Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 351 posts

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#331

Post by ZeroGravitas »

nitwit005 wrote: post #174
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #50

This appears to be part of a long running PR campaign by large corporations that are happy to lock up poor, mentally-ill and drug-addicted people at the taxpayers expense if it lets them fear monger, while at the same time stealing from their own employees. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/... https://www.npr.org/2020/10/16/923844907/when-shoplifting-is... https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinio…

You believe that retailers secretly hate the mentally ill and drug addicts, and are engaging in a decades long nation wide secret conspiracy to get them thrown in prison? I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that they probably just don't like people stealing from them.

Are these two things different?

Did the fossil fuel industry take part in a decades long, ongoing conspiracy to deny and downplay the impacts of their pollution (we'll just skip over the wars and revolutions and lead poisoning) or do they just like when people give them money?

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#333

Post by dragonwriter »

AniseAbyss wrote: post #332

Stores are switching to self checkout. Clearly the math works out for them but it makes stealing a lot easier.

> Clearly the math works out for them but it makes stealing a lot easier.

It makes outsider theft easier, but it also reduces the number of staff needed, and the majority of theft (from my understanding from people who have worked in Loss Prevention, the overwhelming majority) from retail establishments is insider theft.

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#334

Post by AniseAbyss »

rayiner wrote: post #251
bko wrote: post #3

> The target was no ordinary shoplifter. He was part of a network of organized professionals, known as boosters, whom CVS had been monitoring for weeks. The company believed the group responsible for stealing almost $50 million in products over five years from dozens of stores in Northern California. The story isn't about people selling stolen goods on Amazon. It's about organized theft operations. One way to stop th…

One of my observations coming from Bangladesh, where policing is pretty inadequate, is that criminal law is really there to prevent the growth of organized crime. So you have to think about crime as a system not in terms of individuals. Harsh punishment may not deter a given criminal. But it may well make it hard to recruit dozens of low level people to engage in low value illegal activity that adds up to something s…

That would work if humans were rational and intelligent.

We have 20 year old people who end up in jail for life because they assassinated someone. It's insane, they're doing it for just 20000 euro!

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#335

Post by AniseAbyss »

hattmall wrote: post #317
jzb wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't seem to be working so well with drugs. We've filled prisons with people engaged in low level illegal activity but we don't seem to have made any dent in illegal drugs. In fact, probably the opposite.

This is basic supply and demand. Supply side enforcement for drugs is unlikely to be successful. Increasing the enforcement only raises the reward for doing it eventually as the market dictates someone will step in to fill the role as long as supply demands it. On the other hand the reality is that there is a limited supply of drug users. Demand side enforcement could end the "war" quickly. Enforcement of sellers is…

Not very limited. In my country basically everyone uses drugs. It's a "work hard play hard" mentality.

And no you can't prosecute buyers. They are white middle class people.

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#336

Post by [deleted] »

hattmall wrote: post #321
learc83 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time I’ve seen an armed guard at a retail store in the southeast is when they have off duty cops late night at very high crime locations. It is extremely uncommon here for a Target or Best Buy to regularly employee armed security.

Most everywhere in Atlanta has armed security, CVS included. It's not ever really geared at shoplifters though, as a lot of people seem to forget that shoplifting isn't really the biggest crime you can do in a store.

[deleted]

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#337

Post by learc83 »

hattmall wrote: post #321
learc83 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time I’ve seen an armed guard at a retail store in the southeast is when they have off duty cops late night at very high crime locations. It is extremely uncommon here for a Target or Best Buy to regularly employee armed security.

Most everywhere in Atlanta has armed security, CVS included. It's not ever really geared at shoplifters though, as a lot of people seem to forget that shoplifting isn't really the biggest crime you can do in a store.

I don’t think it’s most everywhere in Atlanta because I lived there until 2 years ago (I still visit regularly), and it wasn’t the norm anywhere I regularly went. Atlanta is a big place, so I’m sure there’s room for variation.

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#338

Post by [deleted] »

BuyMyBitcoins wrote: post #312
a9h74j wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So will we see a startup: Uber for alternative policing to whom small retailers submit surveilance camera footage, and expect a series of crimes to be merged into a single case?

That’s actually a pretty compelling idea. Not necessarily the alternative policing part (private police?), but compiling hard evidence against offenders and handing that to the authorities.

[deleted]

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#339

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #240
kevinpet wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm concerned about lawlessness, but if the only alternative is that $950 theft is a _felony_ that's messed up. This seems more like a case of not being able to deal with crime than lax sentencing.

Nobody will risk prison for $950 of stuff. If you make it basically a ticket, then you can easily get dozens of people to be able to steal a meaningful amount of stuff.

People will risk prison for a lot less than $950. Chicago isn't San Francisco, and if you're caught stealing a weed-whacker out of a garage, the police will mess up your year. People still break into my garage. I don't think felony sentencing has really any impact on these kinds of crimes; all it does is stuff prisons full of hopeless people.

That's not to say there isn't a policing solution to this problem! Just that dialing up consequences isn't it.

Re: Retailers are spending millions to combat organized theft from stores

#340

Post by mjul »

floren wrote: post #215
jokethrowaway wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government is incompetent at protecting people. Call the police and you'll see how it goes. And this is happening while the government is spending 13B per year. I wonder, where does the money go, if basic services are not provided? I'd rather spend my money on a network of competing private protection companies if I didn't have to pay taxes for the police. Once the system is in place you can create all sort of ch…

> I'd rather spend my money on a network of competing private protection companies if I didn't have to pay taxes for the police. I'd prefer to fix the cops rather than sign up for a MetaCops subscription in my burbclave.

That looks like a Snow Crash reference (Neal Stephenson). Absolutely worth a re-read if you want to explore this scenario.

Edit: spelling

Post reply on HN