Best Buy store oopsie

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1


srothstein
Senior Member
Posts: 3914
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Luling, TX

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby srothstein » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:07 am

Grundy1133 wrote:
srothstein wrote:
SQLGeek wrote:Is LP/AP legally able to detain somebody? If so, under what authority?


Any citizen has the authority to detain someone under Article 18.16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Art. 18.16. PREVENTING CONSEQUENCES OF THEFT. Any person has a right to prevent the consequences of theft by seizing any personal property that has been stolen and bringing it, with the person suspected of committing the theft, if that person can be taken, before a magistrate for examination, or delivering the property and the person suspected of committing the theft to a peace officer for that purpose. To justify a seizure under this article, there must be reasonable ground to believe the property is stolen, and the seizure must be openly made and the proceedings had without delay.


This is what generally allows people to work security and loss prevention. But it does require them to be right. The person detained not only must be a thief but must actually have the stolen property on them.

so if an AP accuses me of shoplifting and detains me an dit turns out its just my gun could i file charges against the store for unlawful detainment?


That would be my understanding, but I am not a lawyer, just a retired cop.
Steve Rothstein


flechero
Senior Member
Posts: 1677
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central Texas

Wow... seriously?

Postby flechero » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:17 am

Why is everyone so lawsuit happy?? I really just don't get it. Someone sees you oddly fondling an item and then sees a bulge under your shirt and asks to verify it's not merchandise and people want to bring on a lawsuit?? What in the world? Think through what you are saying. Hundreds of wasted hours and lots of money spent on both sides, not to mention pulling resources away from real needs. Are we drunk in our righteousness? I'm really shocked with the responses. :confused5

Do you fight the LEO on the side of the road when you are pulled over for "speeding" (aka spot check) if you actually weren't, or do you show your DL/LTC & insurance to go on your way?



I'm really surprised by the change in attitude around here. And having seen a frivolous lawsuit against a good friend, I know what a waste it is for all parties... when it is finally thrown out, there are no refunds of your time, money or reputation.


Flame suit on. :lol:

User avatar

SQLGeek
Senior Member
Posts: 2761
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:48 am
Location: Richmond, TX

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby SQLGeek » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:15 am

srothstein wrote:
SQLGeek wrote:Is LP/AP legally able to detain somebody? If so, under what authority?


Any citizen has the authority to detain someone under Article 18.16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Art. 18.16. PREVENTING CONSEQUENCES OF THEFT. Any person has a right to prevent the consequences of theft by seizing any personal property that has been stolen and bringing it, with the person suspected of committing the theft, if that person can be taken, before a magistrate for examination, or delivering the property and the person suspected of committing the theft to a peace officer for that purpose. To justify a seizure under this article, there must be reasonable ground to believe the property is stolen, and the seizure must be openly made and the proceedings had without delay.


This is what generally allows people to work security and loss prevention. But it does require them to be right. The person detained not only must be a thief but must actually have the stolen property on them.


Thank you for the info, Steve. I was just curious how the law worked in this regard.
Psalm 91:2


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts: 3304
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Wow... seriously?

Postby Soccerdad1995 » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:27 am

flechero wrote:Why is everyone so lawsuit happy?? I really just don't get it. Someone sees you oddly fondling an item and then sees a bulge under your shirt and asks to verify it's not merchandise and people want to bring on a lawsuit?? What in the world? Think through what you are saying. Hundreds of wasted hours and lots of money spent on both sides, not to mention pulling resources away from real needs. Are we drunk in our righteousness? I'm really shocked with the responses. :confused5

Do you fight the LEO on the side of the road when you are pulled over for "speeding" (aka spot check) if you actually weren't, or do you show your DL/LTC & insurance to go on your way?



I'm really surprised by the change in attitude around here. And having seen a frivolous lawsuit against a good friend, I know what a waste it is for all parties... when it is finally thrown out, there are no refunds of your time, money or reputation.


Flame suit on. :lol:


Someone asks if I am a thief? Insulting, but I agree that is not worthy of a lawsuit. Someone physically prevents me from leaving their store? Going so far as to assault me if I insist on leaving? Definitely lawsuit worthy, IMHO. Actually worthy of more than a lawsuit, but we are civilized folks, so I would prefer to get recompense from the courts than from that person directly in the same manner. And we are not talking about law enforcement. We are talking about private citizens working for a company.

If I invite you to my home and then grab you and physically prevent you from leaving because I wrongly accuse you of being a thief, would you honestly just say "oh well, no harm no foul. Guess it was an honest mistake?"
Ding dong, the witch is dead


Abraham
Senior Member
Posts: 7675
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Abraham » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:29 am

No flame from me, just an observation.

At Walmart, I've seen the greeter doing the receipt check against the goods in the basket just as the customer was exiting the store. The times I've seen this occur, the checking and verifying was quick/efficient and the shopper went his way out the door. Obvious to me, it seemed to be a spot check type situation. Which, to me says: Hey, all our customers are potential thieves and if I the Walmart employee care to spot check you, just comply and all will be well, assuming you're innocent.

I find this policy outrageous. Why? I'm not in prison where random, spot checks are done all the time and are expected. In Walmart? Not only no, HECK no! I'm not your prisoner. Nor, do I care to be treated like one.

Now, if the shopper is stopped because the store is positive he/she IS a shoplifter, I can get on board the program of receipt checking.

Otherwise, this policy should discontinued.

In fact, at Fry's Electronics I won't shop there because they check every customer's receipt against the goods in the basket. And, as far as I know, it's not a Sam's type situation where you've agreed to be obliged to go by this policy by signing a document that says so...

Neither am I their prisoner or live in some sort totalitarian country where I can be ordered around.

If ever I'm stopped in Walmart, for a random spot check, I will politely ask for the manager (and no I won't be shop lifting) once we meet and greet, I'll be calling the local police and make my claim about being illegally detained. Will they just laugh and request I cease and desist. That I'm making a 'mountain out of a mole hill'. Maybe, but I'm going to pursue it, if it ever comes to that. So, I should just be a easy going shopper and not complain? After all, Walmart's simply trying to cut down on pilferage? Tough for them. They can do it without me going along with it as my rights as a citizen go flying out the window.


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts: 3304
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Soccerdad1995 » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:40 am

Abraham wrote:No flame from me, just an observation.

At Walmart, I've seen the greeter doing the receipt check against the goods in the basket just as the customer was exiting the store. The times I've seen this occur, the checking and verifying was quick/efficient and the shopper went his way out the door. Obvious to me, it seemed to be a spot check type situation. Which, to me says: Hey, all our customers are potential thieves and if I the Walmart employee care to spot check you, just comply and all will be well, assuming you're innocent.

I find this policy outrageous. Why? I'm not in prison where random, spot checks are done all the time and are expected. In Walmart? Not only no, HECK no! I'm not your prisoner. Nor, do I care to be treated like one.

Now, if the shopper is stopped because the store is positive he/she IS a shoplifter, I can get on board the program of receipt checking.

Otherwise, this policy should discontinued.

In fact, at Fry's Electronics I won't shop there because they check every customer's receipt against the goods in the basket. And, as far as I know, it's not a Sam's type situation where you've agreed to be obliged to go by this policy by signing a document that says so...

Neither am I their prisoner or live in some sort totalitarian country where I can be ordered around.

If ever I'm stopped in Walmart, for a random spot check, I will politely ask for the manager (and no I won't be shop lifting) once we meet and greet, I'll be calling the local police and make my claim about being illegally detained. Will they just laugh and request I cease and desist. That I'm making a 'mountain out of a mole hill'. Maybe, but I'm going to pursue it, if it ever comes to that. So, I should just be a easy going shopper and not complain? After all, Walmart's simply trying to cut down on pilferage? Tough for them. They can do it without me going along with it as my rights as a citizen go flying out the window.


I know people who have a policy of politely, but firmly, saying "no thank you" when encountering these receipt checks at Walmart and other locations. Reportedly, the checkers let them pass, which makes sense given the rather thin legal basis cited upthread. I'm not sure of the situation at Fry's. I only shopped there once, and that was in a different state at least 20 years ago. But I'd imagine that they are trained in a similar manner. It seems very reckless for a company to instruct employees to detain anyone unless they have very strong evidence of shoplifting.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


flechero
Senior Member
Posts: 1677
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Wow... seriously?

Postby flechero » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:45 am

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
flechero wrote:Why is everyone so lawsuit happy?? I really just don't get it. Someone sees you oddly fondling an item and then sees a bulge under your shirt and asks to verify it's not merchandise and people want to bring on a lawsuit?? What in the world? Think through what you are saying. Hundreds of wasted hours and lots of money spent on both sides, not to mention pulling resources away from real needs. Are we drunk in our righteousness? I'm really shocked with the responses. :confused5

Do you fight the LEO on the side of the road when you are pulled over for "speeding" (aka spot check) if you actually weren't, or do you show your DL/LTC & insurance to go on your way?



I'm really surprised by the change in attitude around here. And having seen a frivolous lawsuit against a good friend, I know what a waste it is for all parties... when it is finally thrown out, there are no refunds of your time, money or reputation.


Flame suit on. :lol:


Someone asks if I am a thief? Insulting, but I agree that is not worthy of a lawsuit. Someone physically prevents me from leaving their store? Going so far as to assault me if I insist on leaving? Definitely lawsuit worthy, IMHO. Actually worthy of more than a lawsuit, but we are civilized folks, so I would prefer to get recompense from the courts than from that person directly in the same manner. And we are not talking about law enforcement. We are talking about private citizens working for a company.

If I invite you to my home and then grab you and physically prevent you from leaving because I wrongly accuse you of being a thief, would you honestly just say "oh well, no harm no foul. Guess it was an honest mistake?"


I hadn't considered that (bolded) part when I responded... I read the original scenario as only being verbally questioned, not physically accosted. Agreed there is a big difference there.


I don't like the receipt checking, even after they watch me check out but it's not usually enough to make me drive to a different store (we are in a small town so not too convenient to find alternatives)


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts: 3304
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Wow... seriously?

Postby Soccerdad1995 » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:52 am

flechero wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
flechero wrote:Why is everyone so lawsuit happy?? I really just don't get it. Someone sees you oddly fondling an item and then sees a bulge under your shirt and asks to verify it's not merchandise and people want to bring on a lawsuit?? What in the world? Think through what you are saying. Hundreds of wasted hours and lots of money spent on both sides, not to mention pulling resources away from real needs. Are we drunk in our righteousness? I'm really shocked with the responses. :confused5

Do you fight the LEO on the side of the road when you are pulled over for "speeding" (aka spot check) if you actually weren't, or do you show your DL/LTC & insurance to go on your way?



I'm really surprised by the change in attitude around here. And having seen a frivolous lawsuit against a good friend, I know what a waste it is for all parties... when it is finally thrown out, there are no refunds of your time, money or reputation.


Flame suit on. :lol:


Someone asks if I am a thief? Insulting, but I agree that is not worthy of a lawsuit. Someone physically prevents me from leaving their store? Going so far as to assault me if I insist on leaving? Definitely lawsuit worthy, IMHO. Actually worthy of more than a lawsuit, but we are civilized folks, so I would prefer to get recompense from the courts than from that person directly in the same manner. And we are not talking about law enforcement. We are talking about private citizens working for a company.

If I invite you to my home and then grab you and physically prevent you from leaving because I wrongly accuse you of being a thief, would you honestly just say "oh well, no harm no foul. Guess it was an honest mistake?"


I hadn't considered that (bolded) part when I responded... I read the original scenario as only being verbally questioned, not physically accosted. Agreed there is a big difference there.


I don't like the receipt checking, even after they watch me check out but it's not usually enough to make me drive to a different store (we are in a small town so not too convenient to find alternatives)


As with a lot of these hypotheticals, the issue is with "what happens next". If someone asks you to show them a receipt, then they haven't done anything worthy of more than a sideways glance, IMHO. But what do they do when you smile and say no thanks? Do they move to block you from exiting? If you continue on, do they lay hands on you? I think a lot of the folks responding are assuming the actions of the "receipt checker" after you refuse to show a receipt. Specifically, they are assuming that the person will prevent them from leaving either by ordering them not to leave, or by getting physical in some way.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


Russell
Senior Member
Posts: 2787
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Russell » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:54 am

Keith B wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:This would be interesting if they had a 30.07 sign posted. In that case, I don't know that you could legally raise your shirt even if asked.


No. If you were being stopped by store asset protection, then showing them that it's not a stolen item is basically under their request. They are the ones posting the 30.07, and they could not have you arrested for openly carrying if they request to see what it is you have under your shirt.



I wanted to bring this back up for discussion.

It obviously makes sense that the property owner posting the signage can override said signage at will - however I haven't seen any basis for this in the penal code. It reads to me like if the signage is up, it's up for everyone at all times.

Is there somewhere I can be pointed to that clears the way for the property owner to permit "chosen individuals" to legally ignore the signage?
http://www.texas3006.com - Texas 30.06 and 30.07 Signage Database.
Join us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/texas3006


Abraham
Senior Member
Posts: 7675
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:43 am

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Abraham » Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:08 pm

In all my grocery store purchases, I've never encountered this receipt checking exercise.

Wonder why not?

They have pilferage problems too.

Why (who I'm actually a fan of) does Walmart do this?

What makes them special...?


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts: 3304
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Soccerdad1995 » Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:19 pm

Russell wrote:
Keith B wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:This would be interesting if they had a 30.07 sign posted. In that case, I don't know that you could legally raise your shirt even if asked.


No. If you were being stopped by store asset protection, then showing them that it's not a stolen item is basically under their request. They are the ones posting the 30.07, and they could not have you arrested for openly carrying if they request to see what it is you have under your shirt.



I wanted to bring this back up for discussion.

It obviously makes sense that the property owner posting the signage can override said signage at will - however I haven't seen any basis for this in the penal code. It reads to me like if the signage is up, it's up for everyone at all times.

Is there somewhere I can be pointed to that clears the way for the property owner to permit "chosen individuals" to legally ignore the signage?


I'm also curious as to the form that the permission would need to take. A written authorization signed by someone in charge of the property, that clearly allows you to open carry would be bullet proof, I believe. But simply being asked to raise your shirt? I don't think that a jury would likely conclude that this automatically gave one permission to violate 30.07 restrictions.

Regardless, this might be a good opportunity to parlay the request into a general permission that overrides any 30.07 signage. At least then something good would come of it.
Ding dong, the witch is dead

User avatar

Grundy1133
Senior Member
Posts: 779
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 2:18 pm
Location: North Texas

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Grundy1133 » Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:37 pm

Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Russell wrote:
Keith B wrote:
Soccerdad1995 wrote:This would be interesting if they had a 30.07 sign posted. In that case, I don't know that you could legally raise your shirt even if asked.


No. If you were being stopped by store asset protection, then showing them that it's not a stolen item is basically under their request. They are the ones posting the 30.07, and they could not have you arrested for openly carrying if they request to see what it is you have under your shirt.



I wanted to bring this back up for discussion.

It obviously makes sense that the property owner posting the signage can override said signage at will - however I haven't seen any basis for this in the penal code. It reads to me like if the signage is up, it's up for everyone at all times.

Is there somewhere I can be pointed to that clears the way for the property owner to permit "chosen individuals" to legally ignore the signage?


I'm also curious as to the form that the permission would need to take. A written authorization signed by someone in charge of the property, that clearly allows you to open carry would be bullet proof, I believe. But simply being asked to raise your shirt? I don't think that a jury would likely conclude that this automatically gave one permission to violate 30.07 restrictions.

Regardless, this might be a good opportunity to parlay the request into a general permission that overrides any 30.07 signage. At least then something good would come of it.

I think if they asked me to raise my shirt I'd pull out my LTC and tell them this is what they are seeing. if they wish to further pursue the issue, I'd tell them I refuse to pull my shirt up due to the 30.07 signage. if they FURTHER pursue the issue and decide to call a LEO, while I wait for them to arrive I'd decide whether I want to press charges for unlawful detainment or not.
NRA Member


priusron
Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby priusron » Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:05 pm

I don’t show my receipt at Walmart and they have become very adamant that I need to show it. When the money changes heads so does ownership. They need a search warrant to view my items or receipt. I have also walked past the person at frys. I don’t mind at frys so much because they attempt to do 100% but I don’t wait in line for it.

User avatar

Bitter Clinger
Senior Member
Posts: 1828
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:16 pm
Location: North Dallas

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby Bitter Clinger » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:02 pm

Some members-only discount stores require their customers to give consent to be searched by an employee as a condition of membership. For example, the Costco membership agreement contains an unconditional consent to search. Customers who sign such an agreement (as all Costco customers must) would seem to have no grounds to complain if they are later required to submit to a receipt-check.
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח


RicoTX
Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:35 pm

Re: Best Buy store oopsie

Postby RicoTX » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:27 pm

I rarely shop at Wal-Mart. When I do, I rarely use a basket, so I'm leaving with just bags. I have been asked numerous times over the years to show my receipt and my response is always the same: "No thanks, but feel free to tell your manager they are welcome to follow me to my truck and I will be more than happy to explain why I refuse to do so. " I have always been nice about it, and only once did someone actually walk after me pestering me. I kept walking and explained that if they want to make sure I paid for my stuff, they can move the registers to the doors and that while they were bothering me about my Wal-Mart sacks, there were probably five criminals in the store shoving merchandise down their pants.
NRA Endowment Life Member
TSRA Member
GOA Member


Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 11 guests