Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Is self-checkout a bad idea?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

legaldummy

New Member
Jurisdiction
Washington
I read that if you use self-checkout at grocery store and you accidentally miss an item, you could be arrested for theft. Therefore you should avoid self-checkout.

Is this good advice? I don't think I would miss scanning an item. But I'm getting old so who knows.
 
I always use self checkout.
I enjoy doing things myself, always have, always will.
I've never been accused of stealing, because I make sure to scan the things in my cart.
YMMV
 
legaldummy said:
I read that if you use self-checkout at grocery store and you accidentally miss an item, you could be arrested for theft. Therefore you should avoid self-checkout.

Is this good advice? I don't think I would miss scanning an item. But I'm getting old so who knows.
Click to expand...
It's just advice. If you want to avoid self-checkout, then avoid self-checkout. I can tell you, though, that there are cameras focused on the self-checkout operation. The difference between a genuine mistake and attempted theft is usually pretty obvious.
 
army judge said:
I always use self checkout.
I enjoy doing things myself, always have, always will.
I've never been accused of stealing, because I make sure to scan the things in my cart.
YMMV
Click to expand...
I've had two items in my hand (to scan one, then the other) and the machine complained as soon as I scanned the first item because it assumed I was trying to pull a fast one.
 
Zigner said:
I've had two items in my hand (to scan one, then the other) and the machine complained as soon as I scanned the first item because it assumed I was trying to pull a fast one.
Click to expand...

I take my time doing everything.

I scan each item, one by one, unlike Noah's two by two approach.

Nice and easy, I always slow my roll.

:D
 
I prefer self-checkout. No lines to wait on. Don't have to empty the cart on to the counter. Item goes from cart to scanner to bag to cart. Or, at Sam's Club, I can scan everything while it's in the cart.

I check the receipt against the items so I don't miss anything.
 
legaldummy said:
I read that if you use self-checkout at grocery store and you accidentally miss an item, you could be arrested for theft. Therefore you should avoid self-checkout.
Click to expand...

Where exactly did you read this nonsense? It certainly is true that one could be arrested in the situation you described. However, in the absence of additional evidence supporting the conclusion that a theft had occurred, the possibility of that happening is, at best, remote. I have used self-checkout for years - whenever it's available. I've never had an issue. On a couple of occasions, the store's alarm went off as I walked out of the store. Since I was certain that I had scanned everything in my bag(s), I continued to walk to my car, and nothing further came of it (I think, maybe, the first time, I stopped and looked back for a store employee and was waived along).


legaldummy said:
Is this good advice?
Click to expand...

I assume the above sufficiently answers your question.


Zigner said:
there are cameras focused on the self-checkout operation. The difference between a genuine mistake and attempted theft is usually pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

Concur.
 
You can google "problems" with hundreds of day to day activities and find plenty of news stories about those "problems." Google doesn't butter any parsnips for me.

That being said, there is something going on now that may eliminate even self checkout.

I've done it with Sam's Club a couple of times. I order my stuff online and, for an extra $4, I park and an employee brings out my stuff and loads it into my trunk. Very convenient.
 
adjusterjack said:
You can google "problems" with hundreds of day to day activities and find plenty of news stories about those "problems."
Click to expand...

That's long been a problem even before the internet. News outlets report things that are unusual or otherwise interesting to readers. People going about normal every day things is neither unusual nor all that interesting for others to read or watch. So when a kid gets abucted, that makes news because it is unsual and raises interest in readers. That has lead some communities and schools to go to extraordinary lengths to keep kids safe because parents fear child abducters are everywhere. But the reality is that 99%+ of kids don't get abducted. There are rarely stories reporting that. If space aliens are watching our news they'd get a very unrealistic view of what like is like on planet Earth.

adjusterjack said:
I order my stuff online and, for an extra $4, I park and an employee brings out my stuff and loads it into my trunk. Very convenient.
Click to expand...

I don't mind that for a lot of things other than fresh food. However, I want to pick out the fresh fruits, veggies, meat, etc myself to make sure I get just what I want. For canned/boxed/frozen food, that's not typically a problem because one blue box of mac & cheese is just the same as another blue box. :D
 
Redemptionman said:
Should say self check out is not a problem, stealing or not scanning merchandise that you knowingly do is a problem.
Click to expand...

True enough, but store security doesn't know what's going on in your head when you fail to scan an item. Did you just miss it or did you intend to steal it? They don't know, and they won't rely on your word that it was just missed. If it's just one small item out of many they'll probably chalk that up to a mistake, at least the first time. But if you fail to scan in multiple items, it's going to look a lot more deliberate. There are few people who weren't intending to steal who get charged with theft from self-check out, but it's not as a common as some people seem to think it is.

Still, there is some risk so you want to do as much as you can to avoid being singled at as suspected shoplifter. Self check out is fine if you pay attention to what you are doing and scan every item. The mistakes happen when you get distracted from what you are doing — in other words, not sufficiently focusing on the task at hand.

Amazon's store experiment might be the way things go in the future. In Amazon's retail stores only prime members may shop there. That's central to the way the system knows who to charge for the stuff taken off the shelves. When you go through the store, you pick out the stuff you want and the store's sensors know what you picked up and add it to your bill. When you are done, just walk on out and Amazon adds the total purchase to your account. No check out lines and no security people checking reciepts against the stuff in your cart. And no need for self check-out stands.
 
Right, Amazon could be a good use of the system. Major retailers such as Wal Mart, Target, and CVS have closed stores in major cities due to large amounts of retail theft. In those areas Soros appointed DAs do not prosecute anything over $1k and there are major issues.
 
Redemptionman said:
In those areas Soros appointed DAs do not prosecute anything over $1k and there are major issues.
Click to expand...

Soros does not nominate DAs nor did direct the hiring of the ADAs that work for them. He did provide a lot campaign donations to DA campaigns of progressive candidates. Nothing prevents conservatives from making similar donations to their favored candidates. If they choose not to go head to head against the far left liberal types they cede that district/state to those who are spending to convince the public that far left policies are the way to go. Plenty of wealthy people contribute to conservative candidates in races they think the candidate has a chance to win. That's part of the reason we have more strongly red state legislatures and governors today than we had 25 years ago. But they don't put their money into elections in strongly blue areas as they consider that money wasted. That's a short term view, and in politics, like in business, if you just look at the next election or next corporate annual report as your goal you risk losing out in the long run.

I don't blame Soros for this. He's entitled to do whatever he likes with his money (as are the rich conservatives) so long as they are not violating the law in doing so. Unfortunately too few ordinary people put their money behind their convictions and donate to their favored candidates. If a lot of them contributed what they could the aggregate effect could make a big difference. I donate to various charitable organizations who are doing work I think is worthwhile. I also donate to candidates whose views are fairly close to my own. I don't consider that money wasted. When I ask people why they don't donate or work for causes/candidates they believe in they tend to say their small donation wouldn't make a difference. They miss the concept that a lot of little donations can add up to a large amount of money.

Ultimately I blame the voters who elected those DAs (and similar people in other elected offices). So if the woes of a particular district are due to the DA's policies, that's what the voters signed up for when they elected that DA. The DA candidates' positions weren't a secret; they are what got them elected. So the voters got what they thought they wanted. Now some are shocked it didn't lead to the utopia they thought would come from it; the utopia that they were sold during the campaign. Already in some progressive areas there are calls for tougher action on crime now that they've seen what lax enforcement and prosecution lead to: more crime. No one wants to be a victim of crime regardless of their political sentiments. When crimes go up, so does the risk of the voter becoming crime victims. If they remember that when they step into the voting booths to elect the next DA they can kick out those ineffective DAs out and get someone in office who will take seriously the prosecution of criminal offenders. I won't hold my breath counting on that.
 
Last edited:
Okay, @Tax Counsel, that is true people get what they vote for. You take a rather optimistic view of old George Soros. He is a leftist who grew up in Germany and had worked for various Nazi party groups rounding up Jewish property. These are his own words if you will. He looks to destabilize countries and benefits from massive investments in their stock markets failing. He is no friend to any one country and through his open borders society netwroks, he looks to relocate the poorest and most uneducated foreign nationals into western civilization to help control them. The democrats love ole Soros since they feel the people he imports get free welfare and social benefits intended for that countries own citizens. Regardless of what you think you know about ole Soros, make no doubt that he hates western civilization and is actively and passively looking to transform it. Makes him the perfect donor to the party that he loves the most. You have two sides those who think people can improve themselves through hard work, determination, and education. The other side just wants more welfare, more government control, and non-capitalistic zombies who they can control and tell who to vote for.

The Republicans choose not to fight for votes in those areas since they realize these individuals are not capable of independent thought and values. They just want more FREE stuff, but what happens when that FREE stuff runs out? Mass chaos and destruction ensues. I believe the democratic party killed off "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" when Kennedy was assassinated.
 
Zigner said:
Fact Check: Did George Soros help Nazis confiscate Jewish property?

No, George Soros Was Not a Nazi or Nazi Collaborator During World War II

Fact check: False claim that George Soros collaborated with the Nazis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...195582-d1e9-11ea-8d32-1ebf4e9d8e0d_story.html
Click to expand...


all lies and false claims within themselves, false information and lies. Use Duck Duck Go for non scrubbed truths. Wikipedia and Google and leftest lie machines, Soros wrote that he was a Nazi co oped in his own book.

LOL
 
welkin said:
Problems do happen at self-checkouts. I never use them.

Just Google problems at self-checkout. There are plenty of news stories.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are. Let's say there are 500 stories per year about problems with self-checkouts. How many transactions are done at self-checkouts in a year? Maybe 5,000,000. Kinda makes the small handful of problem transactions statistically insignificant, doesn't it? After all, no one reports on "Florida Man Successfully Uses Self-Checkout at Walmart."
 
Redemptionman said:
all lies and false claims within themselves, false information and lies. Use Duck Duck Go for non scrubbed truths. Wikipedia and Google and leftest lie machines, Soros wrote that he was a Nazi co oped in his own book.

LOL
Click to expand...
SMH
I haven't used Google for a search in years, and I didn't look at Wikipedia regarding this. Duck Duck Go led me straight to the results I posted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top