A Few Things That Really Piss Me Off Part 1...

It's been some time since I've posted anything new on here and over the last several months, I've been spending a great deal of time thinking about a few different issues that really piss me off. When I do have a few spare moments here and there, I sometimes look up shoplifting videos on YouTube. I'm a dork like that. And in just about every single case, I find some brainless fuckwit that thinks he knows the laws better than those of us in the business and leaves a comment such as this: "Hopefully the shoplifter hires a lawyer and sues that company because they're not allowed to touch you." Really? So what you're saying is that no employee hired by a company for the purposes of controlling theft within the store is allowed to utilize any type of physical force to detain a shoplifter? So... every retail location, in every state in the US, has a "hands-off" policy? It's illegal to place your hands on a shoplifter to keep them inside the store? Really? In 7 years that's news to me. Perhaps someone should write a letter to Brad Brekke (head of Target Corp. Assets Protection) and let him know that he should immediately cease and desist sending his new AP team members to classes that specifically teach them how to utilize physical force and techniques to detain shoplifters... because why would the head of security for one of the country's largest corporations advocate a class that trains its employees how to break the law? I guess there's really no reason for them to carry handcuffs either because, in order to handcuff someone you obviously must place your hands on them and that would be illegal too wouldn't it? Most security offices inside Target stores have handcuff benches and some even have holding cells. So I guess that anyone who might need to be placed inside a holding cell is going to go in willingly huh? Then what the fuck would be the point of a holding cell??



I just get so god damn aggravated with these people who think they know everything. Here are the FACTS:



Every single state in the US has passed "merchants protection" statutes. They may be called something different in each state, but they are basically all the same. They allow for a retailer, or an agent employed by the retailer, to protect the assets of the business and detain someone suspected of theft for the purposes of delivering them into the custody of law enforcement officials. These statutes do not regulate the methods by which a retailer can detain someone. The common understanding when acting under these statutes' authority is that one doesn't use "excessive force." If a guy tries to run, you can hold him in the store. You can take him to the ground and hold him down. If your company allows you to use handcuffs, you can use them. There is nothing that any public safety department can say or do to regulate the methods that a private business uses to protect themselves as long as their actions cannot be construed as criminal. For example: you cannot beat a shoplifter repeatedly in the head. You cannot use 7 guys and dog pile a shoplifter and pin them down. You cannot use any type of weapon to strike or inflict injury upon a fleeing subject. A retailer (grocery store, department store, convenience store, etc.) no matter how big or small can use reasonable force to detain a shoplifter. However, if a shoplifter sustains injury during the course of their detention, you can be sure that an investigation will take place and if it is proven that a retailer acted outside the scope of their authority or used excessive force, they can be held responsible both in civil and in criminal court.



The reason why I think so many people have this misconception about store security not being allowed to touch a shoplifter, is because of a company's individual policies. There are a lot of retailers out there that do have "no touch/no chase" policies, but these are specific to the companies and not because of any state or federal laws. These companies instill these policies purely for liability reasons. They are smart enough to realize that if their people can manage to verbally detain a shoplifter without getting into a physical struggle, then it's worth the risk. But no amount of stolen merchandise is worth an injury to any person or any subsequent law suit that WILL result from such an injury. If you look through the phone book, you'll find at least 50 local lawyers who would give their left nut (or breast) to take on a lawsuit against a retailer for excessive force resulting in injury. The potential payoff is enormous. The title of most retail security departments is "Loss Prevention." Many new "LP" people think that preventing just means catching thieves. What they fail to understand is that loss comes not only from a shoplifter but from liability lawsuits as well. And the potential loss from a liability lawsuit is far greater than a $15 DVD that some 15 year old kid is walking out of the store with.



It may seem like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth; like I'm both advocating and admonishing the physical apprehension of shoplifters. That's not the case. I fully support a retailer allowing their people to use physical techniques to detain a shoplifter as long as they hire mature responsible people who aren't "cop wannabes" and provide them with the proper training and education to do so. Now, it's important that I differentiate between a "cop wannabe" and someone who wants to pursue a career in law enforcement. A wannabe, to me, is someone who has attempted to become a police officer and for some reason or another has failed, and now LP is the closest thing they can get to law enforcement. This is very different from the young (or not-so-young) college student who is studying and training for a career in law enforcement and who is working in LP to get as much "real-world" criminal justice experience before going through the academy. There are also those of us, like myself, who decided from the outset to make this our career. Of course I considered law enforcement at one point in time, but over the years my priorities have changed and I learned early on that there is more money to be made within Loss Prevention. It's true that money isn't everything, but when you have a family to support, it becomes just slightly more important.

In almost 7 years of being in this line of work (I know, I know, you're probably getting tired of hearing me tell you how long I've been doing this), I've only been in maybe 6 physical altercations, one all-out foot chase, and maybe 2 other instances were the subject tried to flee. The foot chase occurred while working for a company that allowed them. The other two fleeing incidents occurred with a company that had a no-chase policy. In one of the cases, law enforcement successfully apprehended the subject only a few miles down the road. In the other case, the subject got away with about 15 DVD's. Two weeks later, he went into another one of our stores and was successfully apprehended. Due to the excellent CCTV coverage, we were able to charge him with the DVD theft from my store as well as several other charges that resulted from his violent attempts to flee the store. My point is that if you have the right person in the right position, you shouldn't have issues with implementing a no-touch/no-chase policy and still successfully apprehend shoplifters. Out of 100 shoplifters, maybe 15 will try to run. Out of those 15, maybe 8 will run regardless of how the agent approaches them. The other 7 will most likely return to the store without force if they are approached in a forceful yet respectful manner while using some creative language.

I cannot possibly begin to count the number of people I've apprehended over 7 years. A friend of mine works for another similar retailer and he's had over 200 apprehensions in the last 2 years. I average slightly more stops than him every month, mostly due to the fact that I work in worse neighborhoods, so you do the math. Let's make a conservative estimate and say I've apprehended 500 shoplifters in 7 years. The estimate is probably low but it doesn't matter. If in 500 or more apprehensions, I've only had 8 situations where I was not able to successfully talk the subject back to the office, what the hell is going on in the rest of the LP world?

Two things to consider before I wrap this up:

First- Wal Mart. Can someone please explain to me why in 4 months, there have been just as many shoplifting-related deaths? In three of those cases, it was the shoplifter that died. In every one of those cases, the amount of recovered merchandise was less than $300. In the fourth case, the shoplifter got so out-of-control that a non-LP employee "had" to jump in to help subdue the subject. I realize that other companies have experienced serious injuries and even deaths related to the apprehension of shoplifters. Wal Mart will always make the news quicker than any other company for the exact same story simply due to the nature of being Wal Mart. I can't believe, however, that any other company is experiencing the same number of injuries and fatalities as Wal Mart. Why are shoplifters dying in their custody? Why are other non-LP employees jumping in to subdue an out-of-control shoplifter. Physical force is one thing, but when the subject becomes that combative that we need to enlist others in our attempts to subdue them, we must ALWAYS make the decision to disengage from the apprehension. Law enforcement should have already been contacted and will most likely arrive soon enough to catch the person in the parking lot or nearby. Only if the shoplifter continues to attack us after we've disengaged from an uncontrollably violent offender, should we continue our attempts to subdue them and defend ourselves. I have to imagine that someone within Wal Mart's upper echelons is reviewing their LP policies and hopefully making some changes to reduce the likelihood of these things happening again the future.

Last, let us each consider this before we go out to apprehend our next shoplifter: How we approach the shoplifter and how we treat them once they are in our custody has effects that reach far beyond and long after they've been released. If you are rude, disrespectful, and over-aggressive with a shoplifter while confronting them, you will absolutely make them more difficult to handle for the next one of us that crosses their path. If you are professional, respectful, and authoritative in your approach and casual yet cautious throughout their detention, when and if that person re-offends, they will undoubtedly be easier for the next LP person to deal with.

That's all the ranting I can do for now.