Door searches at Wal-Mart

[milk man]

But, you got the answers.

- Carl

What's your point. A guy bust my balls on the fifth post and I don't roll over and end up pissing off everyone.

 

[milk man]

I just have to say that I but things all the time at Wal-Mart and I live in the store, the enployees all know me on sight. I set off the alarms all the time with my 2 small children in tow and I STILL STOP and let them look if they want. I have nothing to hide and therefor, it doesnt bother me. The more you resist, the more you look guilty.

I have nothing to hide either.

 

[CdwJava]

What's your point. A guy bust my balls on the fifth post and I don't roll over and end up pissing off everyone.

It appeared you insinuated you did not get the answers you sought ... you did.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

I just have to say that I but things all the time at Wal-Mart and I live in the store, the enployees all know me on sight. I set off the alarms all the time with my 2 small children in tow and I STILL STOP and let them look if they want. I have nothing to hide and therefor, it doesnt bother me. The more you resist, the more you look guilty.

Heck, I'm a local cop and serve on several committees and boards with staff and management at our Wal-Mart and I still stop on the rare occasion that the alarm rings when I head out. Since I spend a good deal of time in electronics, I tend to purchase items that need to be deactivated and apparently this does no always happen. It is certainly rare, but it does happen ... even to me!

- Carl

 

[milk man]

It appeared you insinuated you did not get the answers you sought ... you did.

- Carl

I didn't like the answers, big deal.

What I did, I restated my questions in a different form so I could better understand the answers. I don't have a law degree or been in enough trouble in 42 years to understand the ins and out of the law. So everyone type slow for me

It was an assumption of a poster that I was argumentative by asking for further explanation of the answers. Then instead of rereading what I wrote others assumed that I didn't believe what I was being told. Why would I come on here and argue the law with the people that enforce it or practice it.

So I ask anyone that gives a care to re-read what I've posted keeping in mind I was just wanting information and not trolling.

 

[BoredAtty]

I should have said it was not extended by the Supreme Court but that the Supreme Court RECOGNIZED it as part of the Commerce Clause of the Consitution. My slip of the tongue improperly. Sorry. Didn't mean to french kiss too many at the wrong time. However BA, Congress did not pass that part of the Constitution. As part of the COnstitution it existed before Congress -- at least Congress as we know it. It didn't go into effect until the states ratified it. So... it was not by the authority of Congress but the Authority of the states when they ratified the Constitution.

You aren't by any chance a former Miss Teen USA contestant from South Carolina, are you?

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which oddly enough was passed by Congress in 1964, is most assuredly not a part of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which was written almost 200 years prior to 1964. I'm also fairly certain that the Supreme Court has never stated that it is.

 

[CdwJava]

I didn't like the answers, big deal.

Few people do.

The Glee Club is next door.

Personally, I travel the path of least resistance. I don't like confrontation when I am off duty, so when someone says they want to look at my bag, I comply. No skin off my nose, I get to leave without making a scene, and my delay is measured in seconds.

But, that's just me.

- Carl

 

[mike_lee]

so, yeah, I'm looking forward to saving a LOT of money every month with even less driving!

- Carl

Forget about saving money. It's some wal-mart law that every time you save a buck you get a new cookie addiction.

Personally, I travel the path of least resistance. I don't like confrontation when I am off duty, so when someone says they want to look at my bag, I comply. No skin off my nose, I get to leave without making a scene, and my delay is measured in seconds.

it's odd how passive I become in situations where someone else is calling the shots and I can just go with the flow. The nail that is sticking up gets hammered down, as they say.

On the other hand do you think stores will stop there? if wal-mart had their way our checks would be deposited at their bank and every penny we made would be spent at walmart. People like the OP do us all a service, you can see his personality type he's the type who can do this kind of thing.

 

[CdwJava]

On the other hand do you think stores will stop there? if wal-mart had their way our checks would be deposited at their bank and every penny we made would be spent at walmart. People like the OP do us all a service, you can see his personality type he's the type who can do this kind of thing.

The stores do this to try and stem the rising tide of shoplifting. In my state, the losses to Wal-Mart from shoplifting alone (not counting employee theft) in the first quarter of this year was in the millions! And that was from only high-ticket items (no, I am not sure what the region is, but it is either all of California or part of it ... I cannot recall the specific figure cited to me but it was more than 3 million, and I believe it was the northern CA region).

If businesses feel they will lose more business by this practice than they will save in theft, they will stop. Personally, I don't care. If I don't want to be stopped at the door, I'll shop elsewhere. Since I mostly shop on-line anyway, I wouldn't be out a whole lot by staying home anyway.

- Carl

 

[Grayson]

There was a thread like this on an Anti Walmart board where a woman claims she was detained after refusing to show her reciept to prove the merchandise that was under the cart was paid for since It wasn't in a bag. She threw a big fit even called the cops who intitially said there was nothing they could do. She claims she is sueing walmart however no one else in the thread seems to believe this, or if she did she would get far. Sad part is she has done this on several occasions and still continues to shop there! Why you'd shop some where if you felt your rights were being violated I'll never know.

The humorous part of it, despite it being an Anti-walmart board the rest of the posters were against her for the very reasons. Its not hard to stop shows your receipt and be on your way if you have nothing to hide. Otherwise, it just makes you look guilty. Its the door greeters job to check for things like that. How are they supposed to know you aren't stealing something from someone who is?

 

[justalayman]

I just have to say that I but things all the time at Wal-Mart and I live in the store, the enployees all know me on sight. I set off the alarms all the time with my 2 small children in tow and I STILL STOP and let them look if they want. I have nothing to hide and therefor, it doesnt bother me. The more you resist, the more you look guilty.

the more you look guilty? Since when is that any justification. I know all sorts of bikers that look guilty of just about anything you can imagine. That does not give one warrant to search them.

but that is not the point. The point is whether they can legally restrain you should the alarm sound. Although my response was not overly specific, in general terms, it is more or less correct.

While many see this is such a simple thing and if you do not wish to be sbject to a search, then don;t shop at WalMart. I on the other hand am bothered by the actions. Unless they have reasonable suspicion (which I believe the alarm is considered as such although there are time I have argued when the cashier was too incompetant to clear the item) I feel as if I am being accused.

 

[Ohiogal]

You aren't by any chance a former Miss Teen USA contestant from South Carolina, are you?

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which oddly enough was passed by Congress in 1964, is most assuredly not a part of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which was written almost 200 years prior to 1964. I'm also fairly certain that the Supreme Court has never stated that it is.

OKay I was referring to the COmmerce Clause being in the Constitution. We misunderstood but could you get anymore bitchy? YOu PMSing or something?

 

[BoredAtty]

OKay I was referring to the COmmerce Clause being in the Constitution. We misunderstood but could you get anymore bitchy? YOu PMSing or something?

LOL...yeah, it's that time of month for me.

I didn't intend to pick on you, but your posts about the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act were kind of a mess. The Civil Rights Act is not a part of the Commerce Clause, and the Supreme Court had nothing to do with it being applied to privately owned businesses that are open to the public. Also, I have no idea why you began discussing the ratification of the Constitution.



For the record, just so people aren't baffled, here's how it works (it's actually quite simple):

The federal government is limited to only those powers granted to it in the Constitution. One of the powers the Constitution grants to Congress is the power to regulate interstate commerce (this power is found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 -- also known as the Commerce Clause). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 regulates interstate commerce. Thus, the Commerce Clause is the authority by which Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

 

[VeronicaLodge]

There was a thread like this on an Anti Walmart board where a woman claims she was detained after refusing to show her reciept to prove the merchandise that was under the cart was paid for since It wasn't in a bag. She threw a big fit even called the cops who intitially said there was nothing they could do. She claims she is sueing walmart however no one else in the thread seems to believe this, or if she did she would get far. Sad part is she has done this on several occasions and still continues to shop there! Why you'd shop some where if you felt your rights were being violated I'll never know.

The humorous part of it, despite it being an Anti-walmart board the rest of the posters were against her for the very reasons. Its not hard to stop shows your receipt and be on your way if you have nothing to hide. Otherwise, it just makes you look guilty. Its the door greeters job to check for things like that. How are they supposed to know you aren't stealing something from someone who is?

the funny thing to me is that everytime the 90 year old at the door stops me to check my receipt she never really sees if the item on the bottom of my cart is on my receipts she just glances at it and then waves me on, i know she didnt find that item on the receipt of 100 items that fast with her old eyes! its just for appearances!

also, i seem to set off those darn door alarms even when i walk in and/or leave without having bought anything, i think my blackberry sets it off.

 

[BoredAtty]

the funny thing to me is that everytime the 90 year old at the door stops me to check my receipt she never really sees if the item on the bottom of my cart is on my receipts she just glances at it and then waves me on, i know she didnt find that item on the receipt of 100 items that fast with her old eyes! its just for appearances!

I was once leaving Costco after buying a few items, one of which was Turbo Tax software. When I got to the door, I pointed out to the receipt checker that I didn't see the software listed on the receipt (I was actually thinking that I had paid for it but it wasn't listed). The woman checking the receipt convinced me that it was listed.

Anyway, when I got home I double-checked the receipt and found that I was correct...it wasn't listed. And it wasn't listed because I hadn't been charged for it. That receipt checker sure did a great job.