var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
legwork
October 21, 2009 11:47 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

Non-rehirable? Damn, that'll be rough soon when Wally's is the only remaining employer in the U.S.A.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
October 22, 2009 4:26 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@legwork: Probably due to lawsuits arising from situations that were similar. It happens a lot believe it or not...though generally not a positive outcome for the criminal who sues in conservative places like texas.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
thisistobehelpful
October 22, 2009 3:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@legwork: What an appropriate user name for this story.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Xerloq
October 22, 2009 2:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@legwork: Don't worry, they'll only have half the jobs. The rest will be from the Federal Government

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Conrad
October 21, 2009 11:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Lots of companies will fire you if you go after a shoplifter. It's pretty common. Walmart, Rite Aid, Borders, Grocery Stores, Video Rental stores, lots and lots and lots and lots of companies will fire you if you chase a shoplifter.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
The Marionette
October 22, 2009 5:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Conrad: True. At my job one of the papers we signed had something in it about handling thefts (like if someone has a gun, etc) and we're not supposed to do anything to them. If they ask for money we have to just give it to them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
korybing
October 23, 2009 3:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@The Marionette: So Security Guards are basically just big signs that say \"Hey don't do that\"? No wonder people steal from Walmart all the time. Everybody knows nothing is going to stop them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
October 22, 2009 5:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Conrad: I don't get it though. You're fired if you don't go after him, and you're fired if you do go after a guy who broke the law? So you get fired for doing your job one way or another? What kind of crap is that?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 10:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Papa Midnight: No. Proper procedure generally in these cases is to confront the shoplifter at the entrance. If the suspect runs out into the parking lot, and especially if a weapon is evident, no further pursuit is to be taken.

At that point, the procedure is generally to get as good a description of the individual as possible (including a license plate if applicable) and notify the police/record the incident.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
October 22, 2009 2:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mianne: Maybe if those kinds of policies would change universally we would see a decrease in shoplifting at stores with security guards.

Ideally, I would like to see the new policies written in such a way that leaves the discretion up to the security guard as to whether or not they want to chase down a thief. In other words, if the guard feels that the situation puts him/her in too much danger then they should be able to elect to not perform the chase without any fear of getting fired or reprimanded.

In addition, I also believe that the security guard should not be able to chase a thief, get hurt, and then sue the company they work for. They should only get worker's comp. It needs to be a two way street like that.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Elcheecho
October 22, 2009 2:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Naame: if i were a business owner i'd hire a security guard to do his job in the store. if the guy is staying in the parking lot threatening my customers that's another story, but if a knife-wielding thief is trying to leave, that's obviously the ideal outcome for me, in cuffs or not. i won't pay security guards to play superhero out in the local neighborhood.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Naame
October 22, 2009 3:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Elcheecho: I completely understand, but would you both create and enforce a policy which requires your security guard to not pursue an armed thief even if they wish to do so voluntarily assuming that your security guard could not bring forth any legal action against you once all is said and done?

My point was to leave the choice in the hands of the security guard.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Underscore_Lysdexia
October 22, 2009 1:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mianne: So if I want to steal something from walmart...all I have to do is run out the door and get to my parked car that is on the other side of the building?

Interesting

Reply
\"user-pic\"
2 replies
October 22, 2009 5:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Underscore_Lysdexia:
Yeah, they've got cameras on the outside of the building. Now they're going to turn it over for you to definitely pursued by the police instead of a little flabby spam.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
digisplicer
October 22, 2009 12:52 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Conrad: It doesn't seem that he cared about the shoplifting. He was attempting to stop somebody who had intent to harm.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
nakkypoo
October 21, 2009 11:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Not like never being able to work at Walmart again is such a bad thing, but he should have known better.

The very first things my first boss told me on my first day of work in my life way back when was \"Don't try to stop thieves or shoplifters. I won't want any heroes. I will fire you immediately.\"

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Communist Pope
October 22, 2009 3:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nakkypoo: The thing is though, if you're an adult who's working at Walmart for any reason other than putting yourself through college, never being able to work there again probably is a bad thing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TheObserver
October 22, 2009 12:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nakkypoo: Good for your boss.


I'm tired of these wanna be heroes and Jackie Chan's wanting their 15 minutes of fame and adulation in the media for being a \"hero.\" No one was being hurt in the vicinity, he didn't have to help anyone. His excuse was pretty asinine.


There's nothing \"brave\" about what he did I don't care what spin people put on it.


This isn't the first time I read of these John Wayne's out there. Enough is enough.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Shadowman615
October 22, 2009 2:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheObserver: Oh, c'mon now -- didn't you ever see Spiderman?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
babyruthless
October 22, 2009 12:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nakkypoo: I worked at Victoria's Secret in college. We had all these procedures we had to do to confront a suspected shoplifter. We had a crew in one day that was shoplifting perfume and whatnot, and my boss wanted us to get them, so they were calling us over the headsets to watch them steal (several people have to witness a shoplifting before you can confront). When they saw one of the shoplifters produce a knife (they didn't threaten us with it, but they were using it to cut off security tags), they called us all off, and told us to act like we hadn't seen anything. They stole a few thousand dollars worth of stuff from us, but it wasn't worth anyone getting shanked over. I really hated my job by the end of it, but I was glad they had that much common sense.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
October 22, 2009 12:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nakkypoo:

You know what's kind of funny? My first boss, who was also related to me in some convoluted way (you'd never have known it by the way he treated/treats me), told me \"If anyone fucks with you, you take this pepper spray and spray it all over their face. I mean ANYONE. If some guy comes in and tries to steal shit, pepper spray him. If anyone starts shit with you, pepper spray him. After you pepper spray those fuckers, call me and then call the cops. Got it?\" Yeah crazy relative, got it...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
HalOfBorg
October 22, 2009 11:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@trujunglist: I had a boss like that once. (jukebox/video game operator) Early on he told us \"If you need to tell a customer to fuck off, go ahead and do it. I'll back you up.\"

I had company truck, had to park too close to neighbor's driveway one night. 1st thing in morning I'm out there to move truck, big rude note on the truck telling me off. (I wasn't blocking driveway, just too close).

I tore up the note and threw it in his yard.

Monday AM boss call me. I guess neighbor called him because all he asked me was \"Did he have it towed?\"

\"Nope.\"

\"OK, see you later.\" click.

He was real good that way.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nakkypoo
October 22, 2009 12:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@trujunglist: hilarious. \"yo boss, you gonna pay for my lawyer when i get sued for pepper=-spraying people?\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ivanthemute
October 22, 2009 12:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nakkypoo: Had a boss like that years ago at Eckerd (pre-JCPenny)/(now Rite Aid.) He was pounding some shelves into place with a 3lb rubber mallet, and some guy started loading up on Sudafed. Boss goes and says to put it back, guy pulls a knife, boss beats him into a coma with the rubber mallet. The security cameras caught it all. Boss got a slap on the wrist for approaching the shoplifter, and a $5000 reward from Crimestoppers for this guy.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
El_Fez
October 21, 2009 11:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Glad to see someone with balls to stand up for justice. Good for him! (the chasing the bad guy down, not the getting fired during an economic meltdown where nobody is hiring).

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
October 22, 2009 12:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@El_Fez: I wouldn't call a random civilian chasing down an armed robber \"justice.\" This is just egging on a crazy person that's probably not afraid to knife random people to get away. \"Absent minded\" and \"negligent\" are more appropriate terms in my book.

Let the people who are trained and supposed to handle these situations handle them. That's justice. If something like this happens after your employer makes it very clear that you'd be in hot water for risking you're life to save a $0.99, made-in-China piece of junk, then you're nothing more than a huge liability.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
your new nemesis
October 22, 2009 1:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: I concur, there are certain things worth risking your life for, and walmart just isn't one of them. Even if your principle driven, certain principles need to be let go for the sake of survival.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Preyfar
October 21, 2009 11:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Steal, then power walk away!

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Yuppers: I love you
October 22, 2009 8:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Preyfar: Yeah...kinda crazy. The official title for this ex-employee was Lost PREVENTION. Prevention. HA. Perhaps they should rename the position to Lost Encouragement-and-Acceptance-Until-We-Call-the-Cops.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
jeff
October 21, 2009 11:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

To be clearer - based on the story that is linked the shoplifter didn't display the weapon inside the store, it wasn't until he and the security officers were outside that he pulled the knife, Rutner's choice to chase was a split second one that cost him his job, but at least the knife welding shoplifter is off the street.

It also depends on a lot of factors on what security guards can and can't do (the policy of their employer). In places in Washington D.C. they have full arrest powers.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
TCama
October 22, 2009 12:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeff: In places in Washington D.C. they have full arrest powers.

Are you sure? Maybe the security guards you're thinking of are actually police officers. But as far as I know, in order to have arrest powers, you have to be a sworn officer through the state (or district, as it were).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 10:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: Any security officer has \"arrest powers\", just as most any other person does in this country. It's known as a citizen's arrest.

Now, the only times it is appropriate to do so is when you've personally witnessed a suspect commit a misdemeanor (e.g. shoplifting) or if you have reasonable suspicion an individual committed a felony (e.g. someone confesses to you that they just killed someone.)

Also be advised, before you go an arrest the drug dealer on the corner, that as the person making the arrest, it becomes your responsibility to properly and humanely detain the individual until the police take custody. Also you may have to personally prosecute the case in a court of law. Fail to prove the suspect's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and you could be subject to civil and possibly even criminal action against you for unlawful detention, kidnapping, etc.

Now most run of the mill security guards have only the most rudimentary training about these issues when they are initially licensed in their jurisdiction. Generally, they will not be given authorization to make an arrest by their employer or the client who contracted their service. Hence and therefore, a private security officer is likely to get themselves into hot water if they try to act like they're a cop.

Meanwhile, other security officers, often having no more officially licensed authority via their state or local jurisdiction are given the authority to arrest. They might be employed as plain clothes detectives in a retail establishment or perhaps as a doorman/bouncer at a nightclub.

The difference (hopefully) with these officers, is that they are given additional training and regular refresher courses on the law, use of force, use of handcuffs, report writing, evidence collection and preservation, etc. So that when they do make an arrest, all necessary steps are taken to gain a conviction against the suspect and have any lawsuits against the officer, employer, and.or client quickly dismissed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jeff
October 22, 2009 12:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama:

They work for a private security firm - the have full arrest powers for the area(s), they also usually are armed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ivanthemute
October 22, 2009 1:05 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jeff: Here in SC there are multiple \"tiers\" of security guards. Your average \"mall cop\" has no arrest powers and the only requirement to be licensed by the state is that you have no violent felonies. The next level is that of armed security, which allows you to carry a Tazer or a firearm to protect whatever you are tasked to protect. You have no arrest powers, but have discretionary powers with regards to use of force. Usually reserved for armed bank security, armored car security, armed couriers, and the like. You must have a clean record with no felonies or gross misdemeanors. Finally, there are \"special security services\" personnel. These guys are armed bodyguards, private military contractors, or guards for sensitive locations (such as nuclear reactors.) They have broad powers to include arrest powers in some cases, and you don't want to screw with guys who practice with 500 rounds of 5.56 a week. I've seen guys at this level be fired for not disclosing traffic tickets, and the licensing requirements are as stringent or even more so in some cases than to be a LEO.

This guy, if he was actually security as opposed to loss prevention or a greeter, is probably the first.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
jeff
October 22, 2009 4:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ivanthemute:

I have no doubt he fell into the first category - I wanted to say that \"security guard\" can mean a lot.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dukegreene
October 21, 2009 11:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't understand why anyone wouldn't just follow a policy that lets them off the hook when a fleeing, armed suspect crosses an imaginary line. I hope I never have so much to prove that I'd risk leaving my loved ones behind to play John McClane at my local superstore.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
de4d5y
October 22, 2009 12:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dukegreene: I agree with you, I know I certainly wouldn't be chasing somebody already outside of a store, especially if they had a knife. On the other hand, I can kind of understand why he did it. He probably just got caught up in the moment and felt like he could stop the guy.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
calquist
October 21, 2009 11:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wal-Mart fires the one guy who gives a toot about his job enough to defend it. We all know you are NOT supposed to go after the shoplifters, but I do feel kinda bad for the guy.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dondegroovily
October 22, 2009 3:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@calquist: No, Walmart fires the one guy with no regard to the safety of himself or others. Remember, being chased makes the robber more likely to use the knife, and a good chance he uses it on some random guy in the parking lot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
October 22, 2009 5:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dondegroovily:

you're right...a knife wielding thief should be left to do as he pleases.

remember, getting away with a crime makes the robber more likely to do it again.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kelrod
October 21, 2009 11:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Rutner says they told him it's a non-rehirable offense, meaning he can never work at Walmart again.\"

Blessing in disguise.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
October 22, 2009 2:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kelrod:
Not if it's the only place in his area actually hiring.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Stillgot24hours
October 21, 2009 11:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

While I understand it was a policy he was probably informed about, I still feel bad for him. I'd do the same thing really. I mean, c'mon, he works at Walmart and probably has a lot of pent up frustration concerning his job. He was probably looking forward to the day he could beat the ever loving crap out of someone.

I work at a family run sporting goods store and I think our unofficial policy is to grab a bat and chase the person down and beat the crap out of them. This is definitely due to having to deal with some of the customers we have to deal with. It would be worth the price of the bat tenfold.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Sifl
October 22, 2009 7:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Stillgot24hours:


And then what would you classify the price of the lawsuit brought forth against you... or even criminal charges if you inadvertently went too far.


The law is only so sympathetic before the words \"Two Wrongs don't make a Right.\" statement comes up in some manner or other.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dondegroovily
October 22, 2009 3:39 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Stillgot24hours: It wouldn't be worth it if the guy pulled a gun and shot him.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Stillgot24hours
October 22, 2009 4:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dondegroovily: Now that just depends on what kind of day it has been.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kingdom2000
October 21, 2009 11:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The lesson from this is if you shop lift and get caught, quickly remind them that chasing you will get them fired and then take off. I think they also get arrested for grabbing your, touching you or trying to restrain you. So pretty much if you refuse to cooperate, you can get away free and clear assuming none recognize you for later (just park the car elsewhere so no license plate to write down).

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 10:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kingdom2000: Except, in most cases, if you've slipped a few DVDs into your coat and try to run out. You'll be met at the door usually by the Asset Protection team, and likely a few of the larger guys who work in other departments as well. Your path directly out the door will be blocked. Hopefully at that point, you will realize it's over and come in the the security office when asked politely to do so.

Trying to force your way through them instead and you will probably be pushed to the floor and handcuffed. Sure, you can claim excessive force in court, but it probably won't stand. Remember, the stores have cameras everywhere--especially at the entrance. Once the court hears from all the witnesses (those folks you tried to force your way past) that you were forcibly restrained AFTER you attempted to push the employees out of the way, and you can expect the judge to smirk and instruct the jury to disregard your complaint.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
trujunglist
October 22, 2009 12:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kingdom2000:

Haha, great idea! Someone should go grab a couple Xboxes and then run out the store yelling NYAH NYAH ITS AGAINST COMPANY POLICY TO CHASE ME LOOOOSERS or something.. see what happens.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Preyfar
October 22, 2009 12:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kingdom2000: Steal, and power walk away to victory?

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Paladin_11
October 22, 2009 12:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

WalMart is just trying to save money. If Paul Blart here gets knifed WalMart has to pay. If he harms the shoplifter WalMart will get sued, and they'll have to pay. Heck, if our intrepid hero trips and knocks himself out WalMart is on the hook.

Lower prices, every day. WalMart.

In all honesty, major props to the security guard. We all have to take a stand against crime. One reason it's as bad as it is stems from our tolerance of it and or failure to get directly involved. This guy felt capable of doing something and he should be applauded for taking that stand for the rest of us.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Paladin_11
October 22, 2009 5:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Paladin_11: I'll admit to being a little cynical here. But when it's all said and done, an employee who is killed on the job also represents a liability, and the company would still have to pay. I suspect that's the ultimate reason behind the corporate policy. Keeping the employees safe provides a nice cover for that.

Now, having said that, you're right that the employee was (rightfully) fired for violating the company policy. I have no problem with that. But on a more personal level I do think we're all somewhat responsible for doing our part to prevent crime. This guy put himself in danger more so than anyone else. Not everyone would go that far. But if you (the generic \"you\", not you specifically) were in that position and decided not to go that far I would hope that you would at least focus on the perpetrator and be a good witness for the police. Too many people simply cower and won't even do that.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
secret_curse
October 22, 2009 7:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Paladin_11: As far as everyone being responsible for preventing crime, I think you're right to a point. If someone is harming another person and you are able to do something about it, then common decency dictates you help. In this case, some dude had stolen something from WalMart and was getting away. It was definitely not a situation that would warrant someone innocent getting hurt over. The vast majority of shrinkage for big box retailers comes from employees improperly filling out paperwork. When I worked at Best Buy in college, we were told that theft was only responsible for about 18% of shrink from stores. We were also told over and over that there was nothing in the store worth getting hurt over. I despise theives, but stores understand that theft will happen and aren't worried about it. They are worried about employees or customers getting injured, though...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Paladin_11
October 23, 2009 5:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@secret_curse: Hence the good witness part. Property crimes aren't worth the risk of physical injury. But if you witness something you should be willing to stick around and report what you've seen.

I think we're in complete agreement here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SubzeroScientist
October 22, 2009 4:52 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Paladin_11: My workplace has a similar policy. We comply with robbers, do not confront shoplifters, and generally do everything we can not to endanger ourselves or others, both employees and customers. Corporate may not be the best when it comes to giving a crap about their employees, but I still feel that they'd rather lose money and merchandise than have someone killed.

Whatever the case, the no pursuit rule was something this guy agreed to when he was hired. And you get fired for breaking rules. It's a common policy, and it is there for a reason beyond a company not having to pay out for a wrongful death suit (which, IIRC, can often end up being CHEAPER than worker's comp).

I would rather a guy not feel the need to play the hero and end up potentially getting people injured or killed, than see my store or any other lose a few bucks. He put people in danger, and that is not cool.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dondegroovily
October 22, 2009 3:41 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Paladin_11: \"If Paul Blart here gets knifed WalMart has to pay.\"

If he gets knifed, well, someone got knifed. I'm not a fan of Wal-mart, but I'm pretty sure keeping employees alive is more important to them than worker's comp.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
NotYou007
October 22, 2009 12:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Steven Seagal is sad :-(

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
ageshin
October 22, 2009 12:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

For once I am in agreement with Walmart. I used to work in security, and I can tell you that one security officer doesn't equal one cop. The police are trained to handle violent situations, and security officers are not so trained. These security officers should have notified the police, and let them take care of the offender. The security officer is also represents the company he or she works for and the store can be held libel for the officer's actions.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
LeChiffre
October 22, 2009 12:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ageshin: Well here is my opinion. I used to be upset when companies fired their employee's for this but after studying law to some degree, I am in complete agreement with stores that do this for a number of reasons. One issue lies with the perpetrator and when he is the actual plaintiff, but at what point does he becomes the defendant. When he is inside the store and you believe that he has not paid for an item that is on his/her body, he is the defendant. However, once he leaves and YOU begin a chase, now he can claim being a plaintiff and his rights were violated, etc. and then you have to defend your actions if he sues you (I think I'm right on this). THAT is the legal issue that stores are trying to avoid. It has nothing to do with \"feeling\" who is right or wrong. Forget your morals or the \"white knight\" attitude. The court will always view human life as being worth more than stolen merchandise. And remember that a security guard's given authority is inside the store, period. It is NOT in the general public because that is the local police jurisdiction. And after thinking of these situations, I wouldn't want some rogue guard starting something outside of his \"lane\" inside or outside a store. That could be put me in danger. Hell, I don't want to be shot over a stupid CD, etc. I'd just let him go because if someone wants a stupid CD that bad, let him have it. As we say in Iraq, don't be a hero because it may kill you. Just my opinion.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
ptkdude
October 22, 2009 12:55 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

...and yet they've chased me out the door before when I refused to show my receipt. No one got fired over that one.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Im Just Saying
October 22, 2009 3:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude: This. I immediately wanted to scream this from the rooftop but I figured someone already had. So I'm joining the chorus line. Walmart shoppers take note, if you just run out of the store with your purchases, they'll leave you alone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
drizzt380
October 22, 2009 1:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ptkdude:
Its company policy to harass paying customers. So, they were following instructions.

It is specifically against company policy to not chase non-paying customers. Therefore giving them an enjoyable Wal-Mart experience.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 22, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@drizzt380: You know, that's a really good point. Why do they bother chasing people they know paid for something, but the employees are fired if they chase someone who didn't pay for something? That sounds pretty ass backwards to me.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Bog
October 22, 2009 1:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Then what's the point of even having a security guard?

I worked in a place in high-school, decades ago, that gave cash bonuses if you caught a shoplifter and the shop lifter was convicted.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
tbax929
October 22, 2009 2:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bog:
Supposedly, the mere presence of security deters would-be thieves.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
scouts honor
October 22, 2009 5:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@VagrantRadio: Or maybe one of those plastic owls. Deters shoplifters and pigeons.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 22, 2009 2:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Bog: That's my question. Do they only handle shoplifters that are compliant?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
secret_curse
October 22, 2009 7:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: Absolutely. It's not worth it for a store to be sued because they told their loss prevention team to chase a shoplifter to his car and tackle him. If the shoplifter is a psycho that pulls out a knife or a gun, the store would be exposed to crazy amounts of liability because they told their employee to chase them.


Loss prevention teams are trained to ask shoplifters to stop if they have evidence. If the person bolts to their car, they're supposed to get all the information they can, pull all the security tapes, and give the evidence to the police. It's much safer for everyone involved if real law enforcement officers take care of the problem, and nothing in a WalMart is worth a person dying...

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Moosehawk
October 22, 2009 1:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's a good thing they're checking receipts

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
B
October 22, 2009 2:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

In slow motion? Sliding across the hood of a Torino? While the police chief accused him of not going by the book? As his partner gets shot one day before retirement? With a partner cop who's his total opposite, yet they make a great team?

Reply
1 replies
","","","
\"user-pic\"
j.as.on
October 22, 2009 2:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Here is my question. What if I am robbed while shopping at Walmart? As the thief is exiting out of the building I inform a Walmart Security. If security fails to stop him, can I sue Walmart? Many of them are dressed so much like an officer of the law they even wear a badge.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Insomn
October 22, 2009 2:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I can understand how having the title of security guard makes you feel obligated to do something in this kind of situation, and I totally understand that if he didn't do anything he would have considered himself that much more useless for the rest of his employment.


However, since it is a company policy he should be aware of, I think it's kind of stupid that he went after the guy. It's not your merchandise, it's Walmarts. Why should you care if they lose an item? they can afford it, and it really isn't your problem. I would be a little happy on the inside that somebody is sticking it to them.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 11:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Insomn: Also, the shoplifter isn't \"sticking it to them\" so much as to the other customers. As Wal-Mart (or any other retail establishment) has to factor \"shrink\" into their overhead. They pass the loss along to the honest customers via higher prices.

So despise Wally-World, Home Despot, and Worst Buy all you want! But the person shoplifting there isn't hurting them, they're ultimately hurting you!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 11:02 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Insomn: Yes, a properly trained security officer often may feel like they aren't having any effect. But in a retail environment, a uniformed officer's primary purpose is to look vigilant (make eye contact, etc.) in so doing would-be thieves might choose another establishment to steal from that isn't as protected. So, by simply saying \"Hello\" to someone, that alone may have prevented a theft, and yet still have been seen as courteous by the legitimate shopper also similarly addressed.

Further frustrating many a security officer is that they're usually the first person a cashier or stock person will turn to when they suspect a customer is shoplifting. If the officer didn't personally witness the theft, they are not permitted to confront the individual. Best they can do is tail the person through the store, who will (whether thief or not) become agitated by all the attention and a) leave b) tell off the guard and/or c) complain to a manager. but at least nothing more is being stolen at that point.

In fact, if the store's plain clothes detectives have become involved, then the best thing a uniformed officer can do usually is keep far back out of sight of the suspect. That will better enable the AP team to observe an individual concealing merchandise and prepare to detain them at the exit.

That doesn't diminish the role or effectiveness of a uniformed security officer in any way, but the fruits of their labor are usually impossible to recognize directly, so frustration and incidents like the one in the article can happen.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
bigd7387
October 22, 2009 3:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Lucky him. I will not shop Wal-mart, I could only imagine the poor idgets that have to work there. I would imagine most never graduated High School and that's a shame. I really hope that one day Wal-mart will be taken down but after seeing pictures of the kinds of redneck people who shop there I feel sad knowing it will probably never happen in my life time.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 22, 2009 2:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bigd7387: Oh look, someone insulting the intelligence of the workers and shoppers at Wal-Mart. Weren't we just talking about this in another Wal-Mart thread? How people only insult Wal-Mart workers/customers, but not the workers/customer of other stores...and everyone jumped all over the few of us who pointed it out. Here's a good example right here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
October 22, 2009 12:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bigd7387: What is wrong with you? I hate Wal-Mart just as much as the next person, but I don't think the people who work there are stupid or anything. A job is a job - in this economy, I bet there are a ton of people who can't find anything else. When I was in college, the local Wal-Mart was partially staffed by my fellow students. Get off your high horse.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dondegroovily
October 22, 2009 3:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bigd7387: This is a candidate for disemvoweling. There are probably Wal-mart employees that read this, some who have college degrees, and almost all who've graduated high school.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
scouts honor
October 22, 2009 5:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dondegroovily: There are also probably Wal-Mart employees who can construct a comment without a run-on sentence and improper capitalization, unlike \"idget\" bigd7387.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mmmsoap
October 22, 2009 3:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I understand the policy that most corporations have established about not chasing/confronting criminals; it's clearly for fear of being sued by the families of employees slain in the \"line of duty\" so to speak.

What I don't understand, though, is why they continue to employ security guards who are not allowed to take steps to, you know, keep security.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
aguacarbonica
October 22, 2009 3:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TheObserver:

Er, did it ever occur to you that this adult has the right to decide if his principle is worth his job?

What makes you think that he was being disingenuous about his reason for chasing down the thief?

I'm tired of people complaining about people doing the right thing. Your reasoning that \"no one was being hurt\" can be applied here. He's not hurting you, so why the condescension?

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
TheObserver
October 22, 2009 6:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aguacarbonica:


First of all, he didn't decide if his principle was worth the job. In fact, he's still clueless as to why he was fired and is probably hoping for some public media campaign to restore his 'honor' or something. It's not like in the heat of the moment he had to make a decision to stay put or give chase and possibly be fired.


Second, his reason for chasing down the thief WAS disingenuous. As pointed out below and if you read the full article, one of the things that strikes you is how he made the situation worse from the very beginning due to some incredibly poor decisions. When he noticed the thief walk out of the store with a pack of golf balls in his pocket, what does he do? He calls another person, and together they decide to tackle the guy like in some action movie. That's right, this 'hero' violently tackles a thief involved in a NON VIOLENT crime. He doesn't do what is more logical, to approach the thief and question him. So immediately he ESCALATES the situation and the thief in response pulls out a knife, swings it, and runs away.


So for him to state that the thief was a danger to the public and the city, when in fact this was originally a non violent shoplifting incident, is absolutely ludicrous. I'm not condoning anything the thief did, but for a guy to deliberately create a situation where everything is escalated, puts the thief in a corner, and then tries to make himself out to be a hero for it, is insane. This thief could have seriously wounded both guys, and maybe even others, because the thief's adrenaline was already at a fever pitch and he was antagonized.


Why do you think people advise others to immediately give up their wallets when a criminal asks you for it? It's because you don't want to escalate the situation and force the criminal's hand or otherwise make things worse. Same principle here. So I'm not complaining about him doing the \"right\" thing. I'm complaining about him doing the WRONG thing. No one's life was in such danger in this situation that it required two people to tackle a non violent shoplifter.


He should have known better. Vigilance is one thing, having guys on your team that go out of their way to be heroes and escalate the situation when it required no such thing is the hallmark of someone that cannot be counted on to make the right decisions in the most critical of times. Wal-Mart was absolutely correct in their decision and I applaud them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
October 22, 2009 5:13 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aguacarbonica: \"First they came...\" seems to apply here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
October 22, 2009 5:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why not bridge the gap here? Why can't stores hire actual private security firms who DO have law enforcement powers to handle store security. That way they could pursue a potentially dangerous criminal if need be.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RandomZero
October 22, 2009 11:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: I don't know if it works differently in the States (and I'd be scared as hell if it did), but up here, there's no such thing. The moment the guy is off Wal-Mart property, he ceases to be a concern even for a private firm. Also, private firms don't really have much more in the way of capability - slightly better equipment and training is about it. Lesson 1 when I worked private security was \"If a Situation seems to be developing, get your boss to call the real cops.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Thricebanned
October 22, 2009 6:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: Because there is no such thing as a private security firm that has law enforcement powers.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
secret_curse
October 22, 2009 6:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@scouts honor: Off duty police officers generally cost from $50 - $100 per hour (where I live, YMMV, etc). Plus, there wouldn't be enough police officers on any force to man all the retail stores that want security.


Most off duty gigs for cops are things like security at concerts and parties. They're 2 - 3 hour jobs where the cop is basically keeping order by being present with a badge and a gun. None of the cops I've ever met would want to work a full patrol shift and then clock in for 8 hours of watching a security monitor at WalMart. Plus, it's not like any retail store is going to pay $50 - $100 per officer per hour...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
October 23, 2009 5:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

If private security firms have no law enforcement powers, how do you explain the armored car drivers that carry guns? They aren't law enforcement but they have a broad range of powers to stop a crime from happening.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
KMan13 still wants a Pontiac G8
October 24, 2009 9:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: it's called self defense ... it's the same as a business owner having a carry permit. they're only allowed to engage if they're being threatened with harm. if a guy just tries to run off with a bag of cash, and no weapon, they can't just shoot him ...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
October 22, 2009 4:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is the guard willing to relocate to Louisiana?


He can work for me. I will even let him carry a gun. And I pay a hell of a lot more $ than WallyWorld.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 11:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@StanTheManDean: Are you prepared to defend yourself and your company against the lawsuits that will follow when the guard goes \"Dirty Harry\" on someone, and the officer, the suspect, and/or an innocent bystander is injured or killed as a result?

Pro Tip: Just train a pitbull to tear into anyone that enters your premises.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
outlulz
October 22, 2009 4:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The thing I hate most about this policy is that there's nothing stopping someone from just grabbing a bunch of stuff off the shelf, running out the door, and driving away. There's no time for the cops to come and no one in the store is going to stop you.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
biikman
October 22, 2009 12:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@outlulz:


Yes it's true he might get away initially, but between witnesses and store security cameras he/she most likely won't be free very long.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mianne
October 22, 2009 11:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@outlulz: So let them run out with the newspaper, candy bar, and bag of ice all located right by the exit.. Sure, they're be long gone before anyone (following proper procedures anyway) can stop them.

But you know what? That person sure attracted a bunch of attention to themselves pulling that stunt. Think they'they're going to don a ski mask for that \"crime of the century\"? Odds are pretty good that between witness accounts and reviewing the CCTV that they can get a pretty good description of the individual. What's more, said individual probably isn't all that bright, and will be back tomorrow.

Guess what happens then? Nearly every associate in the store, on the AP team or not is watching them. And just waiting for them to make a run for it again. And this time, as the person tries to run out, they'll probably run smack dab into the 6'4\" guy who pulls the pallets full of juice and water across the store all day.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
diasdiem
October 22, 2009 4:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Approves.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
October 22, 2009 4:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Observe and report syndrome! No really...as much as procedure dictates what an employee does, it doesn't relinquish your morality or duty. I give him kudos for following his heart and morality in deciding what to do regardless of the fact it cost him his job.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
copwriter
October 22, 2009 4:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The policy isn't about taking shoplifters off the street. It's about employee safety. There's no merchandise worth someone's life, economically or morally. If WM (or any other employer) forgives the violation of the policy (and the policy is made explicit to loss prevention staff), then it becomes \"don't chase a shoplifter, unless doing so makes you a hero.\" Instead, this guy is the one other employees talk about, who lost his job for the policy violation.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
sevenwhitehorses
October 22, 2009 5:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

THE BIG QUESTION...... Did the knife come from wall mart?! and, did he have a receipt.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
boomerang86
October 22, 2009 7:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Let me get this straight... WMT fires their LPAs for chasing down shoplifters, but OTOH lets their greeters/receipt checkers chase down customers who refuse to comply? Sounds bass ackwards to me.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
FLConsumer
October 22, 2009 8:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The real story here -- Someone's desperate enough to shoplift from WalMart. C'mon gang, there's far better places to steal from. Risk vs. Profit. C'mon shoplifters, don't any of you have economics degrees? Jeesh.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Deezul_AwT
October 22, 2009 10:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I guess the best way to not a receipt check is to SAY your a shop lifter and run out. Company policy says they can't chase you. So if they DO call the cops, tell them the check misheard you, and show them the receipt you just used. Maybe Wal Mart will take a hint after cops keep showing up for bogus shoplifting calls.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
JohnDeere
October 22, 2009 12:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

well sometimes being a good person is better than being a security guard for walmart. strike that, being a good person is always better than being a security guard for walmart.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
JohnDeere
October 22, 2009 12:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

and thats whats wrong with america. INSURANCE if i want to risk my life, for the sake of others, insurance companies should not be able to penalize my employer. there is no honor or integrity anymore. the guy is a hero plain and simple.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Cupajo
October 22, 2009 1:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

WalMart is just upset because if this guy is chasing down real criminals, who is left to stand at the door and check receipts so that honest customers *feel* like criminals?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dpeters11
October 22, 2009 1:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

One time I was in a Walmart, something with a magnetic strip must not have gotten reactivated. It likely was the people just ahead of us. After going through the security area, it started beeping and a automated voice from above said \"The Walmart Inventory Control System has been activated.\" I don't know what was going on behind the scenes, but the public part that was activated was an 80 year old greeter that checked our bag and receipt. I really want to know what else got activated if they can't come after you in the lot.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
bravo369
October 22, 2009 2:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

i guess i'm in the minority here but i think the insanity has to stop. Stopping criminals gets you fired. it angers me. If this happened in my town then i would boycott that store and start a campaign to get everyone to boycott it. we've become a sue happy society. what next? fire employees who help lost kids find their parents because they were carrying the kid or holding the hand of a kid that isn't theirs? I think some people are just wired to fix an unjustice if they see it. that's why ordinary people run into a burning buildings, or chase after a purse snatcher or break up a fight..all while others just stand around and watch. it's sad and it's despicable that companies do this to people.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Avrus
October 22, 2009 3:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Did they discover his shoplifting after careful receipt checking?

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Biggbrother
October 22, 2009 6:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd be curious if this policy also pertains to when Walmart hires off-duty police officers, as I have seen sometimes.

On one hand, the officer is being paid by Walmart so Walmart could actually liable if anyone is injured in his pursuit or attempt to apprehend the suspect.

On the other hand, even police officers who are off-duty have some legal obligation to continue to inject themselves into situations where the public may be harmed. Many police departments require their officers to carry their weapons off-duty just for this purpose, although that tradition seems to be fading.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
teke367
October 22, 2009 7:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So, following people who skip a receipt check line is okay, but a legitimate shopper lifter is a no-no?

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
October 23, 2009 4:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Confusing policies they've got there. If you have no reason to think the customer is stealing anything, detain him at the door. But if he's shoplifting you have to let him go. So, just tell the receipt-checkers you're stealing something and you can leave.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Schildkrote
October 23, 2009 5:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I was halfway expecting the shoplifter to have been someone who hadn't shown the security guard his receipt.

They certainly won't hesitate to chase you then. \"Sir? SIR?!\"

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
AngryK9
October 24, 2009 2:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Security guards are dmaned if they do, and damned if they don't.


If they chase the subject down, they lose their jobs. If they do nothing, they lose their jobs.


Personally though, if I were a guard in Wal-Mart, my take on it would be this: That $25 hoodie that the idiot is stealing isn't worth my life...and Wal-Mart sucks anyway, so let him steal it.

Reply
","","");