to Tesco,
           | but if we've completely given up on the rule of law, I'm not
           | sure that's a society I'm happy to live in.
        
             | am_lu wrote:
             | Londoner here, true for big shops and supermarkets, off-
             | licenses and corner shops will be equipped with a baseball
             | bat behind the counter. Watched them dragging low-life
             | thiefs to the back stores to be dealt with.
        
             | ChefboyOG wrote:
             | ...what? The average Texan, as it turns out, isn't
             | literally Wyatt Earp. It would be shocking if a random Best
             | Buy manager stopped a shoplifter with a firearm--not to
             | mention probably in violation of Best Buy's policies for
             | handling shoplifting.
             | 
             | The average cashier's ability to administer lethal force is
             | probably not a major influence on the prevalence of
             | shoplifting in Texas.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | MisterBastahrd wrote:
             | Convenience store, pawn shop, or other stores in low income
             | areas? Maybe.
             | 
             | The ones these people are hitting? Not a snowball's chance
             | in hell. An individual could walk out with 10 baskets full
             | of medicine and still not be worth the trouble to pull a
             | gun for all the legal headaches that will bring.
        
             | blacksmith_tb wrote:
             | Likely Tesco tossed them right in the bin, however. I think
             | it's overstating the case to claim that people robbing
             | shops (especially big chains) is an indication that "we've
             | completely given up on the rule of law" - at least, I find
             | it unlikely that your erstwhile (if gormless) thief,
             | emboldened by his huge haul of free meat and cheese, would
             | choose next time to relieve you of your wallet. Robbing
             | people is a much riskier game, even in a civilised (read
             | "non-firearm-carrying") place like the UK.
        
             | bluedino wrote:
             | >> but in Texas, how likely is the staff or the store owner
             | to be armed, and actually confront you?
             | 
             | At a CVS? Not likely at all.
        
               | kook_throwaway wrote:
               | Why not? Plenty of folks from all walks of life down
               | there get their CCW.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | So given the opportunity, Texan bystanders with guns
               | would shoot unarmed shoplifters?
        
               | pandemicsyn wrote:
               | Nah, a big section of the class you take to get your LTC
               | (we don't have a CCW) covers just how screwed you would
               | be if you did so.
               | 
               | ...but...theres dumb people everywhere, so when you
               | decide to shop lift in Texas the risk profile is
               | certainly different than it is in CA.
        
               | alamortsubite wrote:
               | "There's dumb people everywhere, so when you shoplift in
               | Texas" sounds a lot like like "Texan bystanders would
               | shoot shoplifters."
        
               | kook_throwaway wrote:
               | Why on earth would you jump straight to that conclusion?
               | Even if the firearm was drawn, which is a huge if
               | assuming the carrier was attacked, almost all defensive
               | gun uses end before a shot is fired.
               | 
               | Someone carrying a firearm should be more willing to
               | nonviolently confront a thief than someone that's
               | unarmed.
               | 
               | https://reason.com/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-
               | tha...
        
               | sfasf wrote:
               | In a fairly liberal area of PA I saw a manager of a
               | Walgreens very aggressively (not physically) confront a
               | shoplifter and yell out to never come to the store again.
               | The punk tried to respond, but ultimately cowered to the
               | anger of the manager.
               | 
               | In TX they'd be more intimidating, I'm sure. Unless
               | corporate bans guns.
        
               | unexpected wrote:
               | sorry, but in Texas, big box retailers do not use armed
               | staff. Target, Wal Mart, CVS, Walgreens, Best Buy - I
               | have never, ever seen a worker with a gun.
               | 
               | As a life-long Texan, this sounds ridiculous to me. A Wal
               | Mart employee is more intimidating, simply because
               | they're Texan?
               | 
               | This is not the 1850's.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | cdot2 wrote:
               | You probably walk by people carrying guns every day and
               | never notice
        
               | jdavis703 wrote:
               | Even in the ultra-liberal Bay Area my Walgreens, Target
               | and Best Buy employ armed security. I find it doubtful
               | that Texas of all places doesn't have armed security.
               | 
               | (Oddly I've only seen unarmed, tired looking security in
               | CVS. Perhaps they're too cheap to pay for armed gaurds.)
        
               | kook_throwaway wrote:
               | > box retailers do not use armed staff. Target, Wal Mart,
               | CVS, Walgreens, Best Buy - I have never, ever seen a
               | worker with a gun
               | 
               | It wouldn't be the corporation arming the staff, it would
               | be the staff arming themselves via a CCW/CHL. The first
               | letter states 'concealed', so by definition you shouldn't
               | see it.
               | 
               | >A Wal Mart employee is more intimidating, simply because
               | they're Texan
               | 
               | Its less about any individual employee, and more about
               | the general culture and nature of crime in the two areas.
               | If I were a criminal in Texas, I would undoubtedly prefer
               | crimes with less chance of confrontation.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | amznthrwaway wrote:
               | There is absolutely no way that corporate would allow
               | employees shooting people to defend property.
               | 
               | The resulting lawsuits would be orders of magnitude more
               | expensive for the company than the lost goods, and "there
               | was a shooting at walgreens" is not a headline that
               | Walgreens wants to see.
        
               | ChefboyOG wrote:
               | Texas is a big place, and as far as I'm aware, doesn't
               | make it a policy to train individuals to be vigilantes.
               | 
               | If your anecdote proves anything, it is the relative
               | safety of that liberal area of PA. The fact that a
               | manager of a Walgreens was comfortable confronting a
               | criminal without real consequences speaks to the level of
               | danger they were in.
               | 
               | If you've spent time in any rougher areas of Texas (I
               | have), you'd agree that physically confronting a criminal
               | over petty theft, as a store manager, carries a huge risk
               | of violent escalation--something you'd probably want to
               | avoid in a city with a higher murder rate.
        
             | nonameiguess wrote:
             | All of the downtown CVS locations in Dallas don't even have
             | checkout employees. It's automated self-checkout. You can
             | just walk out of the store if you want to. Nobody is going
             | to shoot you. Whoever owns CVS doesn't live anywhere near
             | the stores.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | I totally believe you, but I don't think that's laudable.
             | 
             | It's one thing to go after someone who steals from _you_ or
             | some other individual, but appointing yourself the
             | vigilante protector of the grocer class is not about
             | defending society, it 's about your personal drives.
             | 
             | The food you returned almost certainly wound up in the
             | trash (stores have no way of knowing you're not a weirdo
             | who contaminates food for kicks), and the cost of
             | administering 'rescued product' is more than that of just
             | writing off the loss as a business expense, which you'd
             | better believe they already budget around.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | Friend of mine got in the local paper for retrieving his
             | laptop from a grab-and-run, by being a regular competitive
             | runner and dramatically outrunning the guy.
             | 
             | Can't imagine anyone doing that for Tesco, though.
             | Especially unpaid.
        
             | nuclearnice1 wrote:
             | I love a good foot chase!
             | 
             | Given the sentiments of your last paragraph, why did you
             | choose to send the criminal away and return Tesco's stolen
             | beef?
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | I don't understand putting your personal safety at risk
               | (who knows if he had a knife or something) over PS100 of
               | goods belonging to a PS20B company. It's not like he
               | stole your meat and cheese as you were shopping. Nobody
               | is going to miss that cheese. Nobody is going to get
               | fired over it. It's really not that important.
        
               | nuclearnice1 wrote:
               | You mention the meat and cheese, but the comment
               | explicitly disavows that motive.
               | 
               | P: I chased this guy for law and justice, not meat and
               | cheese.
               | 
               | Q: why did you chase for meat cheese?
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | He _said_ he chased the guy out of principle, but if that
               | were true, it follows that he 'd do the same thing if the
               | guy stole a pack of gum, which is even more insane. Even
               | the police won't chase someone down for stealing such
               | small amounts. He's not the police, he's not the owner of
               | the store, he (presumably) don't even work there. He has
               | no skin in that game whatsoever.
               | 
               | The store has already accounted for shoplifting and
               | shrinkage in their budget, and any steps they might take
               | to combat it will be systemic via policy and by working
               | with law enforcement to bust major groups (the subject of
               | the actual article) and not one-off foot-chases.
               | 
               | You might argue that a store will charge higher prices in
               | an environment with shoplifting than without, but how
               | much does that really boil down to in terms of the
               | customer's final bill? Bread becomes PS0.02 more
               | expensive in a store that has accounted for shoplifting?
               | Does anyone care?
               | 
               | Finally, there is almost no secondary market for food,
               | so, in OP's case, the guy was likely stealing in order to
               | eat, and not to just fence the goods for money.
        
               | incone123 wrote:
               | It's pretty normal to be offered freshly stolen meat and
               | other high value food in pubs, in poor neighborhoods.
               | It's happened to me lots of times. There very much is a
               | secondary food market.
        
               | ctoth wrote:
               | > You might argue that a store will charge higher prices
               | in an environment with shoplifting than without, but how
               | much does that really boil down to in terms of the
               | customer's final bill?
               | 
               | This is clearly not about meat and cheese. This is about
               | stamping out the attitude that some people have that
               | allow them to walk into a store and just ...take stuff.
               | This time it was from a large company. Next time it's
               | from your house or car. What is the cost of living in a
               | civil society where people don't routinely steal?
               | Apparently, in a world where police are unwilling to
               | respond it's acts like this. Thank you OP.
        
               | sfasf wrote:
               | Well, the principle of the matter for one and some have
               | personal courage.
               | 
               | Also, what you propose radically changes society for the
               | worse. If Tesco can't assume a high trust environment to
               | sell their goods, they will implement policies to protect
               | themselves that are more expensive/less convenient for
               | everyone. Thomas Sowell has written extensively about
               | this.
        
               | chrischen wrote:
               | Agree that OP doesn't have a responsibility to defend
               | Tesco from crime, however disagree that it doesn't
               | matter. It's logical fallacy to say that crimes small
               | enough don't matter. By that definition a criminal that
               | is robs billions of people for mere pennies wouldn't
               | matter. You have to look at the class of crimes. So if
               | petty crimes are significant, then as a class of crimes
               | it matters.
        
       | Gunax wrote:
       | > Retail investigators blame changes in sentencing laws in some
       | states for an uptick in thefts. In California, a 2014 law
       | downgraded the theft of less than $950 worth of goods to a
       | misdemeanor from a felony. Target recently reduced its operating
       | hours in five San Francisco stores, citing rising thefts.
       | 
       | I think this is an example of conflating two classes of crime.
       | There are effectively two classes of shoplifter: the professional
       | and the desperate amateur. The activists who wanted the
       | sentencing reduction probably did not have organised gangs in
       | mind. But the gangs are taking advantage of the light rules.
       | 
       | This is something we miss a lot in discussions of crime. For
       | instance, laws against possession exist because of the crimes
       | associated with drug use. People who use drugs who wouldn't
       | otherwise cause any crime are a sort of collateral damage of
       | these rules.
       | 
       | It's often remarked how drug laws are disproportionately enforced
       | against the poor, but I have always regarded that as a feature
       | and not a mistake (as awful as that is for equality under the
       | law). No one really cares about the banker snorting coke because
       | he isn't robbing gas stations to get his fix.
        
         | throwaway894345 wrote:
         | > But the gangs are taking advantage of the light rules.
         | 
         | Not only that, but it incentivizes amateurs to _become_
         | professionals. Theft becomes a viable career under lax laws.
         | And crime begets poverty, so I suspect this creates quite a few
         | more  "desperate amateurs" some of whom will become
         | professionals and so on.
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | > And crime begets poverty...
           | 
           | Doesn't this get cause and effect backwards? You have no job,
           | no prospects, so you turn to crime. How does the reverse
           | narrative work?
        
             | throwaway894345 wrote:
             | It's a cycle. Crime drives away money and poor people are
             | more likely to resort to crime. It's super difficult to
             | reverse this cycle, which is why we ought to keep a clear
             | berth.
        
             | josephcsible wrote:
             | The store can't afford to stay open because of all the
             | crime, so it closes and lays off all its employees, who are
             | now all in poverty.
        
         | mywittyname wrote:
         | Also, isn't seven years a pretty big lag time between cause and
         | effect here?
         | 
         | Brazen thefts like this have been happening for years around
         | the country. I used to work retail (loong ago) and the store
         | would actively let people walk out with expensive merchandise
         | and do nothing to stop them. So I really doubt the change in
         | law has anything to do with this.
         | 
         | More like 2020 was fucking miserable and goods shortages &
         | unemployment drove people to take up lucrative careers in
         | organized theft.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | UBI might fix this. Criminals, as a rule, aren't doing it for
       | lulz.
       | 
       | It's like the free speech problem. Don't combat the bad by trying
       | to stamp it out. Combat it by providing a better option.
        
         | keeganpoppen wrote:
         | "as a rule"?
        
         | president wrote:
         | Never understood the point of UBI. We have food stamps,
         | welfare, and a wide assortment of government safety net
         | programs. UBI would just be all those things on steroids. Why
         | would hard working people want their tax money going to others
         | who aren't contributing? The whole concept would lead to mass
         | dependency on the government, which is the worst thing that
         | could happen.
        
         | frockington1 wrote:
         | Wouldn't people just collect UBI AND steal? The article
         | explicitly mentions that most of the people doing this are also
         | receiving state and feral unemployment benefits
        
           | swayvil wrote:
           | If UBI (or feral benefits) fulfilled their needs then I doubt
           | that they would resort to crime.
        
             | missedthecue wrote:
             | For some reason, I just don't think the people described in
             | this article are moving millions and millions of dollars of
             | makeup and over-the-counter drugs every year in order to
             | keep their basic needs met.
        
           | luckylion wrote:
           | > Wouldn't people just collect UBI AND steal?
           | 
           | Yes, they would. Great example: Turkish + Arab Clans in
           | Germany. They usually collect benefits, aren't asked to work,
           | and are heavily involved into crime.
        
       | ZeroGravitas wrote:
       | This appears to be part of a long running PR campaign by large
       | corporations that are happy to lock up poor, mentally-ill and
       | drug-addicted people at the taxpayers expense if it lets them
       | fear monger, while at the same time stealing from their own
       | employees.
       | 
       | https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/...
       | 
       | https://www.npr.org/2020/10/16/923844907/when-shoplifting-is...
       | 
       | https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/San-Fr...
       | 
       | There's some telltale signs that people are trying to swap
       | between thefts and violent organized theft in a dishonest way,
       | trying to conflate the two.
       | 
       | They're also using it as cover for closing stores that they were
       | going to close anyway.
        
         | black_13 wrote:
         | Yes i have seen the articles to much if the same content in
         | different places to be spontaneous
        
           | thatguy0900 wrote:
           | Let's suppose there is a real problem with shoplifters
           | effectively being immune from punishment, would you expe t
           | there to be little news coverage?
        
         | nitwit005 wrote:
         | You believe that retailers secretly hate the mentally ill and
         | drug addicts, and are engaging in a decades long nation wide
         | secret conspiracy to get them thrown in prison?
         | 
         | I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that they probably
         | just don't like people stealing from them.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | president wrote:
         | I don't care if they're rich, poor, mentally-ill, or drug-
         | addicted - if someone breaks the law, there needs to be some
         | sort of punishment. Letting them off is just enabling repeat
         | offense and signaling to other criminals that this behavior is
         | tolerated as we have seen.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | I think I realized that America is lawless when no one who
           | matters went to jail for torture during the Afghanistan/Iraq
           | wars. Shoplifting is a drop in the bucket compared to that,
           | so I have no sympathy for "tough on crime" rhetoric anymore.
        
           | wes-k wrote:
           | s/punishment/response
        
         | rossdavidh wrote:
         | Why would they need "cover for closing stores that they were
         | going to close anyway"? They can basically just close them, and
         | no one's going to stop them or cause a problem. Why would they
         | need "cover"?
        
       | black_13 wrote:
       | Ive gone to many retail stores at night an they have almost no
       | one working there they are victims of efficiency and the people
       | working there dont care about the store they are not paid enought
       | to care ... if your making 7 dollars an hour in a retail store in
       | Boston you by default hate your employer
        
       | victorbstan wrote:
       | What's the point of police or security guards?
        
         | josephcsible wrote:
         | When the prosecutor refuses to prosecute anyone, there's no
         | point at all.
        
       | bluedino wrote:
       | I worked at a mall in the 90's in two different stores. One was a
       | clothing store, and 'home shoppers' made up the majority of the
       | thefts.
       | 
       | The way it works, is you 'place an order', and someone from the
       | theft ring steals what you want, and in a few days you get your
       | items at a discount from the 'home shopper'.
       | 
       | I remember my dad would buy some random clothing items from a
       | friend of a friend who had things in the trunk of his car. I
       | never thought much of it.
       | 
       | When I worked at JC Penny I then saw how it worked. You'd have
       | random individual shoplifters (they'd leave all the tags and
       | stuff from the clothes in the bathrooms or dressing rooms), or
       | you'd have multiple shoplifters come in at once, fill their carts
       | and then dash out the door, getaway car waiting for them.
       | 
       | Store security couldn't do much, if you tackled the people you'd
       | get fired, so the best defense was to jam up the automatic doors
       | with empty shopping carts, that way they could only leave with
       | what they could fit in their hands.
       | 
       | It wasn't much different at the electronics store I worked at
       | afterward. PC add-in cards would end up missing, empty boxes
       | found in the appliances on the other end of the store, sliced
       | open so they could be fished out the bottom. There go the new
       | $300 3Dfx cards...
       | 
       | And the organized shoplifters came in at night, just before
       | close. You'd have 5-6 people come in, and all head for the CD
       | aisle. We'd page for customer assistance, and anyone still
       | working in the store would head over. They'd fill their coats
       | with CD's and again run out the door, getaway car waiting.
       | 
       | All you can do is get them on camera, record the description or
       | license plate of the car, and let the police know, and let the
       | other stores know. Our internal email system had a ongoing thread
       | of the shoplifters they'd seen lately, because they would hit
       | every store in the state.
        
       | Proven wrote:
       | They could simply donate to Republican election campaigns.
        
       | steve76 wrote:
       | Plagues and barbarity go hand in hand. A few become obscure and
       | cure disease and advance humanity. Everyone punching each other
       | and stealing and killing each other miss out on it and die.
        
       | hamburgerwah wrote:
       | In my experience retailers are lying in a bed of their own
       | making. They have had more than a decade to implement RFID based
       | UPCs and have steadfastly resisted it at every turn because of
       | the few pennies it adds in the supply chain. While not perfect
       | RFID allows for much better security controls that the status
       | quo. Instead they continue to underinvest in adequate technology
       | skills and will just rely on shady third party, privacy
       | destroying, false positive generating facial recognition.
        
       | N1H1L wrote:
       | I thought that was EBay?
        
       | paulpauper wrote:
       | I would hope so or expect so. How is this news surprising.
        
       | legitster wrote:
       | A friend of mine is a manager at a Safeway. He says a typical
       | store might lose six figures worth of product in a year. In a bad
       | neighborhood it's not uncommon to lose over a million dollars a
       | year.
       | 
       | They hire security personnel, but people figure out that a) even
       | when security catches you, they are not allowed to restrain you
       | and b) the police do not respond to shoplifters (in certain
       | jurisdictions they are not allowed to.
       | 
       | The stores are responsible for the cost of missing inventory -
       | they credit it back to the manufacturers. Stores already run
       | tight margins, so this cost ends up getting paid by reduced
       | headcount at stores (except for security, if it's bad enough) and
       | directly in prices.
       | 
       | And this is in the grocery space, where there's very little
       | secondary market for the stolen goods!
        
         | joezydeco wrote:
         | Some goods serve as an alternative currency, like bottles of
         | Tide laundry detergent:
         | 
         | https://nymag.com/news/features/tide-detergent-drugs-2013-1/...
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | My wife introduced me to the world of underground baby
           | formula. It's frankly shocking how many people she knows who
           | make money off of it (either shoplifting, Medicaid fraud, or
           | as a way of converting WIC into cash).
        
             | realitygrill wrote:
             | I would love to hear more about this, particularly the
             | Medicaid fraud angle.
        
         | carstenhag wrote:
         | Why are they not allowed to restrain a shoplifter? In Germany,
         | that's covered by the "anyone's" right: if you see someone
         | commit a crime, you can detain/restrain them until the police
         | arrives. Some restrictions apply, like for example having to
         | watch the crime yourself etc but for shop security staff it's
         | enough rights
         | 
         | https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festnahme#Jedermann-Festnahme
        
           | bpodgursky wrote:
           | They're allowed in a legal sense, but the store often orders
           | security not to physically intervene because of the potential
           | legal liability if either party is injured.
        
           | DavidPeiffer wrote:
           | It's not necessarily that they can't legally do so, but it's
           | against the policy of every single store. If you do so as an
           | employee, you will most likely get fired. No amount of
           | merchandise is worth risking an employees life. Healthcare is
           | a mess over here, but we do generally have that part right.
           | 
           | Restraining a shoplifter could lead to liability issues for
           | the employer. For example, if the shoplifter injures the
           | employee, there's a workplace injury that goes on the OSHA
           | record, you have an employee who is out for some amount of
           | time, it could increase insurance rates, and it could lead to
           | the employee getting shot if the shoplifter were particularly
           | violent.
           | 
           | Additionally, if the shoplifter gets injured, they may sue
           | the store for the injury they sustained.
           | 
           | Most of the US does allow a citizens arrest to be performed.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest
        
         | rot13xor wrote:
         | Eventually all stores are going to require a membership or
         | deposit before letting you enter, like Costco.
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | I mean, you can just run into a Costco, grab something, and
           | run out. No one can stop you.
           | 
           | In Costco's favor, they don't have a lot of valuable things
           | that you can just walk with that aren't just a cardboard
           | voucher.
        
         | ericcholis wrote:
         | Slightly adjacent, fighting credit card disputes feels the same
         | way. A company can prove without a doubt that it's a legitimate
         | charge, only to have the case go to pre-arbitration; which in
         | many cases is too costly to fight without certainty of winning.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | > In a bad neighborhood it's not uncommon to lose over a
         | million dollars a year.
         | 
         | Then the store closes, then you get a food desert.
        
           | zionic wrote:
           | Followed by a smug article decrying the entire situation from
           | some smug blogger.
        
         | 13of40 wrote:
         | I noticed my local Home Depot has done away with the security
         | tag scanners at the front of the store, apparently in favor of
         | a cluster of new cameras above all the exits. I wonder if we're
         | headed for just having an AI watch everyone all the time in the
         | store like the automatic-purchase grocery stores Amazon was
         | setting up. Either that or they discovered that it was better
         | for their bottom line to put real security around the power
         | tools than bust people for stealing trivial things.
        
           | sjg007 wrote:
           | Ultimately high value things will get secured behind a clerk
           | where you take a picture card of what you want to them.
           | 
           | Stores will use cameras and AI to build a comprehensive case
           | against someone or group and then notify the police. That
           | will be enough for a warrant etc...
           | 
           | Probably a startup or two in this space. I am sure home depot
           | or CVS will invest in your series A.
        
           | DavidPeiffer wrote:
           | From a month ago, they're working on some new methods where
           | power tools won't work until they're activated at the
           | register.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28035458
        
       | matrix wrote:
       | Amazon's co-mingling of inventory facilitated large-scale theft
       | by enabling stolen goods to be sold along-side legitimately
       | sourced items. One has to wonder: at what point does Amazon's
       | reluctance to improve supply-chain integrity venture into the
       | territory of aiding and abetting crime?
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | "Pawnshop" is the wrong word. A "Pawnshop" takes your goods for
       | collateral and loans you money. A "fence" is somebody who helps
       | thieves sell stolen goods.
       | 
       | A pawnshop might be a front for fencing, but Amazon doesn't
       | function as a pawnshop at all.
       | 
       | [This comment was a reaction to the title of this post, which was
       | fortunately changed.]
        
         | andy_ppp wrote:
         | I'm actually surprised no-one has set up an online pawnshop,
         | Klarna meets eBay.
        
           | 55555 wrote:
           | Shipping costs make this probably a bad idea.
        
             | Cerium wrote:
             | You would have to do it as a social marketplace. You could
             | post the items you want to pawn and local independent
             | 'shops' could offer the item. Essentially, a reverse
             | Craigslist with pawn dynamics backed by eBay style profiles
             | and feedback.
        
               | quakeguy wrote:
               | That sounds like a good idea tbh.
        
           | wil421 wrote:
           | It would be way too easy to scam them. Pawnshops need to
           | validate the quality of the item and determine if it's legit.
           | Most Pawnshops will also sell on ebay.
        
             | andy_ppp wrote:
             | This is exactly what people said about eBay, no?
        
               | wil421 wrote:
               | How can I put this. The clientele who are using eBay is
               | not quite the same as Pawnshops. I've seen someone get
               | off a city bus with a massive TV heading into the
               | pawnshop. I doubt the person owned the TV and the
               | pawnshop was known as a fence. It had a walk up after
               | hours window that was open late. Although it's much more
               | common for homeless people to have phones these days than
               | when I saw this occur. Junkies will find junk that's for
               | sure.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | rtkwe wrote:
         | They're not great places to take stolen goods either, at least
         | not generically, for anything with a serial number or distinct
         | characteristics. Every item that get's pawned or sold in a
         | store goes into a searchable database like LeadsOnline [0]. My
         | family owns a number of pawn shops and we got a very low number
         | of stolen items, the most common was someone stealing from
         | family.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.leadsonline.com/main/index.php
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | I thought pawn shops were places you could sell random stuff
         | and buy random stuff, never knew they loaned money!
        
           | betwixthewires wrote:
           | It's the oldest form of credit, the collateralized loan.
        
           | astrea wrote:
           | When you "pawn" an item, you get a short term loan with your
           | item as collateral. If you don't pay back the loan they sell
           | your item.
        
             | wccrawford wrote:
             | With interest, of course.
        
         | ninetenfour wrote:
         | 100%. Pawnshops are basically high interest collateral loan
         | shops. This is saying that Amazon is a fencing operation. But
         | then again this has been a major use for eBay and similar as
         | well.
        
       | chrisxcross wrote:
       | https://archive.is/s4S8a
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | JackFr wrote:
       | Mods, please correct headline.
       | 
       | This hardly a story about Amazon. It's a story of how Northern
       | California's choice not to prosecute theft has resulted in a
       | massive increase in criminal activity.
       | 
       | That CVS has to privately hire security in the face of $10
       | million/year of goods being brazenly looted out of its stores has
       | little to do with any Amazon policy and more to do with the
       | policies adopted by local district attorneys.
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | Large numbers without a comparison are difficult to understand.
         | Is 10M a large or small number in this context?
         | 
         | CA has 1,180 CVS pharmacies. [0] Northern CA has 40% of CA pop.
         | [1] Assuming regular distribution of CVSes in CA, there are 472
         | in Northern CA. 10M is 21k/store. Is that a lot? Not certain.
         | 
         | 0. https://www.scrapehero.com/largest-pharmacies-in-the-us/
         | 
         | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_California
        
         | busyant wrote:
         | There's reasonable evidence that this is how the Sicilian Mafia
         | started: lack of effective state enforcement of laws and
         | property rights... Creating a situation where private security
         | forces arise, offering protection from gangs of thieves and
         | perhaps protection from the security force itself. Obviously,
         | this is not what cvs is doing, but lack of effective law
         | enforcement can lead to unusual and unexpected "solutions."
        
         | mint2 wrote:
         | How much is it DAs vs cops just not wanting to do their job to
         | prove what they said would happen is true?
         | 
         | Cops don't always arrest based on the law, but what they feel
         | like doing. See Oregon where they decided not to police proud
         | boy protests and tend to arrest anti-white supremacist type
         | protestors much more.
         | 
         | How much is it the cops found they can prove their own point?
         | If I make a bet that I'll get last in a race, I'll run slower.
         | If one claims some policy will slow them down and They don't
         | actually have an incentive to win, Then there's a chance
         | they'll slow down to be right so people will do what They say
         | in the future.
         | 
         | What incentive do cops have to arrest or charge theft when cops
         | keep saying it's CA laws that are causing thefts to rise? They
         | can make themselves seem right by not arresting people.
        
           | google234123 wrote:
           | The DAs literally don't prosecute people. It's not the cops.
        
           | sabarn01 wrote:
           | My leo friends have said its morally wrong to arrest someone
           | for something they won't be prosecuted for.
        
         | dls2016 wrote:
         | Wake me when wage theft is prosecuted anywhere near as
         | seriously as shoplifting. Both have been estimated to cost the
         | economy around $40 billion per year in the US. (Simply search
         | "shoplifting cost in us" or "wage theft cost in us" and find
         | your favorite estimate. They're surprisingly close.)
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _Wake me when wage theft is prosecuted anywhere near as
           | seriously as shoplifting_
           | 
           | Given the article is about the effects of not prosecuting
           | shoplifting, time to wake up?
        
         | axus wrote:
         | I wonder if the savings to society for police/court time is
         | worth the increased cost of goods from shops paying for their
         | own security? Will this become another barrier to entry for
         | small businesses?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | Can you link to some sources on this?
         | 
         | edit: I'd seen this mentioned recently, but hadn't realised it
         | was a long running culture war thing so it had already been
         | discredited by research years ago:
         | 
         | https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/...
        
           | nitrogen wrote:
           | That's 2018. Wr're here in 2021 watching videos of stores
           | being actively raided.
        
             | noasaservice wrote:
             | I've worked in retail before (walmart) as a 3rd shift
             | stocker, ages ago.
             | 
             | Never once would I even consider saying anything to a
             | suspected thief. In fact, I walked away from at least 2
             | times where I knew people were destroying the spider-alarms
             | on electronics in the pets aisle. It is not worth my
             | personal safety in saying anything, especially for someone
             | making $9/hr.
             | 
             | Maybe that's the wrong approach. But it's not my stuff, its
             | not my role I was hired in as, and not worth any personal
             | injury I might receive. I will intentionally give a blind
             | eye to petty or professional retail theft. Let security
             | deal with it.
        
             | ZeroGravitas wrote:
             | Have you got any videos of statistical trends or other
             | evidence that what you believe is actually true? Or are we
             | just working from viral anecdata?
        
               | imgabe wrote:
               | Walgreens and Target and other retailers are shutting
               | down stores and changing the hours so they close earlier.
               | Presumably they're not doing that because they watched a
               | viral video.
        
               | ZeroGravitas wrote:
               | > According to federal data, adults with substance-abuse
               | disorders make up just 2.6 percent of the total
               | population but 72 percent of all jail inmates sentenced
               | for property crimes. Addicts are 29 times more likely to
               | commit property crimes than the average American.
               | Furthermore, as the Bureau of Justice Statistics found,
               | "[39 percent of jail inmates] held for property offenses
               | said they committed the crime for money for drugs"--the
               | most common single motivation for crime throughout the
               | justice system.
               | 
               | In other news, the Sacklers got away with making Billions
               | from creatimg addicts.
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | The clickbait/bias just gets more and more brazen.
        
         | CrimsonRain wrote:
         | 100% this.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | gryz wrote:
       | Could a setup like with Amazon Go stores help here? Let in only
       | customers with a verified account.
        
         | CameronNemo wrote:
         | Maybe. That would be the last place I shop, though.
        
         | josephcsible wrote:
         | The shoplifter gangs will just jump over the turnstiles. I
         | imagine any store impervious to this attack wouldn't meet fire
         | safety requirements.
        
       | AlexandrB wrote:
       | There's an irony to the top comment on an article about organized
       | shoplifting being a link to archive.is to get around the paywall.
       | Especially given all the "tough on crime" and "rule of law" talk
       | in the comments.
        
         | josephcsible wrote:
         | Reading the article doesn't make it disappear from the website.
         | If I went to a bookstore, read one of their books in the store,
         | then put it back on the shelf and left without buying anything,
         | would you consider that to be shoplifting too?
        
           | AlexandrB wrote:
           | No, obviously not. But if you scanned the book, put it on
           | archive.is and invited all the visitors to Hacker News to
           | read it I think that might be copyright infringement. IANAL
           | so setting the precise legality aside, in terms of economic
           | harm (which many here have brought up regarding shoplifting),
           | how is this different?
        
             | josephcsible wrote:
             | If I just told archive.is the title of a book, and they
             | went to get it and scanned it in and put it on their
             | website, _they_ might be guilty of copyright infringement,
             | but I don 't think _I_ would be.
        
       | aurizon wrote:
       | Back in the old days, you asked for items the clerk got them and
       | you paid. There was too much theft in the old days for open
       | shelves. Now we leave it open and trust - which has now been
       | massively abused has expanded to fill that void. The clerks were
       | labor intensive, but the similar robots to used in Amazon
       | warehouses could serve people at a screen, the order assembled,
       | paid and then handed to the client - much like online order and
       | deliver - but in person. These huge costs will force this. Small
       | stores will go to the old one at a time model service - most do
       | this with cigarettes and liquor. It is a fine tuning of the
       | retail chain that I feel will inexorable be forced upon us.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-03 23:01 UTC)