There's a bit in Firesign Theatre that goes something like:
Ask the cop on the corner.
Ask the cop under the window. Ask the cop behind the woodpile. Ask the cop who's knocking on your front door.





There's a bit in Firesign Theatre that goes something like:
Ask the cop on the corner.
Ask the cop under the window. Ask the cop behind the woodpile. Ask the cop who's knocking on your front door.
myliftkk wrote
agred. the reason this urban myth pervades is likely because of the extensive caution most corporate store security exercises these days because of the threat of civil action. for almost all businesses, it's much cheaper to lose some merchadise than to lose a lawsuit because you overreacted.
my ex wife worked asset protection at a Target store in Georgia.
they can do what they want to you,if they think you stole something.
agtw31 wrote >>
myliftkk wrote
agred. the reason this urban myth pervades is likely because of the extensive caution most corporate store security exercises these days because of the threat of civil action. for almost all businesses, it's much cheaper to lose some merchadise than to lose a lawsuit because you overreacted.my ex wife worked asset protection at a Target store in Georgia.
they can do what they want to you,if they think you stole something.
No, they can't. Or, more precisely, can't without being civilly liable. Unlawful restraint (if they detain you) or defamation action (if the events are public enough)would be two possible avenues. Walmart has lost a number of cases on exactly those grounds.
A.
agtw31 wrote >>
myliftkk wrote
agred. the reason this urban myth pervades is likely because of the extensive caution most corporate store security exercises these days because of the threat of civil action. for almost all businesses, it's much cheaper to lose some merchadise than to lose a lawsuit because you overreacted.my ex wife worked asset protection at a Target store in Georgia.
they can do what they want to you,if they think you stole something.
asset protection employees (when did they stop being called security guards?) who are ignorant of the law in the practice of their profession hardly denotes a carte blanche "can do anything" right conferred by the law itself. the latitude regarding merchant-initiated reasonable dententions, is just that, latitude, not a free for all absolution of a consumer's constitutional rights.
A few weeks ago, I spoke to someone from the city law department about these searches. He told me the searches & increased police presence on some buses & bus stops are the direct result of several specific complaints & incidents, mostly in the downtown area.
I was also told some, but not all, of these involve youths who have taken to riding the buses for numerous hours for entertainment & are taking advantage of the free bus passes they receive as Columbus public school students. (I'll leave to others to theorize what effect the recent closure of rec centers around the city have played regarding this).
With the onset of cold weather, I anticipate the complaints and searches will drop in number but would not be surprised to see both increase again in the spring.
My office is developing a plan to work with local social service agencies, churches, community organizations, etc to inform their contacts & clients - especially youth - what their constitutional rights are when they are stopped by police.
These "Know Your Rights" efforts are something we've done throughout the area since our regional office opened here in summer 2008 & we've worked with & continue to work with local Latinos, Somalis, students, ex-offenders & others to spread information.
A big part of our efforts involves the distribution of our wallet-sized card titled "What To Do If You're Stopped By Police" (http://www.acluohio.org/issues/PolicePractices/BustcardMultiple.pdf)
If you're affiliated with a local group, agency, school, community center, etc interested in having the ACLU distribute information to and/or conduct presentations for you regarding the rights of people during police encounters, please contact me via PM.
Gary Daniels
Associate Director
ACLU of Ohio
http://www.acluohio.org
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless there is a specific statement in the COTA terms of service (rider rules?) regarding bag searches, then the police have the same right or lack thereof, to search your bag that they have in any other public space. It also seems to me that they wouldn't have the right to refuse service to someone who refuses a police bag search also unless it's specifically listed in the terms of service or under a general 'refuse service for any reason' statement.
I cannot find COTAs terms of service or a statement of rider rules on their web site. Does anyone know if they have any such language in their rules?
We've been ceding rights to the government like this for years. Remember when Mayor Coleman and city council decided they could ban handguns in the city? Then the Supreme Court told DC and Columbus that wasn't going to fly. The government has been peeling away at the Constitution for decades that's why we have the IRS and the Patriot Act. Those aren't to keep us safe or fill the Federal coffers. Those are to keep tabs on the citizenry. The State of Ohio has already done some preliminary work looking at the feasibility or putting GPS devices on our vehicles, strictly for tax purposes of course. We should be outraged but, we've already given up so much most people don't even blink when they hear something like this.
Kirk wrote >>
We've been ceding rights to the government like this for years. Remember when Mayor Coleman and city council decided they could ban handguns in the city? Then the Supreme Court told DC and Columbus that wasn't going to fly. The government has been peeling away at the Constitution for decades that's why we have the IRS and the Patriot Act. Those aren't to keep us safe or fill the Federal coffers. Those are to keep tabs on the citizenry. The State of Ohio has already done some preliminary work looking at the feasibility or putting GPS devices on our vehicles, strictly for tax purposes of course. We should be outraged but, we've already given up so much most people don't even blink when they hear something like this.
Columbus had an assault weapons ban.
sort of tangentially related, it seems the courts are finally getting around to restricting cowboy taser use.
Andrew Hall wrote <a
No, they can't. Or, more precisely, can't without being civilly liable. Unlawful restraint (if they detain you) or defamation action (if the events are public enough)would be two possible avenues. Walmart has lost a number of cases on exactly those grounds.
A.
come on now,use common sense.
it's not unlawful restraint or defmation when you have a purseful of their stuff you didn't pay for,and you're making a run for the door.
did you know there is no such crime as shoplifting anymore?it's now called robbery,a 2nd degree felony.
myliftkk wrote
asset protection employees (when did they stop being called security guards?) who are ignorant of the law in the practice of their profession hardly denotes a carte blanche "can do anything" right conferred by the law itself. the latitude regarding merchant-initiated reasonable dententions, is just that, latitude, not a free for all absolution of a consumer's constitutional rights.
i laughed when my ex told me it was called "asset protection",too.that's Target for you.
the deal is you are in their store,which is their property.
cameras there can see everything you do,and there are security people all over the place.
they profile bigtime,they probably have an eye on you the second you walk in the door.
if they see you stick something in your purse or on your person,they will want to search you.
if you don't like it,try to leave.
you will be detained,and you will go to jail.if you fight them,you will get a beatdown.
agtw31 wrote >>
Andrew Hall wrote <a
if you don't like it,try to leave.
you will be detained,and you will go to jail.if you fight them,you will get a beatdown.
If they give you a beatdown, they are in a real world of hurt.
Know your rights or lose them.
I don't care if you stood in front of the person, with a red strobe light on your head playing the theme to Cats while you stuffed an X-box down your pants.
1) They certainly can not beat you
2) They can only detain you long enough for the police to arrive.
I had a guy at Best Buy try that once. I was walking out with something I bought in a bag. The alarm went off and I continued to walk out. The security guard stopped me.
I told him to either let me go or call the police. His choice.
He called the manager over and after a quick talk with each other they let me go.
Once I buy something, it's mine. You can't have it, you can't search me for it. Explaining that it's store procedure does not sway me in any way. They can tell me not to come back, but they cant stop me from leaving.
agtw31 wrote >>
Andrew Hall wrote <a
No, they can't. Or, more precisely, can't without being civilly liable. Unlawful restraint (if they detain you) or defamation action (if the events are public enough)would be two possible avenues. Walmart has lost a number of cases on exactly those grounds.
A.come on now,use common sense.
it's not unlawful restraint or defmation when you have a purseful of their stuff you didn't pay for,and you're making a run for the door.
did you know there is no such crime as shoplifting anymore?it's now called robbery,a 2nd degree felony.myliftkk wrote
asset protection employees (when did they stop being called security guards?) who are ignorant of the law in the practice of their profession hardly denotes a carte blanche "can do anything" right conferred by the law itself. the latitude regarding merchant-initiated reasonable dententions, is just that, latitude, not a free for all absolution of a consumer's constitutional rights.i laughed when my ex told me it was called "asset protection",too.that's Target for you.
the deal is you are in their store,which is their property.
cameras there can see everything you do,and there are security people all over the place.
they profile bigtime,they probably have an eye on you the second you walk in the door.
if they see you stick something in your purse or on your person,they will want to search you.
if you don't like it,try to leave.
you will be detained,and you will go to jail.if you fight them,you will get a beatdown.
the legend of target's security apparatus certainly appears to have gained mythical status.
knowing someone personally who was fired from target for chasing a thief out of the store, i can assure you, there's nothing otherwordly about their security (any and all security systems can be defeated given time and preparation). that apparatus, however fancy, in and of itself, has no bearing on the abrogation of constitutional rights of any one individual. as a merchant, i cannot, during an unarmed robbery such as shoplifting, lawfully, being the operative term, pull out a .50cal and blow off said robber's head. whether i can do so physically because i possess the means and will to do so is immaterial to the question of whether it is lawful to do so. to suggest otherwise is simply foolish and off topic (since this discussion has been primarily about the exercise of constitutional rights).
agtw31 wrote >>
did you know there is no such crime as shoplifting anymore?it's now called robbery,a 2nd degree felony.
no, it's called Theft, and most shoplifting cases would be an M-1 or F-4
2913.02 Theft, aggravated theft
(A) No person, with purpose to deprive the owner of property or services, shall knowingly obtain or exert control over either the property or services in any of the following ways:
(1) Without the consent of the owner or person authorized to give consent; (2) Beyond the scope of the express or implied consent of the owner or person authorized to give consent; (3) By deception; (4) By threat.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of theft. If the value of the property or services stolen is less than three hundred dollars, a violation of this section is petty theft, a misdemeanor of the first degree. If the value of the property or services stolen is three hundred dollars or more and is less than five thousand dollars, or if the property stolen is any of the property listed in section 2913.71 of the Revised Code, or if the offender previously has been convicted of a theft offense, a violation of this section is theft, a felony of the fourth degree. If the value of the property or services stolen is five thousand dollars or more and is less than one hundred thousand dollars, or if the offender previously has been convicted of two or more theft offenses, a violation of this section is grand theft, a felony of the third degree.
Its called robbery if they engage security (or any other employee) while attempting the theft physically. So yes, it would be robbery if they wrestled with a store employee while leaving the store.
Core_Models wrote >>
Its called robbery if they engage security (or any other employee) while attempting the theft physically. So yes, it would be robbery if they wrestled with a store employee while leaving the store.
yeah. only if some level of person to person violence is involved. Most shoplifting cases don't involve this at all.
It also varies by state as well and some states (iirc) have specific shoplifting statutues.
I started to post what y'all did, but correcting someone like @agtw31 who clearly puts absolutely no thought into what they write is a pointless exercise.
A.
lol
Accused shoplifters cause chaos at Walmart
yep, that sounds like Walmart
back in '92,i was driving back to Atlanta from High Point NC,after a bowling in a tournament there.
i got nailed doing 70 in a 55 in Charlotte,and the cops actually had a police dog smell my balls.
You must log in to post.