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

Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

retailbrew.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#81

Post by vel0city »

simoncion wrote: post #79
vel0city wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Company execs aren't writing the policies, actuaries are. Actuaries which spend their days analyzing all the minutiae of data and trying to quantize risk. If anyone knows the real risk/reward of putting merchandise in cabinets by zip code it's some actuary at some insurance firm. Arguing insurance companies don't follow the data and usually behave irrationally is ignoring reality.

> Arguing insurance companies ... usually behave irrationally is ignoring reality. Arguing that I claimed that insurance companies usually don't follow the data and usually do behave irrationally is ignoring what I wrote, which is reproduced below. > Even companies that you'd think would have everything straight sometimes don't. Assuming that a company that should be a sophisticated actor is ALWAYS doing the correct…

You're arguing this time they got it wrong despite not actually sharing any evidence. Understood. Your gut and vapid speculation of internet commenters is infallible unlike these supposed insurance companies. Which is funny, because even the idea these rates are being set higher is nothing but speculation in internet comments.

I agree they probably get some things wrong, but I think they probably get things right more often than not when it comes to analyzing risk. I wouldn't bet against the insurance companies on any random thing, even though I acknowledge they do make some mistakes. Chances are the insurance company understands the generalized risks on whatever they're underwriting more than I do.

If nobody was actually making claims for shrink, you really think the insurance companies would jack up the rates or require cabinets? It wouldn't just come from nowhere. And it's odd they only do it in some markets and not others. Around me there are no cabinets at Walgreens, CVS, Target, Walmart, and the other retailers mentioned in these comments. Obviously there's some level of targeting here going on, I wonder what data point they'd use...hmm...

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#82

Post by deepfriedchokes »

vel0city wrote: post #52
etempleton wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have little sympathy for many of these big box stores because their policies have indirectly lead to an increase in shoplifting. Their official policy in many stores is to do nothing when spotting a shop lifter other than report it to police after it has happened. For a while some of these big box stores would hire a security guard whose only job was to stand next to a shoplifter in the hopes it would intimidate th…

I mean, what should they do? Attempt to detain alleged shoplifters? Assault them? Shoot them? What do you think should be done?

Assault used to work, it probably still does. They should increase the training for security guards and legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary. All animals respond to violence. Just the potential of physical violence is enough. It works for bouncers, and they work in much more challenging environments.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#83

Post by vel0city »

deepfriedchokes wrote: post #82
vel0city wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, what should they do? Attempt to detain alleged shoplifters? Assault them? Shoot them? What do you think should be done?

Assault used to work, it probably still does. They should increase the training for security guards and legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary. All animals respond to violence. Just the potential of physical violence is enough. It works for bouncers, and they work in much more challenging environments.

> legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary

Corporations should be able to commit violence against those accused of property crimes. Interesting world view there.

> All animals respond to violence

Shoplifters aren't people, they're just animals. The above makes a little more sense

> It works for bouncers,

Because most clubs don't have billions of dollars a year in revenues to go after with lawyers itching to take on the case on contingency because the bouncer at CVS broke your nose.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#84

Post by vkou »

diggernet wrote: post #70
vkou wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In civilized, high-trust societies self-checkout works well and is very convenient. There's nothing convenient about me having to do the cashier's job, but badly, while having a tiny space to do my bagging in, while a computer yells at me. Maybe for someone with truly crippling social anxiety, this is preferable to an actually functional check-out counter, but I'm blessed to not be afflicted by it.

And someone with truly crippling social anxiety isn't going to be standing there in the store with a line of people staring at them while a computer yells at them. They are gonna be sitting at home waiting for the gig worker to drop off their stuff.

Some people with social anxiety aren't able to afford to have their groceries delivered to them.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#85

Post by deepfriedchokes »

vel0city wrote: post #83
deepfriedchokes wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assault used to work, it probably still does. They should increase the training for security guards and legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary. All animals respond to violence. Just the potential of physical violence is enough. It works for bouncers, and they work in much more challenging environments.

> legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary Corporations should be able to commit violence against those accused of property crimes. Interesting world view there. > All animals respond to violence Shoplifters aren't people, they're just animals. The above makes a little more sense > It works for bouncers, Because most clubs don't have billions of dollars a year in revenues to go after with lawyers itchi…

Corporations are legal persons with legal rights. Just the other day Kamala said on Oprah that if someone breaks into her house they’re getting shot! People have a right to defend themselves, as do corporations.

All people are animals. Obviously.

I’m sorry I triggered you, but I just think that doing nothing is acting as an enabler for breaking the law. I’m not some big law and order guy, but we need to maintain some order in society else it all goes to shit, and theft ends up getting paid for by everyone else.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#86

Post by vel0city »

deepfriedchokes wrote: post #85
vel0city wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary Corporations should be able to commit violence against those accused of property crimes. Interesting world view there. > All animals respond to violence Shoplifters aren't people, they're just animals. The above makes a little more sense > It works for bouncers, Because most clubs don't have billions of dollars a year in revenues to go after with lawyers itchi…

Corporations are legal persons with legal rights. Just the other day Kamala said on Oprah that if someone breaks into her house they’re getting shot! People have a right to defend themselves, as do corporations. All people are animals. Obviously. I’m sorry I triggered you, but I just think that doing nothing is acting as an enabler for breaking the law. I’m not some big law and order guy, but we need to maintain some…

There's things in between supporting corporations commiting violence against people they think might be stealing and doing nothing. A whole massive spectrum of actions. There's also a massive difference between shooting a home invader and shooting someone who some security guard thought they saw slip a candy bar in their pocket.

And sure, you said "non-lethal". Lots of people die from "non-lethal" force. There's practically no such thing as "non-lethal", so much they've started using the term "less-than-lethal". Which is still a joke. My point still stands.

But hey continue dehumanizing people and not worry about the consequences.

I'm down for more enforcement against property crimes like theft, but IMO supporting companies to commit violence against anyone they think might have something in their pockets isn't the right way. Maybe we should have our cops actually do their jobs and also solve the reasons why people choose to steal instead of thinking having a society with private security guards beat someone half to death at the exit to a storefront is normal.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#87

Post by EasyMark »

etempleton wrote: post #37
vel0city wrote: post #6

> “A year ago, America’s stores declared a shoplifting epidemic,” stated the CNN article. “This year, retailers are telling a very different story—or no story at all. It’s as if the shoplifting crisis suddenly vanished.” Or maybe because they closed down a lot of stores which were the worst and then on the borderline stores, they put up all the locked cabinets. Maybe now the rates of shrink have been reduced. There's…

I have little sympathy for many of these big box stores because their policies have indirectly lead to an increase in shoplifting. Their official policy in many stores is to do nothing when spotting a shop lifter other than report it to police after it has happened. For a while some of these big box stores would hire a security guard whose only job was to stand next to a shoplifter in the hopes it would intimidate th…

Shoplifting is mainly the result of lax prosecution of said crimes. I don’t ever really feel bad for corps other than companies I’ve worked for or ones I have nostalgia for, it’s just a vice I Iet myself have. However, I do feel sympathy for the people who live in those neighborhoods and can’t even get access to basic toiletries without asking someone to open up the glass. It has to get old and I see why people would just order it from Amazon or do a monthly run outside of the neighborhood to get the stuff they need for day to day activities. It’s time to fire the DAs an public officials who value “treating criminals with compassion” over the people just trying to get on with their honest, hardworking lives.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#88

Post by EasyMark »

vel0city wrote: post #83
deepfriedchokes wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assault used to work, it probably still does. They should increase the training for security guards and legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary. All animals respond to violence. Just the potential of physical violence is enough. It works for bouncers, and they work in much more challenging environments.

> legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary Corporations should be able to commit violence against those accused of property crimes. Interesting world view there. > All animals respond to violence Shoplifters aren't people, they're just animals. The above makes a little more sense > It works for bouncers, Because most clubs don't have billions of dollars a year in revenues to go after with lawyers itchi…

If you are trying to take my property, I should have the right to stop you from doing that. No one is saying shoplifters are animals, but there are laws for a reason, they are part of what holds society together and holds back chaos. It also sounds like new laws should be passed to protect one against civil lawsuits when it comes to defending your property or having an agent doing that.

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#89

Post by vel0city »

EasyMark wrote: post #88
vel0city wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> legally allow them to use non-lethal force as necessary Corporations should be able to commit violence against those accused of property crimes. Interesting world view there. > All animals respond to violence Shoplifters aren't people, they're just animals. The above makes a little more sense > It works for bouncers, Because most clubs don't have billions of dollars a year in revenues to go after with lawyers itchi…

If you are trying to take my property, I should have the right to stop you from doing that. No one is saying shoplifters are animals, but there are laws for a reason, they are part of what holds society together and holds back chaos. It also sounds like new laws should be passed to protect one against civil lawsuits when it comes to defending your property or having an agent doing that.

> No one is saying shoplifters are animal

Then why say "all animals respond to violence". What is that supposed to mean?

> but there are laws for a reason, they are part of what holds society together and holds back chaos.

You're right, the rule of law holds back the chaos. Not empowering and encouraging vigilante justice.

Oh sorry, I thought you pick pocketed me. Turns out my phone was just in my other pocket. Good thing I'm not liable for breaking your jaw! Better not swing back at me though, that would just be assault!

Oh sorry, I thought you slipped a candybar in your bag. Good luck with the medical bills! Maybe in a few months you'll be able to walk again!

And hey security guard Bob, you should definitely decide your life is more important than a few bottles of acetaminophen. Stop that shoplifter at all cost. We'll fire you after you stop showing up to work at the end of your FMLA though, good luck affording the rehab after that.

What a wonderful society you have in mind. If only we just normalized street vigilante violence we'd be such a better place!

Re: Two in three shoppers won't buy products in locked display cases

#90

Post by taeric »

quickthrowman wrote: post #63
taeric wrote: post #5

I'm torn on this. First, yes, I find locked items obnoxious. Still not happy that the easy to find nasal medicine in many stores was found to be garbage. That said, by the numbers here, it isn't clear how often people succeed at buying the item in another store. For a truly hilarious spin, you could think that having the item out where folks can touch things is itself the dark pattern that is encouraging people to bu…

> Still not happy that the easy to find nasal medicine in many stores was found to be garbage. At least with pseudoephedrine you can just walk up to the pharmacy and say ‘sell me as many generic pseudoephedrine tablets as I’m allowed to purchase’, sign the FDA log, and pay for it.

I'm concerned I can't see sarcasm anymore... :(
Post reply on HN