Quote:Just because the law protects my right to slap a lawsuit on anyone who looks at me the wrong way, doesn't make me a hero for standing up and asserting those rights.
Flawed logic. You actually do NOT have the "right" to slap a lawsuit on anyone who looks at you the wrong way. The law protects all of us by DENYING that "right", and instead requiring the burden of proof. Yes, you technically can slap a lawsuit on anyone who looks at you the wrong way, but doing so will very quickly teach you just how illegal that is, and net you a hefty penalty in the process. Judges look down upon that sort of thing, and will not hesitate to turn it around on you if they feel you are trying to abuse the courts.
Now, as for my own opinion, yes, we could call this guy a jerk and an idiot, and chalk it up to nothing more. Personally, I think he does have a point, in some respects. I definitely think the CC employees were out of line, and thus are deserving of reprimand. The officer, too, in this situation went beyond his authority, and he should also be judged for that.
One point to note: People are being asked to check the contents of their store-given bags, not their person nor their other containers. That, of course, cuts the line on "illegal search and seizure". On the other hand, many people are under the impression that these searches can deter theft. I don't know about you, but when I buy something from one of these stores, the only thing in the bag is what I bought. Furthermore, the only way I get such a bag is through checkout. It's not like they're lying around everywhere for people to just take. Lastly, why would any intelligent shoplifter take something OUT of his person (the only place he could possibly conceal it while going through the checkout process), and then attempt to stick it in his newly acquired shopping bag with his legally bought goods a mere few feet from the doors, and in plain view of security, cameras, and customers? My point is that the checking of receipts against bagged items is, as has been said, more a psychological deterrent (for shoplifters) and insurance (for the company). It does very little actual good against shoplifters, especially in lieu of modern technology (sensor tags, etc.).
Of course, no amount of technology will stop a determined shoplifter, and indeed the only way to truly deter shoplifting is by having watchmen and stopping suspicious people at the door, and even that will have holes big enough to swim a tuna through. When I worked at Wilsons, our biggest deterrent against shoplifting was ourselves. Second came double-tagging all items, to make it more difficult to "cut and run" (cutting the sensor tags and then simply walking off with the items). We would regularly get hit by professional shoplifting rings, with gangs spread across the entire East Coast. It's amazing what those people can do, and not just with small, easily-concealed items.
Anyway, personally, I'm amused by the debacle, especially having worked at Circuit City (they have emulated Best Buy, to their detriment, in a last-ditch bid to survive; sad, really) years ago, before such policies were routine anywhere but BJ's Wholesale Club.:PI want to know how it all ends, and I hope justice is done, even if that includes a slap on the wrist for our "Hero".;)I could see him getting a stern warning from a judge, and would find that appropriate, especially if the Circuit City employees and the officer get what they deserve. I'm not going to laud him as a savior, but I'll cheer him on by raising my drink.;)
Edit:
I should clarify that I am neither for nor against the policy of checking receipts at the door. On the one hand, I empathize with his frustrations. On the other, I don't really see it as a big enough deal to warrant such extreme action as a court case, nor do I feel it necessarily needs to be changed. That is for a court to decide, though, not for me, and I cannot stress enough that it was the actions of EVERYONE involved that brought this incident to such a head, not just Mr. Hero. Bear that in mind when you make your own judgments.
Roland *The Gunslinger*