AGW Emulators at Wal Mart

155
4051
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here’s a video of an encounter between a man who had just purchased some items at Wal Mart and store employees enraged at him for refusing to submit to their “policy” requiring every customer to prove they aren’t a thief by submitting to a degrading post-purchase inspection of their items and cross-check with a receipt.

The “policy” is offensive in the extreme as it presumes guilt in the absence of any reason for suspicion and thus upends the doctrine Americans once revered about being presumed innocent until proved guilty.

But “policy” is not law – and these Wal Mart cretins need to learn the difference. They cannot enforce “policy” on anyone.

March right past the sow or frau – or whomever – and let ’em screech. If they touch you, it’s assault and you have every right to defend yourself.

But people – most people – are so cowed these days that they will submit to almost any authority, even that of Wal Mart checkers.

Not me.

I ignore them and just keep going. I hear their “sir! sir!” and treat it with the contempt it merits.

I don’t give a damn that they are “just doing their job.” Their job is cretinous – and I will not enable the normalization of cretinhood. These checkers don’t have to work at a place that – by “policy” treats people as presumptive criminals, just as the blue-suited cretins at the airport don’t have to take jobs that involve conditioning their fellow citizens to being treated like presumptive “terrorists” – in order to get them ready to be treated like inmates in a prison.

These people are scum of the earth. They are exactly the sort of people who – in earlier times and other places – kept the NKVD or the Stasi well-informed on the doings of their neighbors; who served as camp guards and block leaders in another place, another time.

Unless we want to re-experience such times, people such as this must be treated with the derision ad contempt they so richly deserve.

They’re not even worth fish heads – served cold, old and crunchy.

Got a question about cars – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet (pictured below) in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  

 

 

Share Button

155 COMMENTS

  1. I finally duded it!

    I live aqn equal distance from 2 Walmarts. There’s one 17 miles to the west, and one 17 miles to the south. Both supercenters- though the one to south is a smaller one. One to the west is where I’d go 99% of the time, ’cause it’s in the “big city” (Population: 12K) where I can do all of my other errands; while the one to the south is in a town of only 2300 people, and Walmart is pretty much the onlky reason to go there.

    “West Walmart” where I normally shop, was nice for the first few years after it opened…..when a MAN ran it; then it got a new manager- a woman…and the store went downhill fast. That store has to be the most poorly stocked Walmart I’ve ever seen! a good 20% of the shelf space is empty at any given time; and any given item that they normally carry, there’s a only a 50/50 chance they’ll have it when you go; and if they don’t have it…it may be out of stock for weeks or even months!

    They frequently change the layout of the store- so that you never know where anything is (Saves me money! I’m noit gonna go nuts looking for something because they changed where it is)….they only ever have three check-out aisles open, and some of the cashiers are the slowest-moving human beings I have ever seen in my life- once elderly checker I swear, looks like she is in slow-motion. etc. etc. I freaking hate that store, and always swear that I am going to go to “South Walmart” instead- which is still run by a man- and is always well-stocked; has more cashiers [Despite being in such a small town, they do good busyness, ’cause they are near the TN. border, and get a lot of people from TN. who are in an area that is pretty far from any bigger towns/other Walmarts)…in short, South Walmart is a pleasure to shop at. (Plus: No “greeter”/receipt-checker there…surprisingly, ’cause ya gotta watch them people from TN 😉 )

    So the other day I’m in West Walmart…did my shopping…get to the front….and there must have been 10 people in every line, all with full carts! They refused to open more lanes. If there are one or two people ahead of you with half-full carts, you can stand in line for 25 minutes…imagine TEN people, with FULL carts?! I was looking at a wait of well over an hour to check-out. Had a lot of perishables…they all would have spoiled.

    What did I do? I abandoned my cart, which had at least $150 worth of crap in it- and walked the hell out! Despite the wasted time of having shopped, but coming home with nothing, and the wasted gas and all….BOY DID THAT FEEL GOOD!

    Went shopping the next day at South EWalmart, and I feel like a white man again! AHhhh!!!!! I’ve sworn-off ever shopping at West Walmart again- even if I have to make a special trip to the south to go shopping and a separate trip to the west to run other errands. It just isn’t worth the aggravation to shop at stinky West Walmart.

    And despite South Walmart being in a dinky hick town, the clientele there are so much nicer and well-behaved. You never see out-of-control screaming kids there…or land-whales riding the scooter-carts, or fartsoes so scantily clad that they induce vomiting, etc.

    I feel bad that West Walmart will have to throw out all of the perishables that were in my cart…but better them, than me- which I would have had to do if I had been stupid enough to wait on those lines!

    I only wish that I didn’t have such a stromng commitment to property rights/Thou shalt not steal- ’cause there were maybe three items in that cart that I knew I wouldn’t be able to get at South Walmart…and I would have LOVED to have just walked out with them! -Partly for the experience, ’cause if I would’ve done somnething like that, I wouldn’t have hidden them inder my coat or anything- but I picture myself just carrying them openly in my arms, and walking past the “greeter” as I would say “I’m taking these”. (I actually thought of taking those items- worth in total maybe $8, and parading out with them, and throwing the greeter a $10 as I did so…so morally it wouldn’t be stealing- Should’ve done it!)

    But still…just leaving that cart full of crap sitting there was sweet enough!

    • Heck, we live 17 miles from the nearest gas station!

      I suppose we live about equal distance from two Walmarts, because there are two in the nearest city of any size, which is about 60 miles away just to the edge of town. So it’s basically turn left or right at the airport.

      We’ve never really had those receipt checkers here, except maybe if you’re carrying out some big item not in a bag. I can understand that.

      • Lucky you, Anon! 17 miles from a gas station! It’s getting too crowded here! (Although we are 120 miles from a real city).

        Yeah, I doin’t mind the receipt checkers at all, myself.

        Heard a story recently which detailed another good reason to have them: A guy pays with a $100 which looks suspect. Cashier tells him to stay put until she gets her manager. The guy tries to leave anyway, with no receipt. The bill turned out to be blatantly fake.

        I fully “get” it. I can put myself in the position of a store owner. You’re on somneone else’s property…you accept their rules, or simply don’t go there. Enough people steal as it is- including their own employees. Imagine if there were no personnel at the door?! It would be a free-for-all.

        Only time I avoid the receipt-checker is if there’s a line. I’m not waiting in line to get out! I just go around. They never say anything. If they did I’d deal with it…but I’m, not standing in line to leave. Admittedly though, thaty’s my bad- and if they ever confronted me, I wouldn’t give them grief. Might not shop there in the future…or they might ban me…but I wouldn’t start trouble over them just doing what is their right, to protect their own property.

  2. I put a longer response on your video rant about this, I’ll not repeat it here.

    As long as there are alternative stores where you can shop, don’t shop at Walmart. Make sure you express your dissatisfaction with Walmart to your circle of friends. It will help. Some won’t shop there. Alternatives will come on the scene with a better business plan that will be more customer friendly. Avoid the tyranny of low prices and pay up for good service.

    Costco does the receipt check thing at the door. Even worse, they won’t even let you in without showing your “papers, please.” Nevertheless I usually find the shopping experience to be above average for retail. And I can see where it makes some sense for Costco to check your items before leaving, just because they don’t bag and the checkout line is often pretty chaotic. It is as much to double check the cashiers’ errors as much as it is to prevent theft.

    But ultimately this is about the massive scale of retail establishments in this country. Even as late as the 1990s it was pretty common for clerks and cashiers in smaller establishments to recognize and remember customers. I had a pretty good relationship with the girl who ran the Radio Shack in town, to the point of even getting a New Years kiss one year. I know the manager of the small grocery store that I frequent when I just need a quick item and will usually have a quick conversation with him. I’m sure he won’t scrutinize my pockets as much as the greeters at Walmart, if only because he knows that the risk I’d take on far outweighs any economic gains I might have from shoplifting. And a Walmart greeter is given a very specific set of instructions to follow, including treating everyone in an identical way. Which is much easier to do in a high-volume establishment because the chances of recognizing any individual are far less in the cold sameness of big box retailer.

    • To shop at Costco, or Sam’s Club, you signed a membership agreement allowing them to check your receipts before leaving the store. You must allow them to compare your receipt with the items you are leaving with. NOT SO AT WAL-MART. They have no right to do so. They can call the police to arrest you for shoplifting if they believe that you stole something, but they cannot harass you themselves.

      • Hi Nathan,

        If one believes that checking receipts presumes that one is a thief, why is being asked to put that presumption in writing any less objectionable or offensive?

        As to whether Walmart has a right to enact a receipt checking policy, of course they do. But, I do not believe that they have a right to force you to show one’s receipt and they may not physically prevent you from leaving the store.

        I understand why people are offended by this, and I would never presume to argue that they are wrong, I just don’t think it’s a big deal.

        One more thing, if I notice someone stealing something from my store I have the right, no matter what the law says, to use force to get it back.

        Kind Regards,
        Jeremy

        • ” I notice someone stealing something from my store I have the right, no matter what the law says, to use force to get it back.”
          If you ignore the law, you can be subject to legal or civil action.
          The way I told you, calling the cops, relieves you of criminal and civil liability. It may not be as satisfying or immediate though. I understand your reasoning.

      • Of course, calling the cops and having the DA prosecute are two different things. Used to be when someone bounced a check it meant a trip to the magistrate to explain yourself and make amends. But Uncle decided to stop adjudicating check fraud, so the banks just charging a penalty. In many cities the police and DA won’t prosecute crimes under $1,000 or more. So what’s a retailer to do? They tried assuming people are basically good and enough people took advantage to impact profit. The store could come up with a better method of loss prevention, and it might be worth shopping somewhere that is less intrusive.

        When it comes to theft and loss prevention I know that someday in the near future all stores will resemble a Las Vegas casino, where the surveillance is total and fairly unseen. At that point there probably won’t be a confrontation at the door, just a charge on the thief’s credit card (or a point on their social credit scorecard).

      • We, as Libertarians should BE GLADF that stores still have the right to do as they please on their own premises; to protect their assets; and to have their contracts upheld. These are a very part of the essential freedoms we are supposed to advocate!

        Walmarts have signs near the entrances stating that they reserve the right to check receipts. Anyone who doesn’t like that policy, is free not to shop there.

        I still want to know if you guys were to go to a movie theater, if you refuse to present your ticket to the guy inside? Isn’t that the EXACT smae thing? You don’t say “I paid at the box office, and so now it is my RIGHT to view the movie!” -It may indeed be your right…but to exercise that right, you still need to fulfill your end of the contract, which involves presenting that receipt- just as Walmart may require you to present your receipt on the way out.

        THINK ABOUT IT! If Walmart did not do this, anyone could just walk in, throw a $500 TV or computer in their cart, and walk out…and Walmart would be powerless to do anything to ascertain whether that item was paid for- the only option would be to have every shopper under constant surveillance for every second that they were in the store- which is a lot more intrusive, and virtually impossible; and certainly not cost-effective.

        Again, what would YOU do if you owned a large store???

        We may have “rights” while in a store, that the government can not transgress- but when on someone else’s property, their rights trump ours.

        • Morning, Nunz!

          Graves made an excellent point about it being the obligation of the store to arrange their floorplan so as to obviate the lazy/degrading/outrageous practice of treating every customer as a presumptive thief.

          This post-purchase inspection stuff was unheard of in America just 20 years ago. It has become common because it is now common to treat people as presumptive criminals – and these big box stores are furthering the normalization of the obscene.

          I won’t have it.

          Your movie analogy doesn’t parse. Here’s why: The movie isn’t your property. You paid to rent it – inside their theater. Neither the movie nor the theater in which you watch the movie belong to you. Therefore, you have no property right to either thing and must accept their terms for its conditional use.

          The stuff I just paid for at the register? It’s mine now. It stops belonging to the store the moment the cashier accepts payment. At that moment, the store has no more right to what is now my property than whatever is in my wallet or pocket – or my car or my home.

          Their “policy” doesn’t obviate the fact that once sold, the item is no longer theirs and therefore, they have no right to examine it or demand I prove it’s not stolen.

          Not, at least, in the absence of damned good reason to suspect me of having stolen it. The fact that I just happened to be shopping doesn’t cut it.

          I won’t be treated like a thief when there’s no cause to insult my honor in that manner.

          I wish more people would push back against these things rather than accept them as the “cost of doing business.”

          Fish heads, served old, cold and crunchy.

          • Hey Ya, Eric!

            Awwww, well, the “floor plan” solution, when it comes to huge stores like Wally World, essentially equates to cattle chutes- so that in order to exit, you must pass through a check-out, in which case it then becomes the cashier’s responsibility to ensure that everything is paid for before you get past him/her/it; and for those who leave without making any purchases, they have a special gate or turnstile to go through.

            Have you ever shopped in a store like that? I have; they’ve existed in NYC for 40 years now- and if you think receipt-checking sucks, you ought to try the cattle chutes!

            Another method- also long practiced in places like NY in smaller stores: All of the check-outs are literally in the very front of the store, so that after you’ve checked out, you are deposited on the sidewalk- I mean there was not even a door….or store-front. They’d just roll down the garage-door style (We called ’em ‘nigger stoppers’) when they were closed. Some ‘security’ goons would guard the entry, to make sure there were no ‘salmons’ (people exiting through the entrance without paying)- This, in a discount clothing store c.1980, which I don’t think had any items over $20.

            I’ll take the discretionary receipt checking ANY day.

            I think the movie analogy is fitting. When you purchase a ticket, you are essentially purchasing(renting) a seat in the theater. Once you’ve paid for that seat, how is it any different than if you’ve paid for a NeverStart battery at Walmart?

            I can understand if you don’t like, for whatever reason, having to show your receipt- but just as Walmart is still free to protect their interests via a manner which they choose, so too are you free to shop at a store whose politicies don’t offend you.

            This is not a “liberty” issue, because we have no inherent right to shop at any given store. They are not intercepting us and asking us to prove the ownership of everything on our person, nor everything in ouir cart; they are not even singling us out as suspected thieves; they are just enforcing a reasonable policy (IMO) within their own premises, which if we disagree with, we can vote with our feet.

            Isn’t the very essence of what we advocate, the protection of property rights? The ability to refujse service to anyone for any reason; to hire or fire whom we will for any reason; to sell what ever people are willing to buy, for a price they are willing to pay; etc.? Those rights have already been destroyed. Lets not help them destroy what little remains, just because we may feel entitled to shop at their store while expecting to be treated as if we are in a public place where we have a right to be left alone.

            • Hiya Nunz!

              At the theater, you’re just renting use of the seat – and the view – for a defined period of time. There is no question that you aren’t the owner of the seat – or the theater. The owner of property has the right to decree terms and conditions.

              But when I buy something at a Big Box store, it’s mine now. It has become my property. The store no longer has any property rights over my property.

              That’s the rub here. Their “policy” doesn’t trump my right to what’s mine. The fact that I am still in their store is irrelevant for the same reason that whatever’s in your pockets or backpack is yours when you happen to be in my house – and I have no right to demand you prove it’s yours just because you’re in my house – and I’d be an asshole to demand you do so absent some very good reason to suspect you of being a thief!

              These “policies” are all about degrading customers, on the one hand, and encouraging store clerks to act the part of Little Hitlers (or AGWs).

              It’s low and vulgar and intolerable to me.

              I’m probably lucky I’m big – because (so far) they don’t pursue me. If I were a littler guy, I’d have probably gotten into some kind of altercation by now.

              What was it Taylor said in Planet of the Apes?

              • Hey….Eric! [Why is there no diminutive for “Eric”?! 😀 ]

                O-K, o-k…. I still think the premise is the same for the theater. No matter how you slice it or what you call…you’ve paid already, and then someone is demanding proof of that payment; doesn’t matter if it’s for something you own permanently from that point forward, or just something that you rent temporarily (which, like a rented house, is still “yours” for the term of the rental period.

                Walmart is not conditioning us any more so than the theater; they’re just ensuring that thec property which was theirs 10 seconds ago, is now in fact yours.

                It’s simple logisitics. What would you do if you owned a large store with thousands of people coming and going every day?

                Suppose you decide to bring an unopened Monopoly game from home next time you go to Walmart, and carry it around while you shop. On the way out, they see that you have an exact copy of an item they sell, which is not bagged, and you say “It’s O-K, I brought it from home”. Must they accept that? And so if someone says the same about a TV or computer or bag of cat food or box of Tampons 🙂 ?

                Must stores turn a blind eye to any possibility of theft, and surveil each customer to an absurd level, or use cattle chutes; or is merely exercising what most people would find to be a reasonable solution a better idea; with those who don’t like it being free to shop elsewhere?

                It seems strange to be having this conversation with a fellow Libertarian- and especially you. This is more reminiscent of the “I demand my ‘rights’ at all times to the exclusion of everyone else’s, even on private property” crowd.

                Taylor?

                Was he the one who sang:

                “I hate every ape I see,
                From chim-pan-A,
                To chim-pan-Z” ?

                Oh, wait- that was a Simpsons parody of POTA! 😀

              • It seems an ineffective way to stop shoplifting to begin with, along with a easy way to annoy your paying customers. Walmart had a more effective shoplifting deterrent, the store greeter. Yes, the old guy store greeter was a member of the security department. Just his eyes on the door would lower shoplifting rates, and of course the customer greeting was a plus for the store, but not the primary function of the job.

                I worked in a grocery store in high school, and frankly we had our hands full with the easily observed shoplifters, we didn’t have to go looking for them. Yeah, that probably meant that smarter discrete shoplifters got away unseen. You can’t get them all, so you get the easier ones. We would back off on the thieves that would show violent tendencies too, as the owner of the store didn’t want anyone injured over it. Of course I worked in an independent store so we couldn’t afford to annoy paying customers to begin with. This was over 25 years ago, and the neighborhood that store is in is far rougher now, so I wonder what the policies are now.

                • I remember one day the manager of the grocery store I worked at made an announcement that “the gypsies” were in town and to keep an empty cart in all the closed registers. Apparently they were very skilled at distracting all the front employees and running through with cartfuls of merchandise.

                  Of course compared to the food stamp people they were mere amateurs…

            • Have you seen some of the security video making its way to youtube via local news programs and more?

              People will grab all they can carry and walk out of the store with it.

              But in true gradeschool fashion the reaction is something degrading to all the people who aren’t the problem. It’s all like the TSA.

              I first noticed this in junior high. Policies and procedures would be implemented that negatively impacted all the kids and do nothing about the kids who misbehaved in the first place.

              This mentality is now throughout society, corporations, and government.

              Thank the conditioning of government schools.

              • Big corporations don’t make for sympathetic characters either. Most people don’t think corporations, especially those that cater to lower income people, are nice benevolent entities. Other than the one they work for, which is obviously misunderstood by the general public.

                • Hi RK,

                  I rail against the general rip-tide toward proletarianization. Americans are becoming – psychologically – like Russian peasants circa the early 20th century; used to arbitrary authority and degradation. I won’t have it – speaking just for me. I do not bow and scrape before AGWs and call them “sir” or “officer.” I will not accept being treated as a “terrorist” by a blue-shirted make-worker in order to be allowed to fly – and I will not accept being hassled by some minimum wage flunkie serving as a Tool of a MegaCorp which regards me – a customer – as human garbage.

                  I may indeed get in trouble some day over this. So be it. Everyone has their line in the sand. This is one of mine.

                  • Mornin’ Mr. Eric!

                    Heh, we’re a lot alike. I don’t play kissy-ass with the pigs either; nor do I fly.

                    I still don’t “get” how it is though, that you would choose to patronize a business whose practices you can’t accept.

                    As others have stated, in Sam’s Club or Costco, one signs a contract accepting tyheir terms of service and agreeing to abide by their rules.

                    At Walmart, they have signs posted, with a few basic rules/term,s on them, such as that they may check receipts.

                    When we enter a Walmart store (or any business) we are agreeing to abide by their rules. We may not like those rules, but of all people, we as Libertarians should embrace their right to uphold what ever practices they deem prudent and or desirable in their own businesses; and we should respect their right to practice those policies if we choose to shop there.

                    It’s about them regarding you as human garbage; it’s about them protecting themselves from the real human garbage- and being able to operate on very small margins by minimizing theft, because you KNOW that any store with lax security is immediately taken advantage of.

                    Just like how Walmart and most other stores tightened their return policies a while back. It had nothing to do with you or I, but rather was due to hordes of people taking advantage of those liberal return policies to defraud the stores.

                    Why not shop at other stores which have lax security, or are so small that they can physically keep an eye on everything that goes on? Oh, because such stores are much more expensive because their lax security or small size does not enable them to operate on razor thin profit margins? (We can say that “Walmart drove them ouit of business”- but in reality, offering more convenience and lower prices on the free market, and the vast majority of shoppers choosing to taker advantage of those perks, is what a free market is all about- competition, where those who can do it better/cheaper/easier win).

                    As with many things Libertarian, I think this is a case of “We should support someone’s right to do as they please with what is their own, even if we don’t like it”- because unlike the “Occupy” douches and socialists/Marxists, we kniow we are not entitled to patronize any particular bidness, nor to have our rights upheld at someone else’s expense while in their “house”.

                    It’s like free speech: We either advocate free speech for all- including our enemies…or we don’t believe in free speech. Yet, you or I are under no obligation to uphold the free speech of anyone in our house or business; just as it is our right to protest, yet I’m sure you’d agree what Walmart is under no obligation to allow us to march or carry signs in their store or on their property.

                    • What signs Walley World may post (I’ve never seen one, BTW), gives them absolutely ZILCH in terms of any right to detain you or confiscate what is now YOUR property. The most WW may do is “trespass” you (why do cops twist common English?), that is, as long as they don’t discriminate in an unlawful manner (which I believe to be also an inherent violation of private property rights) on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual preference, and so on…they can give you a formal notice, issued on site or delivered to your home, by a peace officer, that the proprietor no longer welcomes you. If you disregard the notice and enter the premises again, then the police can be summoned, and you can be arrested for trespassing.

                      Other than that, Walley World and other retailers have absolutely NO recourse against someone who won’t kowtow to this sort of indignity. And if enough folks refuse, what can they do about it? Not a goddamned thing!

                    • Actually Doug, they do have the legal right under Shopkeeper’s Privilege. By refusing to show your receipt, you’re actually giving them a legal basis to invoke Shopkeeper’s Privilege, under which they can detain for a reasonable amount of time; use reasonable non-deadly force, etc. if they suspect someone of having shoplifted- while they conduct an investigation.

                    • Hi Nunz,

                      The key thing here is what you yourself wrote: “… if they suspect someone of having shoplifted- while they conduct an investigation.”

                      That’s fine; I have no issue at all with this. But that isn’t what’s at issue here. We are talking about treating people who have given no cause to suspect them of anything as presumptive thieves – an intolerable affront.

                    • nunz – you are sadly MISINFORMED as to the ability to invoke “Shopkeeper’s Privilege”. It is NOT an affirmative right to accost patrons on arbitrary conditions as you seem to think. Rather, it’s a defense to a tort claim of battery and/or false imprisonment, which, under the circumstances you’ve described would likely succeed, BIG TIME, if store personnel or a contracted security guard prevented a patron from leaving and/or put hands on them for merely refusing a receipt check. Such a refusal does NOT constitute even reasonable suspicion of theft, let alone probable cause to search and/or arrest! I hope you’re not in the security business, Nunz, you’d be deluged with crippling lawsuits in very short order due to your IGNORANCE.

                    • Hi Eric,

                      ***”The key thing here is what you yourself wrote: “… if they suspect someone of having shoplifted- while they conduct an investigation.””***

                      I KNEW someone was going to say that! 🙂

                      But here’s the thing: By refusing to show your receipt, you’re actually providing cause for that suspicion- and so say the courts.

                      Yes, I know… “How could maintaining your right be used as justification for suspicion?”- but also thus saith the courts (and IMO rightly so) our right in such circumstances (In a private business, having just purchased something that wasn’t ours ten seconds ago) is diminished. It is a completely different scenario than a government agent coming up to you on the street (or on private property for that matter) and demanding to see the contents of your whatever, and proof that it is indeed yours.

                      I don’t understand, why, if you find their policies so egregious that you continue to shop there?

                    • Hi Nunz,

                      It’s important to take a stand on this – because otherwise, this sort of thing has a tendency to become general practice.

                      Again: Once I pay for something, it is mine. Period. End of story. The store can control its stuff – and attach conditions – up to the moment it is no longer the store’s stuff. But the store surrenders all property rights to the items once money has changed hands. I am under no moral obligation to demonstrate that what’s mine is – unless there is reason to believe I stole it. These bastards just assume everyone stole everything – because it’s easier for them than monitoring their store and dealing with actual thieves by use of cameras, security people and so on.

                      It’s despicable.

  3. Eric, and Nunzio. You both have fine arguments for your respective viewpoints and I can find no fault in either. What I see at Walmart, is THEIR failing, primarily due to piss-poor floor-planning and general ownership apathy. They have areas beyond the cashiers where people are still shopping, customer servicing, eyeglasses, etc. and have not properly organized “traffic control” that virtually anywhere else has utilized for decades. The checkouts simply need to be at the point of exit, as practically everywhere else in the world has them. Any Grocery Store, Lowe’s, Tractor Supply, Office Max, Toys-R-Us, and virtually anywhere with large items at risk of theft do this one simple thing, and for the same reason. Hence, no one else even feels the need to implement a post-register “ticket check” Everyone has to wait in turn at the register lines regardless, and beyond that, should only be the exit, with no need for annoying “cattle chutes”, or “ticket checkers”, etc.
    Walmart’s poor floor planning leaves too many opportunities for thieves, and “ticket checkers” are just a piss-poor stop-gap remedy, for which, they don’t wish to spend the money to rectify. The laziness on their part is only a reflection of the laziness of most of their patrons, and society in general, and it doesn’t surprise me one iota.

    • Hi Graves!

      Very well-said.

      I agree, completely.

      These stores need to figure out how to organize their floor space such that people who are there to buy things aren’t treated as though they’ve stolen things just because they’re shopping. Ultimately, the onus is on the store. It isn’t our obligation – as non-thieves – to accommodate their “policy.”

      Not once they’ve accepted money from us as payment. At that point, ownership of the items changes and they no longer have any right to “check” a got-damned thing.

      If they suspect someone’s a thief; fine. Say so, openly – and be prepared to back it up with security camera footage or the testimony of someone who saw an item being filched. Absent such probable cause – fuck them.

      I rarely use profanity – so my apologies. But this stuff lights my fuse.

    • You hit the nail on the head.

      My local feed store has its registers in the MIDDLE of the store. The garden center and feed area have their own exit without a register. You have to tell the clerk inside the store the plant/feed you want to buy because they have no carts to haul the plants/feed inside the store to checkout. I have already been accused of stealing a fruit tree by the plant lady that KNOWS me. They are constantly paranoid and distrustful of everyone that walks through their store because their completely idiotic floor plan is so inviting for thieves.

      • That’s the old fashioned department store layout like Sears, JCPenny, Carson’s, Marshal Fields, etc. Registers located in the middle amongst the merchandise.

    • Hey GTC,

      It’s not really poor floor planning. The way WM does it, is pretty much the only way to do it which allows convenience and free movement, and without making people feel like cattle and restricting their movement. Such is hard to do when you have multiple entrances/exits, and a LOT of traffic.

      Most of the cashiers at WM are at the front. The only thing more they could do, would be to put the cashiers physically in the points of egress- which would cause othger problems- such as lines to exit; and would not allow free movement.

      It’s a pretty good system they have, actually. Stores in general have spent a lot of money and done a lot of research and used past experience and feedback to do things the way they do- because such things inconvenience the fewest people, while allowing free traffic flow, and making people feel comfortable and unrestricted.

      Having to just show your receipt 10 seconds after we’ve purchased something, in a store in which we’ve chosen to patronize, should not be a problem, right? I don’t want to see some fat thug with his boxers showing walking out with a free big screen, because I feel that I have some right while on their property to avoid having to prove that I actually paid for what I just purchased.

      • Hi Nunz,

        A store doesn’t have the right to negate rights. The core issue here is that once I have bought an item, that something is now mine. I don’t care that some other person may not have paid for his item. While I sympathize with the store about the theft problem, I will not be treated like a thief because others may be. Will not interrupt my progress or stand in a queue and present a receipt for what is morally as well as legally my property.

        That’s the principle at issue here – and it’s an important one.

        These stores are routinizing the application of the opposite principle – that everyone’s guilty until proved otherwise. That and the general degradation which accompanies these practices.

        • Mornin’ Eric!

          I tjink the whole crux of our disagreement here is that you think you have a right while in a private business, which you really don’t have; which you have voluntarily ceded by patronizing that store, after you knew of it’s policy; and that you think your right somehow trumps the rights of the property/business owner to define the terms by which their property may be used.

          You may find those terms repulsive- but just because you chose to wander into their business, does not mean that you are entitled to ignore their policies; or that your rights are superior to theirs while on their property- any more so than if I came to your house, and refused to comply with your policies, claiming that it would be a transgression of my rights if I did. My solution would be to leave or not come to your house (Aww, how could I resist?! ), rather than to ignore your policies or try to physically resist your requests to comply.

          Eric, you are always THEE man for making eloquent, well-reasoned arguments….but in this case, you are dropping the ball a little (just a little) because you are maintaining that you have a right which in fact you do not have, when you decide to enter someone’s property/business (I feel like I’m arguing with Walter Bloch! -Not that I ever have…) without addressing why your ‘right’ is superior to those of the property/bidness-owner; and why you do not feel obligated to allow what would be a breech of liberty if performed in public by the government, to be performed by a property owner, when you’ve agreed to it by using their premises.

          It’s easy to look at this from your perspective when it’s about Walmart, or any other large corporation (Which we would do best not to deal with, anyway!)- But what if it were YOUR store? What if you had a clothing store, and you see someone coming out of the dressing room in a brand-new looking pair of yellow and purple fleece panrs (Maybe the store’s in Harlem :D) just like the ones hanging on the rack in your store?

          Is it an egregious transgression of their ‘rights’ to ask to see their receipt as they make a bee-line for the door; and to even restrain them, while you check the video footage to see if they had removed a pair of such pants from the rack and carried them into the dressing room while wearing different pants- or must you just accept the fact that youi will be defrauded by all people who choose to walk out wearing new clothes without paying for them?

          • Nunz – Eric never claimed he had any RIGHT to shop at Walley World or anywhere, certainly a retailer has a right to set conditions of entry and doing business. What he sez, and I agree with wholeheartedly, is that he won’t kowtow to this degrading practice, and is willing to dare them to do something about it, even at risk of being considered a “jerK’ for not “complying”.

            • Hey, Doug,

              Ah, but by shopping at a store whose policies one does not respect/agree with/agree to abide by, and then blatantly violating those polices, one is in-fact basically saying that they do have a right to be there, and “What are you going to do about it?”/”I’ll FG%$# you if you try to enforce your policies on me”.

              • Hiya Nunz!

                Here’s a thought experiment. A nice-looking woman comes to my house; am I entitled to feel her breasts – without her permission – because she entered my house?

                Store “policies” don’t obviate rights. Put another way, when a “policy” conflicts with a right then the “policy” must give way. Now, this gets tricky if we are not careful to define what we mean.

                One doesn’t have a right to smoke in restaurant where this is forbidden by the management. But in that case, the owner of the restaurant isn’t violating your rights. You have the right to leave – and smoke somewhere else.

                But the restaurant owner has no right to demand I prove to him that the money in my wallet is actually mine; that I didn’t steal it from the till (absent cause to suspect me of having put my paws into the till) just because I happen to be inside his restaurant.

                Same principle at a store. Their “policy” is irrelevant once ownership of property has been transferred. What’s in my bag is mine now. Just as my car – parked on their lot – is also mine and I’ll be got-damned if I allow them to rifle through the glovebox or produce a title upon demand to prove to them that it is, in fact, my car.

                • Eric,

                  “A nice-looking woman comes to my house; am I entitled to feel her breasts – without her permission – because she entered my house?”

                  First of all, a nice looking woman doesn’t come to a guy’s house for no reason. She is there for something.

                  And from my experience, as well as every other man I’ve discussed this with, having her breasts fondled is just the beginning.

                  In fact, if you’re keeping your hands to yourself, she most likely won’t ever talk to you again.

                  But back to wallyworld. Ask for a second receipt at checkout and then you can gladly go on your way out the door. In full compliance with any requests to see proof of purchase.

                  Besides, only a casino has more cameras trained on the customer than THE WALL MART.

                  https://southpark.cc.com/clips/154596/agent-of-wall-mart

                  • Good stuff, T!

                    On Wally: I go on my way – and out the door – regardless. I don’t even look at the receipt-check geek (what a loathsome way to make a living). I just walk out. Sometimes, I hear the mewling cry… sir? sir? I keep on going. My business is done with them as soon as my cash is exchanged for their goods. At which moment, the cash is no longer mine – and the goods no longer theirs.

                    From that moment onward, they have as much right to demand a receipt as I have to check their drawer.

                    May the fish heads go down not-smoothly….

                    • A few weeks ago I bought a plastic bin for my mother to store cat litter in, since she can’t lift the heavy boxes of litter.

                      Didn’t notice till a few daysd later (Luckily before adding lttter) that it had two big cracks in the bottom.

                      Returned it to Sam Walton’s place the next time I went, for an exchange- no problemo.

                      They could have just said “Our transaction ended when we took your money and you took the item. How do we know that you didn’t damage it after purchase? You should have inspected it more carefully before purchasing it”. -But they didn’t- They exchanged it. I didn’t even have the receipt.

                      Mutual cooperation and reasonable policies go along way towards making things function well, and keeping the state out of our hair.

                      Oh, and when I went back to the store with the cracked bin, the receipt checker put a sticker on it, so that custumer service ( 🙂 ) would know that I didn’t just grab one off of the shelf and then try and “return” it.

                      Absolutely no problem- I know why they do it. Lots of creeps out there who steal and cheat. Did I get all in a huff and say “Oh, you think I’m one of those creeps when I haven’t given you any reason to do so! How dare you!…”? NOoooo, because that is the policy they have to follow to protect themselves- and if we want the advantage of being able to have a liberal return policies (Can we return Hitlery? 😉 ) in which they already give up some of their “rights” to accommodate us, it is not unreasonable that they should also be able to retain a little of their own right.

                      Throw reasonableness and cooperation out the window, and ya know what you get? CALIFORNIA!

                    • Hi Nunz,

                      What has one to do with the other? It was nice of them to exchange the product. It doesn’t entitle them to treat anyone who hasn’t given them good reason to as a thief. It’s of the same species as prisoners having to spread ’em and show their “jail lockers” are empty… with the difference being we aren’t convicts.

                      But these stores treat us as such.

                    • Hey Eric!

                      My point to the litter bin return story, was that the store had no obligation to exchange it- but instead of strictly maintaining their right, they gladly accepted a diminishing of their right to facilitate business, and create good will.

                      In the same vein, while we may not technically have a legal obligation to show a receipt, it behooves us to do so, rather than to force the store to implement much more draconian anti-theft measures; raise prices due to higher losses to theft; or escalate the situation.

                      We should pick our battles wisely. The most obvious rule of which is: Don’t enter the battlefield if you don’t believe in the war.

                      By standing on technicalities like this, where we are in the wrong- both according to the legal system (Which acknowledges the superior right of the property owner- as it should; and the diminished right of the guest/patron)- and by the tenets of Libertarianism/The NAP, WE are in effect helping to create a moire hostile, less free world.

                      One more analogy:

                      When I go to the local feed store, they have a drive-up window in one building, where you order what you want, and they give you a receipt, and then you drive down the hill to a big warehouse, show the guy in there your receipt, and he gives you the listed items.

                      Now technically, since those items became mine when I paid for them at the drive-up windur, should I just tell the dude in the warehouse to go screw himself when he asks to see the receipt?

                  • Even the “Nice-looking woman” coming to one’s house has been messed around with, thanks to Femi-Nazism. Are you “entitled” to “feel her up” just because she’s a guest in your hunble abode? Of course not, but it can become a “hereafter” situation…”IF you’re not here, AFTER what I here, after, you’re not gonna be here, AFTER…”.

                    In the “olden” days, when common sense reigned, if a woman of desirable qualities came to your home, unescorted, and things got “friendly”, and later she had regrets and claimed that you raped her, generally her claim wasn’t taken seriously, at least on the grounds that no “lady” went to a man’s home under those circumstances save she meant to have sex with him. Now, if said broad makes an (unfounded) accusation against you, her word WILL be taken at face value, and you will likely be arrested and have to, for all practical purposes, either prove that no encounter took place or that the thing was consensual. With that in mind, I don’t wonder that so many young fellows eschew serious dating and just play video games or download porn, at least they won’t run the risk of prison on a bogus charge!

                • “Here’s a thought experiment. A nice-looking woman comes to my house; am I entitled to feel her breasts – without her permission – because she entered my house? ” Eric- don’t know the answer to that, but I like the way you think…
                  “This is MY house and MY rules”…sound familiar ?

                • Hi Ya, Eric!

                  Some good points there, my friend- but in a way, they illustrate my points….

                  If a good-looking woman comes to your house, and you make clear that iut’s your intention to touch her jugs….and she continues to stay, can she rightfully later claim that you sexually assaulted her?

                  See? We are not talkinjg absolute rights here. There has to be some give and take in order for society to function- and sometimes our rights are subordinate; and sometimes they are superior- it’s kind of a compromise that has always managed to work itself out among private citizens quite nicely, via principles such as The Golden Rule and the NAP, and just common sense and decency. It really shouldn’t be a problem where government is not involved. With government, our rights should be clearly defined and absolute…but person to person, there HAS to be some compromise; a realization of who has the superior right; an owning of what it means to consent or not; etc.

                  In your restaurant scenario: Suppose the cash drawer was open, and you justy happen to have a $50 bill hanging halfway out of your back pocket? [Much akin to a large unbagged item in the Walmart cart]. Must they just let you go through the door and say “Oh well, it looks bad, but there’s nothing we can do”? How is it wrong of them to question you?

                  Now if they just walked up to you at random, and said that you must show them your wallet and be searched…that would be different…then you would have the right to resist, and the obligation not to patronize that business anymore.

                  It’s about reason and compromiose…when it comes to us mundanes. Of course, when it comes to government, it is moire black and white, THEY are the ones we should be battling- not our fellow mundanes who are onlky trying to protect their own rights.

                  Suppose you’re reviewing the latest Fiat 500, and while looking for a place to park while running an errand in town, you notice that there is a space among the new cars at the local Fiat stealership (Because someone is out test-driving a Fiat)- so you park there. YTou go and do your errand, and then return to the car amongst the new Fiats, and get in and start to drive away.

                  Is it not reasonable if someone on the lot thinks that you are stealing one of their cars? [In reality, they’d probably thank you 🙂 ).

                  It’s all about reasonableness, cooperation and common sense. This why society used to function so much better decades ago.

                  When we start demanding every nuance of our ‘rights’ even in situations where our rights are subordinate, all it does is lead to what we are seeing now: Orwellian survelliance, and expansion of the police state- thje VERY THINGS we detest the most.

                  And, sad to say, you have actually advocated such in previous posts, by saying that instread of merely requiring that you show your receipt before leaving the store, that they should protect their own rights by having such complete surveillance that they should be able to prove if you’ve stolen something before asking to see your receipt.

                  Think about it: That would require such rigid surveillance that they’d have to be able to track you from the time you put an item in your cart, to the time you paid for it. You think that is preferable to merely requiring that customers who have unbagged or large expensive items just display their receipt before leaving? That’s what you are asking for and requiring.

                  Me? I’d much prefer to show my receipt to prove that I indeed pay for the items which were not mine 10 seconds ago, while in their store; or simply not shop there if that policy bothered me.

          • My uncle worked for Montgomery Wards for most of his life. About store layout- He said that one reason that K-Mart and Wal Mart were successful is their store layout. (Aside from the fact that they put a lot of space between their checkouts and the exits.) He said that in the model accepted for department stores from Sears to Macy’s to the rest of them since the 1800s, there were sales clerks in each department. The shoe department had one, the women’s clothing department had one, etc. . And so when a customer picked out their purchases, they paid for it, it was put in a shopping bag, and they left. They didn’t go to the next department to shop, they left the store. Whereas at K-Mart and Wal Mart, when you choose what you want to buy, you throw it in your shopping cart and roll on to the next area of the store, filling up the cart. So the arrangement of the store into aisles (lanes for shopping carts) and a cash register at the front of the store was deliberate, and a large part of Wal Mart’s success.

            • I remember as a kid, when there were still lots of independent little stores in the downtown areas of most towns, and people would drive/take the bus/walk downtown, and then walk around to the various stores to do their shopping, it was common practice in many stores, that if you walked into a store carrying a bag or bags of things purchased in other stores, that you’d have to “check your bags” at the counter- where they’d keep them till you were done shopping in that store- so as to prevent people from boosting their merchandise and putting it into the bags- because it would not be legal to search those bags if they suspected someone of shoplifting.

              When we push technicalities and throw reasonableness out the window, those are the kinds of indignities we end up with. THAT policy had an impact on me- as it made me realize as a kid, that I was always under suspicion while in a store. The receipt-checking is much more reasonable….and believe me, one feels far more free, and much less like a criminal in a modern Walmart, just having to casually show a receipt.

              I remember the Monkey-Ward’s in the town where my sister lived when I was a kid….it was in a relatively high-crime area for the suburbs (a major black area) and consequently, they had the most intrusive security practices of any store I had ever been to- including an armed guard.

      • When I worked at a medium sized retail store, we were told NOT to touch any customers, even if we suspected them of stealing something. We were told to call a manager, who would then call the police. They said that we could be liable if we touched the customers, and they did not want that. I don’t know what the store told the managers to do, but I never saw a manager touch a customer. I ASSUME that the managers were also told not to touch the suspected shoplifters. I did see the cops touch customers, and take them for questioning, sometimes arresting them and taking them away. But cops are not liable for anything they do.

        • That is a prime example of how people by refusing to cooperate with reasonable policies (or by simply not exercising the discretion to avoid shopping at stores whose practices they can not abide) end up further empowering the state.

          If a customer won’t cooperate, and the store wants to avoid any chance of civil law suits and potential liability, they simply call in the entity which is never held accountable- and thus we ALL lose.

          And suddenly, Aunt Hortense is hauled away by the fuzz and has to go to court and hire a lawyer because she legitimately forgot to pay for the box of Depends she had under the cart….whereas in places where it’s still civil, and if Hortense just acted like a reasonable person, she simply would have been told to “Please go to customer service and pay for these, Ma’am”.

          I’d personally rather spend my time and effort fighting the tyranny of the police state, rather than bolstering that tyranny by trying to make a point against very reasonable actions of other citizens or businesses.

          • Hi Nunz,

            There is nothing “reasonable” about being treated as a presumptive thief without even the pretense of evidence to suggest a theft may have occurred. To have your time wasted and your dignity affronted by some geek pawing over your property and demanding you prove it is in fact yours after you just paid for it.

            What would be reasonable is for a store that suspects (with cause) that a given individual has stolen something to confront and deal with that person. And leave decent people alone.

            I don’t give a damn that treating everyone as a presumptive thief is easier for the store. That it catches more thieves. Fuck them. This is the same got-damned argument made for random DWI “safety” checks and all the rest of it.

            It is not my obligation – morally – to make it easier for them to deal with thieves. It is their obligation to deal with suspected thieves – and to treat customers who’ve given no reason to suspect them of being thieves with respect.

            Again: Once money changes hands, the store has no right to the property now owned by the person who purchased it. At that moment, I am the owner. Period. It doesn’t matter – morally – that I am in their store. It is my property now. Just as it is still my body when I am in their store.

            If I have violated anyone’s rights – as by stealing – then of course I am morally subject to an intervention. But my walking out of their store with my goods doesn’t justify any intervention.

            This business is loathsome on so many levels. One level is the collectivism and lowest-common-denominatorism we all loathe. Everyone treated the same; and treated on the assumption that everyone is a scumbag.

            Another is that it habituates people to being treated this way without cause. Not because of something they did – but because some other person did it (or because “someone” might).

            This sort of thing was nonexistent outside of “bad neighborhood” 30 years ago. Now it is happening everywhere, because corporate poltroons are too got-damned scared of dealing with belligerent thieves who screech “discrimination” (or whatever) and so decide instead to make life more hassle and more degrading for the rest of us.

            Haven’t you had enough?

            I have.

            • And the obvious outcome of all of this?

              May as well be a criminal if you are going to be treated like one regardless. Why be a fine upstanding honest citizen when there is no benefit to doing so?

              • Hi Anon,

                I try to just mind my own business. I shop, pay for the stuff I shopped for – which is now my stuff – and walk on out. So far, they’ve not done anything to try to stop me; just “sir? sir?” – which I ignore. I do radiate hate for them, though – and perhaps they pick it up on their radar and decide best to leave me alone.

                I haven’t been in a fight in years. But they’ll have one if they touch me.

                • When I was young and idealistic I operated under the delusion that ‘play fair, be treated fair’. Took a few decades of observation and some severe screwing over but I am way past that misconception.

                  I am what society has created by showing repeatedly that ‘nice guys finish last’…

              • Being treated like a criminal would be: If you were coming out of the store, not having purchased anything, and were stopped and accused of shoplifting and or searched.

                Coming out of a store with merchandise which the store sells, which was on their shelf 20 seconds ago- in a large store with multiple large points of egress, and having to show that you paid and that that merchandise now belongs to you, is NOT being treated like a criminal- it is just a practical way of doing business in a society where many people are corrupt.

                The only alternatives to receipt-checking would be:

                Tolerate theft, and have to exponentially raise prices.

                Put the check-outs physically in the exits, so that you are deposited outside after you go through checkout. (Which does not allow for the free movement and free coming and going that we are used to)

                Install cattle chutes, to accomplish the same as above- much more intrusive, if you’ve ever shopped in stores that do this (I’ll bet you have, Eric- in DC- as have I in NYC)

                Or…surveill shoppers continuously from the time they enter the store till the time they leave- which is also very expensive and also much more intrusive than merely being asked to show a receipt under some specific circumstances.

                Sheesh, come on, yous; yous are being childish!

                Meanwhile, I’ll bet most reading this use smart phones, which track your movements and compile a profile about you from sniffing everything you do on that phone 24/7, from sending an email, to ordering something on Ebay; to posting on a forum or BSing with a friend through text or social[ist] media- and you even PAY for it. And yet just showing your receipt before leaving the store is a problem? (And it’s not even that they necessarily think you stole something; some people legitimately forget to checkout items left under the cart, etc.

  4. I’m in agreement here, this is just the sort of thing that goes hand in hand with Big Tech “censorship”.

    When a mega-hyper trans-national corporation sets itself up as the only game in town, then they can tyrannize you just as easily and just as effectively as Big Government can.

    Thankfully Wal Marx is getting pummeled in the marketplace, and things like this will accelerate that slide.

  5. This kind of rates the same as being stopped for a DUI check. Same logic,,, if they treat everyone like crap,,, it’s okay. Sams Does this to every ‘customer’, the excuse is the checker might have missed something. I’ve been in line to be checked longer than I was being cashiered out. I do very limited business there now.

    If a store thinks I may have stolen something they can always make a citizens arrest, hold me until a AGW makes an official arrest. But doing that is very risky… for them. This policy of checking everyone leaving is much easier and less risky for them. Most are so used to be treated as criminals with no rights they’re actually used to it. Like a dog fighting the leash in the beginning then after he is used to it he will have no problem with it.

    • Sam’s is not likely to quit since you can now tally your own bill and pay it via the Sam’s app. Going to the door and showing your receipt on the phone is something I don’t see many do but it’s probably riskier than scanning your own items and then paying by card, riskier for Sam’s but they probably figure in the percent of theft(probably low)vs. hiring checkers. I doubt their profits are down.

  6. Think of the alternative: People just walk out the door with TVs and computers and iPuds….and it must just be assumed that they’ve paid for them?

    I really don’t take any offense withj a private entity wanting to ensure that I have paid for mymerchandise before I leave their store.

    Thank the large population of shoplifters and scumbags for this; people who don’t value the property rights of others, require that others be more diligent in protecting their property rights.

    Having to sometimes present a receipt, in my mind, is preferable to the way it’s been in many stores in NYC for decades now, where you’re essentially physically forced through “cattle chutes” (Turnstiles at the one-way entrance; a system of railings corralling you from the check-out to a one-way exit, etc.).

    Imagine if you were a store-owner- large or small. Imagine if you did not have the ability to question shoppers who were walking through the door with items not in bags or not having “paid” stickers on them (What ever happened to those?!).

    I don’t see what is so bad about having to show one’s receipt before leaving the store. If it were the government doing it; or it were a mandatory law, that would be different; or if they follied ya out into the parking lot and then asked to see a receipt, that would be a different story- or if they singled you out, thereby making it seem like they were accusing you specifically…again, different.

    But to merely protect their property rights, by simply requiring that people with non-bagged items/large or valuable items; or items under the cart, show that they’ve paid…no propblemo – or if it is a problem, we can just choose not to shop at such stores.

    I think this falls under the category of ‘other people have rights too”. I can’t help but thinking that the guy in the above vid is an asshole. If he owned a store, I’m POSITIVE that he WOULD have policies in place to ensure that people could not just go waltzing out the door with merchandise, while he would have no idea if it was paid for. With large, high-traffic stores, there aren’t many options to deal with this- pretty much only the Walmart model, or the cattle chute model. Personally, I much prefer the Walmart model, as a shopper.

    I used to actually get a little ticked about showing receipts- and on a few occasions, I even ignored the requests- but upon reflection, I now see it as I’ve explained above- and I gladly show my receipt when asked.

    • So we all should be treated as potential criminals? This checking was not done when I was growing up… 60s and 70s. Walmart has hundreds if not thousands of cameras. They got about 20 of these wireless cameras in the parking lots now. They can hire security to tour the store but if I have purchased something then it belongs to me….

      If they think I need to be stopped then they can call the police and arrest me BUT I tell them they will by hearing from my attorney if they cannot prove I done wrong.

      As an aside,,, purchased some fuel system cleaner and was told it now is on the over 21 list. JHFC,,, Carb cleaner! I was buying this stuff when I was 14. Incredible the nanny crap these stores are pushing.

        • Richland Mall, 1970s. The K-Mart in the mall had an entrance into the concourse. They had an employee stationed at a permanent station at the entrance. If you came into the K-Mart with bags from another store this person would staple the bag shut, and I think there was a paper tag included that provided evidence that the bag was sealed by the employee. This so infuriated my mother that she refused to shop there. Dad was much more practical (or cheap) so he didn’t really care.

        • Yeah, I get that nonsense when I buy something “volatile” at Walley World or Home Buy. If I’m using a normal cashier, she can see I’m over 18 (or 21), being SIXTY. But if I use the “self-serve” (sheesh, I should sue for ‘name’ infringement, LoL), then I have to get the attendant to clear it, IF she can be bothered from perusing her FB page or jabbering with another employee.

    • Sadly, Brent, that is usually a result of government- as the employees can’t protect themselves, and face all kinds of legal retribution- civil and criminal if they make a wrong move. Hell, it’ll soon be like in Australia, where people can just blatantly walk into a store and take what they want, and the shopkeeper can’t do a damned thing, ’cause if he so much as touches or restrains the thief, he’ll go swiftly to jail.

      I think many are looking at this from the wrong perspective. This is a property rights issue- and the stores are exercising theirs; and we should be glad that they still can. No one’s forcing us to shop there. Someone comes to my house and pisses on the Bible, I’m throwing them out- because while they may have the right to do that in public or private, my rights on my property trump theirs.

      • Hiya Nunz!

        I’m 100 percent in agreement regarding property rights; that said, once I’ve bought something it becomes my property and these geeks have no more right to demand I present a receipt for it than they do proof that the money in my wallet isn’t stolen.

        • Hey, Eric!

          I “get” what you’re saying, and technically agree- but the thing is, as a practical matter, they have no way of knowing whether or not you’ve paid; whether or not it really has become your property- and while we’re still inside the store, is really the only time that it can be an issue.

          In a small store, the cashier just controls it; but in these big stores, since the cashiers are far from the exits, and very busy; and there are so many people, I really don’t know how else they’d guard against people just walking out with stuff- ’cause if they couldn’t stop us, neither could they stop the guy walking out with 3 $500 TVs in his cart.

          Yeah, it is our property once we’ve paid for it- but while we’re still in the store, I don’t see what the problem is with just making the distinction that we have indeed paid, and thus that it is now our property.

          • I work for an architect that remodels WM stores. They are currently retrofitting all of their stores with cattle chutes as I type. They are called “AP Gates”. Asset Protection.

            • No shit, Anon? Holy crud! If they install cattle chutes in the one by me, that’ll be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. I don’t mind showing my receipt at all- but those “AP gates” REALLY make ya feel like a criominal; like you’re in a prison.

              • They’ll have to make ’em wide enough for the average Walmart shopper, so they probably won’t be able to deter much of anything.

          • I agree with you, Nunzio. A big store like WM has no way of being able to ascertain whether or not we’ve paid for the items. I have no problem presenting my receipt. The greeters are usually nice about it anyway. To compare them with thuggish, roided up, trigger happy AGWs is off base.

            • Hi Mark,

              I have no issue with a store confronting someone they have reason to suspect is a shoplifter. I have a huge issue with being treated as a shoplifter just because I shopped there.

              It is exactly the same odious business as stopping every driver on a given road and forcing them to prove they aren’t drunk.

              The difference here – as regards Wal Mart and such – is that I can defend myself against these loathsome practices.

              I am not looking for a fight, but if some piece of garbage puts his hands on me without cause, it’s game on. A Wal Mart drone isn’t an AGW. I am not obliged by law to submit. So I won’t. I think I must radiate a vibe, because – so far – these SOBs haven’t challenged me. They had better not.

              We are being conditioned to servitude; to accept being treated as scum by scum.

              I won’t have it.

              Their “security” and “convenience” don’t trump my rights. Let them figure out a way to deal with their inventory control problem – perhaps by dealing with actual thieves.

              And leave honest people alone.

              • I hate it when their door person is a younger one. The old ones know and don’t ask even when I just have big items that can’t be sacked. One once told me it was just things that weren’t sacked they checked but I had this young fatty girl check my list one day. I was in a hurry and it kinda pissed me off. I realize they have a right to check a cart full of items not sacked and the person isn’t holding a receipt and I always have a receipt in hand when it’s all not sacked.

              • I’ve never been treated with disrespect when shopping at Walmart, Eric. At the one I go to, much of the time they don’t even ask for the receipt; when they do, they’re polite and respectful about it. They say, “Sir, may I see your receipt?” I say, “Sure, quickly show it, then I’m on my way.

                Again, how are they to know? It’s also easy to make an honest mistake, particularly if you have a lot on your mind; there have been a couple of times when I went for the exit without stopping to pay first. I didn’t do this because I was trying to steal anything; I simply had a lot of other things on my mind. I doubt I’m the only person to have done this.

              • Hey Ya, Eric!

                This is one of those rare instances where I have to disagree with ya.

                I think the receipt checking is far different than the government randomly interfering with us and presuming our guilt, and requiring us to prove our innocence.

                Walmart is not accusing us of shoplifting; they just are ensuring that have legitimately purchased what could easily be being pilfered- there is a difference.

                Just like when someone goes to a movie; You buy the ticket at the box office, and then then have to present it to the little guy by the velvet rope thingies [Why are they always little guys?!] to get into the actual thee-ater.

                Do you say to the little guy “Ah no! I paid my money at the box office; I have purchased a seat, so now it is my right to take that seat! Leeme alone!”? Do you think that by presenting your ticket you are being suspected of not having paid (Which in reality, is somewhat the case- the ticket being issued to prevent non-payers from getting in).

                If you return an item to the store, do you take offense at having to show the receipt to prove that you purchased it and what you paid for it?

                Yes…they don’t trust us. Why should they? There are a lot of thieves in this world. Businesses have to implement policies to defeat the thieves. They can’t tell by looking at us that we aren’t the thieves (And if they could, it would be illegal- “profiling”)- so playing by these rules; abiding by these policies, is just a part of the terms of the contract we make to deal with these bidnesses.

                Rather than conditioning us, I think the opposite is true- TPTB are using issues like this to foment the mentality that private businesses shouldn’t have the right to protect their interests- so that we end up like Australia, where it is basically not even worth having a small business anymore, because the crooks have all the rights, and the business owner has none.

                It is our RIGHT to use the roads- so when the government goons randomly interfere with us, they are depriving us of our most basic rights- but it is not our right to shop at Walmart- just a choice that we can make- and if we don’t like their policies, we can choose not to do business with them- in which case, we lose nothing, because we have no right to be able to shop there, nor of them upholding our rights while on their property. They have the right to dictate the terms of use of their property- which trumps our rights while on their property, just as your rights trump mine if I come to your house.

                If we as Libertarians/Anarchists believe that a business has the right to hire whom they want; to pay what they want; to charge what they want; etc. why would we believe that they do not have the right to protect their interests on their own property, and to handle transactions as they see fit until such time as we are least out of their doors?

                I got receipt-checked last week, because I had a bag of cat food that wasn’t in a bag. I said to the courteous old “greeter”, “You have no way of knowing that I’m honest, but I would at least think that I look smart enough that if i were going to steal something, it would be something of more value than an $11 bag of cat food!”. [They laughed]

                • Hey Nunz,

                  “Rather than conditioning us, I think the opposite is true- TPTB are using issues like this to foment the mentality that private businesses shouldn’t have the right to protect their interests”.

                  I agree with one qualification. We are being conditioned, but it is so we focus on the “evil” of business rather than the collusion between business and the State. Personally, I’m much more outraged that Walmart, Sam’s Club, Costco, etc… often leverage state power, eminent domain, subsidies, etc… to gain some advantage over the less powerful than I am with a policy of checking receipts.

                  Cheers,
                  Jeremy

                  • You NAILED it, Jeremy!

                    And such makes perfect sense when one considers the erection of a corporate-fascist state:

                    Even in Australia, I’ll bet that the big corporate-owned stores can protect their assets by various means which small businesses can not afford; and by having the fuzz at their beckon call- so they are essentially protected by the state, while the small businesses are forced out of business due to rampant theft which they can not combat- and lawsuits if they so much as look at anyone askew (I’d be interested in hearing commentary on this from our Australian friends here)

                    Even here in the US already- big cities or small towns, doesn’t matter- Walmart calls the fuzz, and they’re there in literally a minute or two.

                    Aunt Polly’s Pet Shop calls the fuzz….if they even show up, it’ll be three hours later- and perish the thought Aunt Polly is guilty of some meaningless technicality…she’ll be the one they haul away.

                    The socialists/occupiers/and so-called ‘anarcho’-socialists are playing right into this mentality, which further erodes property rights and the individual’s right to contract; etc.

                    It saddens me that some great Libertarians seem to be playing into this mentality as well.

                    What would they do if they owned a large store? Just allow people to walk out the door with large expensive items, and assume that everyone has paid? I don’t think so! If they did, they’d quickly go bankrupt, as once weak or non-existent security is found, it is always exploited to an ever increasing degree- and once someone is out that door, you lose all ability to demand proof of payment.

                    I don’t see why it should be a problem to ensure that people have paid for their merchandise before leaving the store- and ‘before leaving’ is the operative term.

                    If they were demanding proof of payment after one has left [assuming they didn’t inquire befoire you left] without reasonable suspicion/proof of theft, then it becomes accusatory, and is a different ballgame.

                    Speaking of this, did you hear that in- I forget if it’s Dallas or Houston- they’re no longer even prosecuting shoplifters if they’ve stolen under a certain dollar value of goods (And the value was quite high- $350 or more, I believe)?

                    I expect all of the stores there will be implementing cattle chutes and locked cases, and many other inhuman controls which make ALL shoppers feel like livestock and criminals, in order to try and keep it from becoming a free-for-all – and THAT is far more of a measure to condition people for a fascist police-state, than merely being asked to show a receipt for unbagged or large expensive items when leaving a store where one otherwise has free-range.

                    THAT is the way it has been in NYC for 40 years (Cattle chutes and locked cases and such- even though they do prosecute shoplifters- it can be difficult and time-consuming and expensive for the stores- while their taxes pay for the perpetrator’s expenses) and maybe THAT is a part of the reason why people in NY are so content to live under tyranny…because that conditioning works….

                    But having to prove that the property I just acquired in your premises is now indeed mine, while still within your promises [No cop is showing up at my door asking to see a receipt for something I bought in 1995; no one’s stopping me in my vehicle and auditing my bags and demanding receipts..] is not ‘conditioning’ for anything except the defense of property rights; due diligence; and the free-market- which things we should be for, not against.

                    When everywhere is like NYC and that city in TX. we’ll be wishing for these days of simply being asked to show our receipt before leaving THEIR ESTABLISHMENT.

                    • Hi Nunz,

                      I understand that these stores are hamstrung by shrieks of “raycissm!” and such that make it hard to deal with thieves – but I really don’t give a damn; or rather, I’m tired of being punished for things done by others for the sake of the convenience of corporate poltroonery.

                      I’m not a thief. If I have given reason to suspect I am then you have every right to “check me out.” But you had better have a reason. My having shopped there isn’t one.

                      I’ll be got-damned if – having paid for something, at which point it becomes my property – I will tolerate having to prove it is mine by step n’ fetchit-style obeisance to a got-damned minimum wage door minder.

                      I don’t give a flip that I haven’t yet exited their store. What’s in the bag is as much mine as what’s in my wallet the moment I have paid for it. Period. It is now my property – not theirs.

                      They have no more right to force me to prove the contents of my wallet are mine than they do the contents of my bag. Ownership has already changed hands.

                      They can take their “policy” and shove it up their ass – or let me do it for them, if they so much as lay a finger on me as I walk out the door.

                      I’ve had enough. And this is among the few things I don’t have to take anymore. Some geek with a Wal-Mart vest on has no police power; he touches me and I will correct him.

                      So far, the pricks haven’t followed me out. Probably because I radiate hate for them and they can sense it. Some things are not worth getting your face smashed in.

                    • eric, you probably won’t be surprised to find out “The Law” is on their side. Wonder how that happened?
                      Reminds me of the brief hearing my cousin had on his lemon Chevy that wouldn’t start. 3 corporate lawyers show up and one asks if it won’t start, how is it you use it? He said I give it a shot of ether and it runs. They pointed out he’d voided his warranty and the court let it stand. Who’s paying who?

            • MM, I liken showing the receipt, to this analogy:

              You come home one day and see a jiggerboo loading your stereo into his car in front of your house, are ya just gonna say “hmmm” and ignore it, or are ya gonna say “What are ya doing with that, buddy?”, and then consult your wife/cat/prodigal son before letting the guy leave, to make sure his story of someone in your house having sold the stereo to him for $5 is true?

            • Oh yes they do have a way to prove if you have paid for an item or not. . I got some prescriptions one time from a Wal Mart pharmacy. When I got home, one of my prescriptions was missing. I called the store, and they asked me what time I was there. I told them approximately when I was there. They told me that I paid for and got the prescription. I said that I had not gotten it. It was an expensive prescription, and I asked to talk to the pharmacy manager. He said he would call me back. About 15 minutes later, he called and apologized, saying that they had looked at the videotape of the transaction, and that the pharmacy clerk had accidentally knocked one of my prescriptions off of the counter while she was bagging them up. He said it landed in a trash can near the cash register. They looked and there it was. I’m sure that she was severely beaten, docked a day’s pay and fired for this, knowing Wal Mart. LOL

              • Hi Nathan,

                My position on this is based on the premise that no one surrenders their rights by entering a privately owned business. These box stores have every right to protect their inventory and pursue people who have given them cause to suspect them of theft. But they have no more right to demand that I prove I haven’t stolen the goods I just bought without cause than they do to demand I account for the contents of my wallet. The items just paid for as much my property as the things in my wallet – and that’s the end of it.

                I despise this idea that we – all of us – are to accept being treated as presumptive thieves because some people are thieves and because Wal Mart is too afraid of being accused of “racism” or whatever to go after the people who have given cause to suspect they are thieves.

                It’s not just demeaning- it is dangerous. It habituates people to being treated as presumptive thieves; to bow low for no reason before Authority. And it empowers the flunkies to swag around like bullies, low-rent AGWs.

                I won’t have it.

                I hope it never comes to it, but if some flunkie ever tries to prevent me from walking out of a store with my property, and puts his hands on me, there is going to be trouble.

                I don’t say that as a Tough Guy – because I’m not. I despise violence. But there are things this dude will not abide.

                • Eric, Eric, Eric,….

                  If you come to my house and start praising Satan (Which I know you wouldn’t do, since you’re atheist) is your right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion being violated when I demand that you stop, or throw you out?

                  If you don’t like the way that the local auto parts place treats their employees, are you being ‘deprived of your rights’ to protest if they will not let you march up and down the aisles of their store carry a sign?

                  Our ‘rights’ are [or should be] sacrosanct in places where we have a right to be- such as a public street or our own property….but when dealing with other people, on their property, where we ultimately don’t have any inherent right to be- be it someone’s house or business- our rights are subordinate to those of the property owner, as in the examples above.

                  If this were not so, then you would be forced to tolerate anything in your home or business lest you ‘deprive someone of their rights’- but obviously, that would be a deprivation of your rights.

                  What you are essentially advocating in your above post, is that a business owner deprive himself of his rights, so that the same rights that you would have in a place in which you have a right to be, can be upheld.

                  what is really disturbing though, is that while rightly decrying violence, you state that you would use it, in a situation where you are on someone else’s property where you know what their policies are, and consent to them by reason of the fact that you continue to go there even after knowing the policies-= biut are essentially saying that if any action is taken against you for not submitting to those policies, you will retaliate.

                  That is the same as saying that you have some inherent right to be there, and thus have an expectation that every one of your civil rights will be upheld to the utmost, not by the government, but by another citizen/entity, whose rights on their own property must be diminished in order to uphold yours….the same as if you had to allow a Marxist diatribe by a guest in your own home to uphold their freedom of speech- which of course you do not, because to do so would be a diminishing of your own property rights; freedom of association; etc. and you, being the homeowner, have the superior right, and the guest is only there by your permission and as long as he complies with your terms.

                  This is fundamental Libertarian principle- without which, there is no hope of ever having a Libertarian society based on cooperation as opposed to violence.

                  It’s not always about OUR rights.
                  When it’s the gov’t vs. us…it’s about our rights.
                  When it’s normal human being vs. normal human being….it’s about who has the superior right- and that often depends on where we are.

                  • Hi Nunz,

                    You- and they – are well within your rights to ask me to leave their store (or your house) for any reason at all.

                    But that is not the same thing as demanding I prove that my possessions aren’t theirs.

                    Again: Once money changes hands, the goods are mine – and the cash is theirs. That’s the end of it, morally speaking.

                    I have an absolute right to defend myself – and my property. Which once paid for is my property – not theirs.

                    If they think I stole something – that is to say, posses property belonging to them – they have every right to investigate and (in my opinion) to use force to prevent the thief from leaving. But they better damn well be able to adduce evidence to support their “suspicion.”

                    Jacking up people without cause is an outrage.

                    • And yets COPS do indeed ‘Jack up” folks w/o even reasonable suspicion all the time, and get away with it. They know that as long as the “detention” is brief and they don’t inflict injury(beyond your dignity), no worthwhile attorney is going to bother as likely the courts will say something to the effect, “you don’t look too bad over it”, nor will the cops face disciplinary action. And if theythinks ye doth “protest too much”, then, if they’ve nothing better to do, they can hamstring you with bogus charges of “disturbing the peace”, “resisting arrest” (for resisting arrest), or “obstruction”, all which are little more than “Contempt of Cop”.

                    • But Eric, it really is the same, because you, knowing their policy, still choose to shop at their store.

                      If I come to your house and don’t comply with your policies; and make trouble when you try to enforce those policies, you would be well advised to ban me from your house (Probably a good idea anyway…I tend to fart 🙂 )- and if I didn’t agree with your policies, it would be utterly stupid of me to keep coming to your house and then complaining about how unfair your policies are.

                      I’ve assked this question previously, but I don’t think you’ve ever addressed it (Maybe you had, and I missed it?)- but if you owned a large store, which sold a large variety of merchandise and had a LOT of peoiple coming and going constantly, how would YOU deal with it?

                      I mean, C’mon….we’re not talking about random acts on the street, and AGWs on witch-hunts; We’re talking about merely showing that your just-acquired merchandise has in-factr legally just changed hands, from those of the store to yours. You show the receipt to confirm this- just as you show the little guy in the movie theater the ticket for the seat you just purchased- to confirm that the transaction has in-fact taken place…and all is good.

                      I can’t help but to think that you are being very uinrealistic, if you somehow expect all employees of the store to automatically know that you paid for your items and that they are now your property- as if the cashier gets on the P.A. and makes an announcement after the transaction:

                      “Attention ladies and gentlemen. The tall skinny white dude has now paid for everything in his cart; it is now his property, so please do not ask him for confirmation of this!……atencion damas y caballeros! el hombre alto y delgado blanco….” 🙂

                    • Hi Nunz,

                      I think we’re at an impasse on this one and will have to agree to disagree. It isn’t my obligation as a customer to assist a store in theft control. It is, however, their obligation to not treat customers like thieves without cause.

                      The whole thing is risible.

                      It’s another means of submission training. Keep in mind, these stores have cameras above every cash register – and everywhere else, too. They can – or should – be able to tell who is and is not a thief. Identify suspicious people; then deal with them.

                      Ah, but that would require them to exert more effort – to treat people as individuals – and it’s easier for them to treat everyone like cattle.

                      Thieving cattle.

                      At any rate, the idea that I have any moral obligation to prove that the merchandise I just paid for isn’t stolen is obnoxious beyond words. Their “policy” carries no moral force when it violates my rights.

                      Check the cart all you like before money changes hands.

                      But once my money has been exchanged for their goods, their goods are now mine. That’s the end of it. There are no qualifications or conditions post-purchase. The store doesn’t retain any property rights to what I have just paid for. If they have cause to suspect me of having stolen something, that is a separate matter.

                      Which is why, incidentally, these geeks have no legal power to physically interfere with a customer who refuses to provide a receipt. They can call AGWs, but they’d better damn well have cause to support an accusation of theft – surveillance video showing some item being stuffed in the pants, etc. Just whining that “he didn’t show me a receipt” for his merchandise is sound cause for a civil suit by the customer assaulted and kidnapped (if they physically interfere with his progress) and – I am pretty sure – justification for physical self-defense.

                      If you believe I am obliged to prove that my merchandise is in fact mine, then perhaps you also believe I can demand to check their cash register, post-purchase to count up the money therein and “make sure” it’s not stolen?

                      So fish heads to them.

                    • Hey, Eric!

                      Yes, we’re certainly not going to change each other’s mind on this.

                      I just can’t wrap my mind around why though, that if you feel this way, you continue to shop at stores that practice said policy?

                      Like I’ve said all along, this is about property rights- and the acknowledgement of who has the superior right when on someone else’s property vs. whose rights are somewhat diminished [not entirely eliminated].

                      I know…it seems like we’re going ’round and ’round in circles here….but is really such a fundamental illustration of the core principles which we believe in being applied in real life, that it seems worth it to banter about it.

                      One more thing: Let’s say you go into Wally World and buy a TV. Pay for it back inb electronics, back inb the bowels of the store; prop it in a cart, and head for the parking lot. You think that it is O-K to require that the “greeter” at the door just let you sail by; that she should have to assume that you paid, and that it is wrong of her to merely ask if that has been paid for, and to see your receipt as proof, before leaving the premises where you purchased it?

                      If that’s the case, then you are requiring that there either be a free-for-all at Walmart…or that physical restrictions and even tighter surveillance be put in place to make it impossible to steal- which would ultimately result in reduced freedom of movement and convenience for ALL innocent customers, ….but at least they wouldn’t have to show their receipt….

                      THAT kind of mentality as cultivated in our society, is largely what is responsible for the rise and acceptance of the police state.

                      Accepting a slight diminishing of your rights in a situation where to not do so would be to require that a property/bidness owner not be able to exercise theirs, on their own property/in their own business is kinda outside the realm of Libertarianism, because it is essentially declaring that you feel that you ultimately have a right to shop at a given store, and therefore they have an obligation to treat you as if theyu were the government and as if you were in a public space.

                      If you accept that, then to be consistent, you would also have to say that a business shou8ld not have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason they so choose; or to fire/refuse to hire anyone for any reason- because ‘the people have rights’- which of course is spurious reasoning, because the property owner/business owner also has rights- and his rights over his own property are superior to those of others.

                      Things like this only become an issue when we fail to recognize and acknowledge the superior property rights of a property owner- which is the very crux of Libertarianism.

                    • Hey Eric and Nunz,

                      I find what others think to be very important, interesting. I don’t mean that in a judgmental way as such opinions are neither right nor wrong, they are just felt deeply by some and not others. For instance, Eric cares deeply about this because he sees it as part of a larger issue, that people are being conditioned to accept being treated as a presumptive criminal. This attitude is understandable and related to his contempt for the safety cult mentality and the “if you’ve done nothing wrong”, you have nothing to fear mantra. All of these condition us to accept a loss pf personal freedom and a degree of indignity for fear of what “might” happen. I share this attitude but I don’t think the check receipts policy is a particularly significant example of such conditioning.

                      I don’t consider this policy offensive or a violation of my rights, I consider it a tool that helps Walmart provide the service that I value most about them, low prices. Sure, the store is video surveilled but, unless a large bank of screens is continuously monitored by a large group of people, this is not an effective theft deterrent. It is valuable mostly for after the fact identification. I prefer the cheaper, and probably more effective, check receipts policy because it helps keep prices low.

                      Nunzio cares deeply about the moon landing “hoax” because he thinks it contributed greatly to the manufactured reverence for the State necessary to maintain mindless obedience. While I share that concern, I don’t consider the moon landing to be a particularly significant event propping up the false myth of political authority. I just don’t care enough about it to do the research necessary for an informed opinion.

                      I understand why others consider them important, and I don’t fault them for it, nor do I believe that a certain position on these issues is subject to a libertarian litmus test. I care about other things that are not shared by many libertarians. For instance, I consider the assertion Ken made about government throwing money at some technology to advance it more rapidly to be far more important than either of the above concerns. Government cannot be restrained by price signals and cannot allocate resources that are sure to align with the needs and wants of people. They throw money toward things that they value. The assertion that what is “seen” is proof of the value of such allocation ignores the “unseen”, and is used to justify every intervention foisted upon us. In Ken’s example it is taken as good that the technology rapidly advanced. But, we don’t know what would have happened absent the artificial intervention. Perhaps a different and better technology would have been created. Perhaps those resources would have been allocated to something of more value to actual people. One thing is certain, absent widespread intervention, we would live in a wealthier society.

                      I care about this deeply but i don’t expect others to share my concern.

                      Cheers,
                      Jeremy

                    • Let me tell you about Wally today. It’s the only pharmacy around that accepts our rural electric discount card. it’s a huge discount we can’t turn down. I go in and there’s this list I have to get. I get to the cat food and there’s two sacks on the floor, to the very back of the rack and I have to get on my knees to drag them out(35lbs). It was hot in there and I wasn’t happy anyway but then the pharmacy, which they said a couple months ago would not be closing for lunch since they had multiple pharmacists. Good deal so I wasn’t worrying about the time. I finally get 3 sacks of cat food and a 54 lb sack of dog food on top and due to smaller items, had to pull them out as I packed the cart with the big, heavy stuff and put them on top. I was sweating my ass off and then got to the pharmacy where they had failed to fill a prescription I checked with the doctor about yesterday.

                      When they gave me 4 of 5 and said I’d have to wait a half hour, which was 45 minutes, I was pissed. I pointed out it was 1:28 and they could just give it to me. The pharmacist said it would take a lot longer to fill than 2 minutes so I checked everything else out. The cart was literally loaded head high on me and with one hand full of scripts and pushing the cart out the door, there was this young girl at the door, something not common. She said “I need to see your receipt”. You have to understand, standing there in the heat it would have taken quite a while to inventory and I had no intention of complying, especially since I’d have to cool my heels(heat my heels cause they won’t spend the money to keep you cool)before getting the last prescription.

                      I replied to her “No thanks” and walked away with this cart carrying a huge load. Their goddamn parking lot is uphill too so I was pouring sweat by the time I got it all loaded and then had to go back in and wait. I finally get my prescription and leave again. Here she was again and she said “have a nice day” and I muttered something in response.

                      I was so pissed I had a hard time getting over it and was so dry I could have drunk hot water and hot cared. Fortunately the wife had some hot water she had been drinking on hours before.

                      I left there with the a/c blowing cold, the first time I’d been comfortable in hours. I was hoping they would call the cops in a way just so everyone could see I only had what I had a receipt for.

                      I had never had this happen to me and it changed my view on their policy. The checkout clerks for the store were their general courteous selves and the idiot I can’t stand who has begun working the pharmacy was hut hutting me before it came time to shut the pharmacy down for half an hour. I was pissed and still am.

                      If any other pharmacy honored our discount card it would be a long time before they would see me again.

                  • Mr. Southman- you must CHOOSE, Grasshopper, between accepting their rules and getting your discount, or telling them to piss off. BTW, they PAY someone to get the heavy/unreachable/inconvenienly situated items for the customers. I regularly ask for help with heavy or other items. Sometimes I have to wait for someone to come over, but I don’t lift heavy things into my cart, etc. . They don’t pay me to do it, so I don’t.

                    • Nathan, here’s the deal. There’s an old saying in Texas that if you lift that calf when it’s born and every day after, you’ll be able to lift it when it’s grown(1100lbs.)
                      Of course it’s a joke but there’s a lot of truth to that train of thought.

                      I’ll soon turn 70 and I can still lift a 11R 24.5 up head high onto a trailer. It may hurt like hell but I have sometimes been forced to do it or just screw the pooch all day waiting for help.

                      I love to get one of the fatty millenials looking right at me and throw a 60 lb sack of fertilizer on each shoulder and walk away. Of course at that point I’m pissed so it’s easier.

                      I’ll be damned if I’ll act like I can’t do something and make sure there’s plenty cameras in the vicinity.

                      Sure, I’ll pay for it, but not in front of the pussy crowd.

                      Why do you think I take drugs(no, not those, yes, those too)?

                      Getting run over from behind screwed up something in my neck and upper back. Breaking both bones in my leg and having the Achilles tendon pull the center of the bone in my foot out did something to my equilibrium.

                      So I take a couple drugs to help with nerve pain but I’ve gotten to they’re not required to the point they once were by using CBD oil, great stuff for what ails you.

                      If I didn’t have to take piss tests whenever the mood struck someone, I’d get my CBD the old fashioned way and feel even better.

                      Shiner Bohemian Black Lager goes a long way toward smoothing that all out, just ask Jeremy.

                      Anyway, I just told her I’d pass and kept going. After going back in for the pharmacy drill and getting the old lady some ice cream, I walked back through again and she said something like “have a nice day” and I mumbled ”you too” or something. I was still hot and sweating.

                      Every doc I’ve been to has tried to put me on psych drugs. Why? Well, they might make you be able to take the pain better, not, Well, they might reduce the pain.

                      Too many times I’ve seen people go the other way. Do you want to feed me something that will someday kill YOU?

                      That little sign disallowing guns won’t stop a crazed person, never has and never will. I prefer to be what I am and not what GlaxoKlineSmith wants me to be, an unstable piece of dynamite waiting to hit critical.

                      I’m a likeable guy and can have a pleasant conversation with anyone. Why turn me into that “one wrong word” type of person? Oh, yeah, for big profit.

                    • Hi Eight,

                      I love this! And – apparently – women love it, too. Not being a weak febe, I mean. I am grateful to the fates I have always been active, since I was kid. Meaning, I was outside, doing work. Working out came naturally, as an adjunct. I don’t fear getting old. I do dread becoming weak… and feeble. So far, no sign of this. I may have had to do as the Terminator did – and reroute to back-up systems – but my powers are still strong!

                    • eric, women won’t admit it but they like bad boys. They’ll stay in a relationship with a guy who’s strong and brave and a bit foolhardy longer than one with a soft guy who can’t change a flat.

                      Rick, the BIL tried something he wasn’t up to once in college. My sister called me to come check their Camaro. Rich had changed the oil and filter and now the filter was leaking. I took a rag, wiped off the filter, grabbed it and screwed it up tighter….problem solved. And he was a big ol boy too, 5″ taller than me but lazy as hell.

                      I’d go to college till the money ran out and then go to work somewhere to get more college funds.

                      I had been out in the patch as a roughneck for a few months and when I got back I went to see my sister. She was worried about me, and asked me what was wrong with my arms. I looked at them and couldn’t see a problem. I told her nothing was wrong with my arms as far as I knew. She pointed out they had divots and “swollen” places all over them. I had to explain it was muscle. Big Rick’s arms were smooth and white.

                      And we both know a bad bike and a fast ride would get the rear seat wet!

                      Probably neither of us has ever been too fast….or even fast enough.

                    • Are you kidding me, Nat?

                      In my local Walmart once, I’m checking out and the drone whose operating the scanner [I won’t call her a cashier, ’cause that’d be an insult to the real cashiers of old who possessed the skill to quickly operate a manual, non-computerized cash register. These modern replacements being just monkeys who pass your iotem over the bar-code reader….]

                      And the dingbat sees the 35 lb. bag O’ cat food in my cart, and whines “I can’t lift that….” as she stands there waiting for me to do it!

                      I hesitated for a moiment. I really wanted to say “Since you’re getting paid the same wages as a man to do this job, you’d better lift it!”- but in the interest of wanting to get the hell out of there in a timely manner, and not have to wait for the inevitable calling of a male or butch employee, I just lifted the bag with one hand and held it as Miss Equal Opportunity Employment scanned it….

                      I was really sorry that I didn’t refuse though; the humiliation would have been priceless…but then again, most people today don’t have any shame, so they don’t even feel humiliation anyway.

                      Glad they didn’t ask to see my receipt when leaving that day, I might have gone off on therm!

                    • Hey Eric!

                      Yep! With reasonable care, it seems that men can maintain their strength and vigor, even to a good age.

                      I hired someone [sight unseen] recently to help me load some junk and haul it to the dumps [Cost no more than making several trips myself- It wasn’t the help I really wanted…just someone to take it to the dumps]- The dude turned out to be 74 years old….and it was a hot day (Low 90’s)…holy crud! I could hardly keep up with the guy! 🙂

                      Then there’s Old Man Karl whom I knew back in NY. A mutual friend needed someone to go with him to MI and drive a big digger-derrick truck back from the auction. He used Old Man Karl- who was 86 at the time.

                      Meanwhile, other guys- ones who spend their lives working at desks or otherwise sitting all day, are done before they’re 50.

                    • 8, Friend O’mine was missing once for 3 days- He was supposed to deliver a truck a few states away, and then go to a distant Copart auction.

                      This is the same guy who got shot by a hit-man [1st wife wanted the insurance money] and who pulled the tubes out his stomach and walked out of the hospital 10 days after being shot.

                      So when the buyer of the truck was contacting me, asking where his truck was, and why my friend wasn’t answering his cell phone…..and after I couldn’t get a hold of him either, I decided to call his wife…

                      Instead of being concerned, she just says “Meh, Tony can take care of himself”.

                      Well…he materialized a few days later. I think he had met a crack whore…. [Well, he’s really an acquaintance, not a friend- and I guess that’s what women get when they marry “an exciting” guy…]

                      Shame though, that the choice for women is often girlyman or thug. Find me onme that’s willing to hold out for a real man who is also of good character;’ like I’ve held out for a woman who’s attractive and sane….. And if ya have to do without because such combos are rare…so be it- at least you’ll be happier- and free, if the right one does come along (Why do they think we want recycled shit? -‘specially if they’ve made poor choices/big compromises in the past? That just shows their lack of character! -Hmmm…How’d this turn into yet another MGTOW schpiel? Oh…because I’m here!)

                  • The diminutive for eric is Rick. I still have a BIL that was Rick his whole life till late twenties when he insisted he be called eric. He didn’t deserve it and I don’t do name changes like I don’t change horses in the middle of a stream.

                    I never quit calling him Rick and he never called me out on it. He’s a pussy anyway.

                    • That’s funny, 8. My bestfriend’s name is “Erick“- I’ve known him since he was 19. He’s 50 now.

                      I was thinking the very thing you used as an example, re: the diminutive of Eric- (Ric? 🙂 ) as it seems to be rather obvious when dealing with an Erick…..but it just never seemed right- unless you’re Fred Mertz: “Ehh, Rick!”.

                      But then again, Hank for Henry; Dick for Richard; and Bill for William don’t seem right either!

                • No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

                  • Nathan,

                    “except in … time of War or public danger;”

                    There are still troops on the 38th parallel. War on Poverty still going strong. War on Drugs going strong as well. War on Drunk Driving continues unabated. War on Terror still finding new fronts to battle. War on Domestic Violence has been expanded to your doctor’s office as he gallantly fights those other wars.

                    Public danger? The public is always in danger.

                    That’s why the War on Freedom has been going on since time immemorial.

                    Don’t you think the government can always find an exception for the rights enumerated in the first ten amendments?

          • Hi Nunz,

            This is not my problem. But I will make it their problem if they ever lay hands on me. I’m the farthest thing from a violent guy, but some things summon the Teutonic berserker in me… this is one of them.

            I find few things more despicable than someone who chooses to hassle people who’ve given no cause for hassling.

            These people have the same mentality as AGWs – but without laws and guns backing them up.

          • I used to know a guy who would walk out with really expensive stuff from a lot of places. He was a thief. He could have paid for it but chose to not do so. Got banned from Harbor Freight that I know of.

            • 8, I know a dude who has real estate in at least 4 different states and pays more in one year in property taxes than I earn in 10 years….and he used to pick stuff up at box stores in states with no sales tax, and often when it was on sale or from the clearance section…and then return it in NY (8.5% tax) without the receipt, and make a tidy profit. He’d also use Walmart as his tool “rental” center….

              And then people wonder why the stores have to tighten their return policies and implement security measures…..

              They’re just protecting their property, ’cause if they don’t, it is WE paying customers who end up paying higher prices due to all of the losses.

              I never truly realized how many hsoplifters there were until I moved here, where they list many of the Walmart busts in the local paper- almost always some dimwit stealing some $5 or $10 trinket….and always turns out they have drugs in their possession too. (That’s partly why I don’t want to serve on a jury- these idiots deserve what they get!)

            • If the store is so LAZY or INCOMPETENT that they can’t, after their cashier has rung up the purchase, monitor the front end to ensure that no “Funny Business” has happened, then I’ve no obligation to endure humiliation by “complying” with their silly-assed receipt check, anymore than I have to brighten up the atmosphere by singing “Zippity-Doo-Dah” from the now “banned” 1946 Disney film “Song of the South” as I exit the premises.

              Again, Nunz, with this policy not seemingly uniformly enforced, there’s huge problems with how WM is doing it. If it were me, I’d incentivize same in two ways (1) have the policy that in order to return merchandise, the receipt must be counter-signed by a store employee on the way out, else the purchase is FINAL (one can still deal with the manufacturer for warranties) and (2) offer prizes or credits for “compliance”. Keeps the matter VOLUNTARY, and doesn’t insult the dignity of the store’s patrons.

              • Doug, remember, our patronage of any particular store is also voluntary. We don’t have a right to be there…but they do have a right to dictate the policies they choose to implement.

                • I exercise MY policy to not submit to a receipt check…and WTF will WalMart or anyone else DO? If they don’t have their heads up their collective asses, not a goddamned thing! Yes, the store manager could have me “trespassed”, but trust me, it’s too much trouble and gives them too much grief.

                  And if some “loss prevention” punk or wannabe mall cop dares put his hands on me w/o probable cause (e.g, I was caught shoplifting, or was creating a disturbance and wouldn’t leave on my own, those ARE reasons that the ‘shopkeeper’s privilege exists), he’ll find out how well I’ve kept up on my hand-to-hand combat training. Not that I’m looking to use it, I learned same to, in the event I’d been captured and had escaped the enemy, to defend myself against the “Commie rats”.

                  It seems that Walt Kelly’s cartoon character, Pogo, words have come true…”We have met the enemy…and he is US!”.

                  • ^This, from a guy who lives in California- the most communistic place on earth. I just don’t understand: Why would shop at such a place if their policies are not to your liking, since unlike existing in one of the 50 states, you have no inherent right to shop there?

                    Agree with their policy or not, one should advocate their right to do what they want on their property.

                    Walmart is not the enemy, ’cause our involvement with them is purely voluntary. Your real enemies are in Sacre[de]mento; your county seat, your town hall, and Wurshington DC.

                    • Morning, Nunz!

                      Evil policies are always the enemy. And policies don’t trump rights. If I hang a sign at the entrance to my driveway stating that all who enter are subject to anal probing, that doesn’t give me the right to anally probe them. Wal Mart has every right to tell me to leave their premises, but they have no right to my property – even when I am on their premises.

                      Once money has changed hands, ownership has changed hands. At that precise moment, they lose any right to control what is now my rightful property.

                      More broadly: These policies are low and despicable. I oppose them for all the reasons I’ve laid out – the routinization of presumed guilt, the habituation to degrading treatment without cause. The de-civilizing effect this has.

                      Wal Mart sets a precedent and by dint of that, others follow – and before you know it, every time you shop, everywhere you shop, you are now treated as a presumptive thief.

                      The more we take – the more we’ll get.

                    • When I “re-tahr” (retire), I will most likely leave Calipornia. It’s a shame, I do have some property up in Humboldt County near this little hamlet known as Dinsmore, like most of the REAL Northern CA (e.g. would-be state of “Jefferson”) is about like being in Idaho, but still suffers from the libtard nitwits from Sacramento.

                    • Ok, Nunzio – to address your position about WalMart, being a PRIVATE enterprise (for the most part, don’t kid yourself that they don’t ‘play the game’ with politicians’, they have to in order to deal with the inevitable ‘zoning problems’ that always seem to come up, and if you likely want any concrete to build that store, especially the floor, the Teamsters will want to have a little ‘chat’, and THAT will COST you…)..yes, in GENERAL, WalMart and ANY private enterprise should be able to conduct their business as they see fit. This SHOULD include being able to ‘discriminate’ in matters of WHOM they want to do business with or EMPLOY, and for those that fear that certain “protected” groups would be shown the door, well, my answers are: (1) if neither their services or their patronage are welcome, maybe there’s a REASON, after all, in business, the ‘color’ that matters is GREEN and (2) if said reason is odious, capricious, irrational, and, dare i say it, “HATEFUL”, then the negative publicity ALONE typically resolves the situation far quickly and with greater effect than anything “Gubmint” can do!

                      As to the receipt check thing, given that if WM gets away with this odious practice, be assured that other retailers will follow suit. I’m willing to risk being “trespassed” and let WM decide the issue of my patronage for me, OR, if it came to that and I were assaulted and/or battered, use appropriate force to defend myself and deal with the likely consequences of an arrest and potential criminal charges, lawsuits (mine and theirs) and so on. Geez, Nunz, the Founding Fathers risked their very LIVES, and all they had, to stand up to King George III, whom in historical perspective was actually a quite benevolent monarch, but his servants, like Lord North, were some real JERKS! we see that happening today, and with ever rapidity in the past 25 years since the lately departed George HW Bush led that ill-advised “Desert Storm” campaign, which, fortunately, the opposite number, the late “Sodom” (Sadaam) Hussein was even more stupid. I’m sorry to say that we’ve largely allowed ever-increasing encroachments on our personal freedoms. Defying this outrageous practice at a Wal-Mart is a rather small way to reverse that trend and maybe, just MAYBE, take back what ‘Murica once was, peacefully, BEFORE it comes down to revolution and violence!

                    • Hey Ya, Er! 🙂

                      Actualkly Eric, this is where I disagree with you- and is exactly what I was referring to in some previous posts when I mentioned the consistency of our Libertarianism [<–That, as opposed to meaning it as a 'litmus test' as to whether or not we are 'real libertarians"]

                      What I mean is, we should have the ability to dictate the terms and conditions by which our own property can be used and accessed.

                      If you post a sign saying that entrants will be anally probed…and I enter….then I can't complain, because I agreed to those terms.

                      THIS is a part of the very heart of Libertsrianism- because in a Libertarian society, this is the way it would be. Who would make it otherwise? Who has the right to tell you what you can and can not do on your own property; or the right to give me a superior right to you, the property owner- which entitles me to use your property in a way that is not in accord with your wishes?

                      It's all about property rights and free association.

                      If we appeal to a third party- i.e. not the property owner, nor the guest- to regulate the terms of our association; and use of our property….we delegate our rights and responsibilities to others, and thus elevate them to a position of superiority over us- which is a perfect description of government.

                      And that is how we end up with places like NY and CA where someone who breaks into your home has more rights than you do; or the state determining the "age of consent", etc.

                      When I lived in NYC proper (Queens) as a young man, I so disliked the cattle chutes and scanners and armed guards of the local stores so much, that I'd often go 60 miles out on LI to go shopping. So, I really don't understand why, if you find Walmart's policies so egregious that you simply refrain from shopping there, and rather acknowledge at least their right to conduct business and dictate the terms of use of their own propertyu as they see fit- even if we may not like it? -Just as we advocate the toleration of many things that others do which we may not like, because we respect the right of others to do as they please with what is their own; and realize that such is the only way we can maintain our own freedom- as opposed to statists, who just want to criminalize anything they don't like or agree with.

                      I like having discussions like this, as this is how we get down to the meat and potatoes.

                      Sometimes, we think we are advocating something that is in-line with our philosophy or belief…but upon further scrutiny, we come to realize that the opposite is really the case- e.g. many self-professed Christians proclaiming "One man, one woman"- but ignoring the fact that the Bible not only does not condemn polygamy, but actually accommodates it.

                    • Hey Doug!

                      I agree with almost everything you said there- the only thing I take exception with is you alluding to receipt-checking being somehow a violation of our rights.

                      It is not a violation of our rights, because by consenting to shop at businesses which practice it, WE are yielding our rights in that situation.

                      Much in the same way that someone can not claim that it is a violation of their “rights” to have to endure Christmas decorations or music in a store. They have no such right, because they have no right tgo shop at every store, and can simply refrain from patronizing stores which consider to be engaging in unsufferable practices.

                      In a truly public place though…they might have a valid point, IF such displays were funded by “public” money…..

                      Quite frankly, I’m not crazy about the receipt-checking thing either….but I tolerate it because I want the cheap prices and convenience- and I understand why they do it.

                      If iit bothered me that much, I’d simply choose to pay higher prices and drive further….but I would not resort to violence over it, nor risk encounters with the donut-eaters over it, because i would be in the wrong if I did.

                      I find what the TSA does to be very egregious and intolerable…so I don’t fly commercially…..even though that legitimately should be my right to do, as airports are clearly NOT private property; and TSA goons ARE the government.

                    • It is a DAMN shame, Doug- CA is a beautiful state, with a variety of unique climates, where just about anyone could find something that would be their idea of paradise- all ruined by GOVERNMENT!

                      I’ve been to Humboldt county- It’s unique- I liked it. My late uncle- the first in our fambly to leave NY- c. 1940’s- owned property way up north in Alturas (He never lived there though- He lived in Southern CA and then in the Sierra Nevadas- where I spent some time- also a unique and wonderful place…but for the gov’t.

                      My mother even lived in southern CA in the 50’s- for nearly a decade. I grew up hearing all of her stories of how great it was…then. I showed her the Google street view of what her old address looks like now…she nearly hurled!

                      Ditto Long Island where I grew up- only 60 miles east of NYC- it was a paradise- Beautiful forests, fields and ponds and lakes; Gorgeous beaches and bays; quiet streets with humble houses…it was amaing. Now? It rivals CA. as one of the most communist, expensive. over-developed, third-world immigrant-ridden places on earth. To see the Jeckyll and Hyde transformation in my lifetime, has been tragic and amazing.

                    • I had never had anyone try to check my obvious receipt in my hand before. Of course I could be carrying a receipt from anywhere and I could have just walked through the store with a huge cart piled high and drug that receipt out of my pocket.

                      But this assumes you have simply gone through the line(no other way out) and nobody noticed you just went around everyone else, which is a million in one chance since there’s always some big-ass people in the way.

                      Their door checker shouldn’t stand where he/she can’t see the register lines if that’s the case. Someone standing beside the inner single door to the entrance/exit doors would be preferable and would see if someone did that instead of randomly checking those who’ve already paid.

                      When everything you bought except for stuff too big for a sack has been checked out, that should be it.

                      If they really wanted to see if people were leaving with a cart of stuff they didn’t pay for, they’d put the person responsible for that at that first single wide exit door who could see who was getting checked out.

                      If their checkers are incompetent, that’s on the store and not on me.

                      The wife and I bought a buttload of stuff one day and they had a new checker, a man for god’s sake. He was a nice guy, about our age and we conversed and had a pleasant conversation, paid and left. About 10 miles down the road the wife said (she was looking at the receipt)Hey, he didn’t charge us for the cat food.

                      I hadn’t noticed at all and obviously he hadn’t either. Well, shit happens and can you imagine going back and trying to make them make sense of you coming back and going back through every item to prove to them they didn’t charge us? It would be more of a hassle than I’d want to go through and might not turn out as if you were being honest.

                      The alternative is to have someone pick people willynilly leaving.

                      I’d have been much more conducive to having my receipt looked over the other day if it hadn’t been so damned hot in there.

                    • At least the big emigration into Texas from other states all head to one of the already huge shithole cities and wouldn’t even try to survive where there’s not a Bed, Bath and Beyond and a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse in town.

                      There was a BB and B in a strip mall once in a town 60 miles from me. I had to go to a store there, radios or telephones or something close to that store.

                      I pulled up there in the old shit covered ranch pickup and parked between a Mercedes and a Caddy. When I got done, I came out to an open space on either side. Gee, those city slickers are sure nice to leave me plenty of room.

                    • I used to do that, 8- Go back in to pay for something that didn’t get scanned. I still do at other stores (But actually, it never seems to happen anymore) but had stopped doing it at Walmart, since they’ll often scan something twice or scan a cheap veggie with the wrong code for a more expensive one; or weigh < 1oz of dried peppers as $6 worth!- So now, instead of going back the next time and going to costumer service to get reimbursed for overcharges, I just keep the occasional freebie. I still come out on the losing end though….as the freebies are nowhere near as frequent as the double scans or overcharges.

                      Best one was at Save-A-Lot years ago (I no longer go there; they don't sell anything i use anymore)- I was getting a 12-pack of soda for my mother, and realized after I got to the truck that they hadn't charged me for it.

                      I go back in, to the cashier who had checked me out, as she was now checking someone else out. I explained why I had returned…and she said I'd have to go to costumer service! I just took out the requisite bills from waller- rounded up a few cents to the nearest dollar, and laid them on her counter, and said "Yeah, right!" and left.

                      Always wonder if she just pocketed the money or did the right thing? Not my concern though- I did the right thing. But the nerve! "You'll have to speak to costumer service"! Stupid bitch- how would that have worked out for her "Your cashier forgot to scan this…"

                  • Bravo, Doug!

                    Well, said, sir. My position on this is precisely the same. I believe myself to be a civil, polite fellow who does his best to be respectful. I loathe violence and will avoid it to the extent I can. But I equally loathe aggression without cause – and some geek demanding – without cause – that I prove to him the items I just bought at the cash register with the camera hanging right above it aren’t stolen is just that. I will ignore his demands – and continue peaceably on my way out the store. But if he attempts to prevent me from leaving or lays a hand on me, I will respond appropriately.

                    All of us should – because then these vile practices would end.

                    • morning eric, this reminds me of the scene in Book of Eli when the roadjacker touched Denzel Washington who said “Touch me again and you won’t get that hand back” and then the guy laughs at him and reaches out to touch him again. Denzel made good on his promise.

                • Polygamy is fine in my view. healthier for women. they get to shack up with successful men and not get thrown overboard once a prettier chick comes along ala trump. Plus all the kids benefit from multiple women and ages looking after them. cant imagine why it isnt legal. Its a voluntary relationship.

                  • M3, it’s a Puritanism thing and a legal thing. When a wife got pissed and was ready to leave, she couldn’t take the husband for all their shit. That would take the fun out of things.

                    Besides the fact that multiple women can’t get along. My best friend that just died is a good example. We lived at least twice together with our wives in the same house. There was plenty living room and he and I could get along every day. Women……not so much.
                    I can walk into a room and through a house and not think much of anything except if it’s clean and neat. Women have other expectations and want things, any thing, shit hung on the wall or furniture turned this way or that, just to suit their whims. I don’t care much about anything but is there food to be et, cold beer to be drunk and cool in the summer and sorta warm in the winter. 2 bathrooms should be enough for 4 people,esp. since I use one twice a day, once in the morning before anyone else is up and once at night to wash all that crud off from the day. I don’t even mind doing the laundry for everyone. Trouble is, my idea of laundry, separating colors from whites and doing towels separately don’t cut it for somebody who has to have some special detergent and other stinkums later in the wash cycle to suit their style.

                    Hell, my only style is clean Wranglers, button up western shirts and Thorlos socks(don’t mess with my socks)and clean undies.

                    In the winter don’t take my leather jacket I use, just because I pulled a calf with it yesterday and stick it back somewhere I can’t pull it off the rack when I’m leaving. I’m not hard to please.

                    I’m bad about not letting women get their proper amount of beauty sleep since I get up and get my coffee and get my shit together for the day, let the pit bull out in the dark where he raises hell at something and comes back in fired up and then barks again and has to go back out. Then he has to go back in when I leave, meanwhile women do whatever it is they deem is the thing to do “that” morning. Hell, all mine are the same.

                    And then everybody complains when that Cummins ISX or Detroit 60 series fires up in about 4:30 and idles for half an hour while I check lights, tires and all the other stuff. Got forbid if I accidentally hit the Jake brake switch while cleaning gauges and when I make a shift 100 yds from the house it blats. It happens, I’m not perfect. Hours after I’m gone, they’ll be pissed even though they went right back to sleep.

                    People are spoiled children these days. I WORK for a living. At least in the morning I’ll be leaving in a quiet pickup.

                    • 8. Imagine Ma Ingalls- or any country woman or any not-rich-and-spurlt city woman of 100 or 150 years ago seeing the lives of these women today, and the way they act!

                      Could you imagine of them complaining if the horse farted as Pa was riding away from the homestead?

                    • Nunz, they wouldn’t hear it. They’d be too caught up in getting children up so they can teach them their new chores since she has a day of killing pullets and putting the in the smokehouse she spent the day before getting ready.

                      Bitch when you get home? She’ll be so tired she can barely walk and so will you. That’s the way we lived till old age took the wife out of the picture. I get to do it all for the most part now. God, those golden years are sorta tarnished coming in from work to your second job and every pet vying for your attention. I’m writing this with Possum in my lap. His full name is Lil’ Possum but the other day at the vet when he weighed 15.1 lbs I suggested we drop the Lil’. Well, I was wrong, this is Nosser but he’s about the same size.

                      BTW, for those of you who have joint pain, I’m an old hand with a TENS unit so yesterday I was in pain in my hips, esp. my left hip from operating a loader all week clearing silt that seems to have no bottom it stood in water so long. I’m trying to load it and haul it off to washed out roads but “the bottom” varied from one foot to another so when you are creeping along, the loader will fall into a hole that’s only there because there is no near bottom. It’s all about the same level. I have to get right up to the truck to raise the bucket since just moving forward a foot, one front tire or the other could drop a foot and a half, the very thing that will have it on its side with you in it. I have torn hell out of the top temporary bars on the top of the belly dump since just as you are close enough to drop, the loader drops over suddenly and only the top of the trailer keeps you upright. It’s tough mentally and physically.

                      I put 4 pads on my left hip yesterday for hours and my back and hip are so much better today I can’t believe it. A TENS unit is a life-saver for messed up joints. Speeds up blood flow to the muscles and to the joint.

                      In the old days one person would heat towels and massage that for the other. Damn glad I have that unit.

                    • 8, if she cleans enough pullets, does she win the pullet surprise? 😉

                      Yeah, my dopey sister has had one’a them TENS things for so long, I think it’s TWENTIES by now!

                      Heh….I almost went vertical in a sinkhole T’other day with the tractor and bushhog. Had mowed my little meadow in the woods, and was backing into the brush to clean around the edges; it’s easy to get discombobulated in there, what with a big fallen tree blocking the view and everything. I backed a little too far not realizing where I was…and suddenly the tractor just kept going backwards and I could see ther sky instead of the ground. Luckily, the bushhog stopped it, and after making sure it was pretty stable, I hopped off, and went and got my F250 and my humongous chain and pulled it out…and everything still seems to work O-K- both on the tractor and me….

                      Hey, what were them socks ya mentioned a few posts ago? I’ve been on the look-out for good socks…mine are old and holy (not in the Biblical sense!) and it seems good socks, like many other things, are becoming a rarity these days…..

                  • While the thought of even ONE wife makes me shudder at this point, I just get a kick out of people who thump the Bible…..in which virtually every Patriarch was a polygamist- and in which the law of God even states that the benefits due one wife shall not be diminished if you take a second wife.

                    And yet most of those very same people have no problem with divorce and remarriage- which the Bible condemns; or with pastors who are even divorced and remarried or who have unruly kids…which the Bible also condemns.

                    And then the government comes along, and says that it’s someone’s “right” to marry someone of their own gender- and that you can’t “discriminate” against them….but it’s somehow a “crime” for a hetero to have multiple wives!

                    I wonder what they’d say if a fudge-packer married two other men?

                    • exactly my point nunz. A marriage isnt based on love its a voluntary transaction between two –or more people – in a polygamy situation for each parties mutual benefit. the man gets laid, companionship, and kids if he wants them and the woman get security and provided for. Whats more natural than that?

                    • Ok i’ll stop at this but if you want a successful relationship with a woman act like you dont care at all. it works like a charm. All this love crap is so much bullshit. Women respect you if they think you can leave at anytime. Goofy i know.

                    • Yeah, I’ve figured that out, Mark. I’d never do that though (assuming i wanted a relationship with a woman- which I don’t)- When things are so messed up that one has to act like the opposite of what they really are…..then there can be no honesty; one can not even be themselves, or be loved for who they truly are…so what would be the point?

                      But you are absolutely correct- if one were just interested in acquiring a given female….being a jerk would go a LOT further than being a nice guy.

                      We can play a part…and get the usual suspects…and end up with the typical results…or we can be our unique selves, and attract that one special one who is different, if our paths should happen to cross- and if we never find that…we’ve saved ourselves a lot of trouble and heartache and misery, which we would have had being shackled to some idjit who prefers jerks.

                      (Awww, don’t quit- this is fun!)

                  • Dammit Nunz, now you make me have to pull Nora out and listen to it from her lips and they are sexy sounding lips.

                    Back in the late 60’s I worked for the Highway Dept.. later to be known as the DOT….whooopeeee!!

                    But I ran a mower, as if it were something new since I’d been running a shredder forever.

                    We were on a road 10 years later I’d be living on with a wife when I looked back to see the other guy pulling a Bush Hog type thing(they weren’t Bush Hogs back then). He wasn’t there. Where the hell did he go. He hadn’t had time to double back and get over the hill…had he? So I threw mine out of gear and hauled ass, Minneapolis Moline style, maybe 12 mph.

                    All of a sudden I saw him and his rig down in a big sinkhole that had eaten the entire thing. Luckily, it has deposited him on a veritable fortune of girly mags, a bit more raw than Playboy but enjoyable when you’re a teen. He was sitting on the mower drooling. No way to get it out so we just waited on the truck that would eventually be around.

                    Pulled the whole thing out backward by the mower/shredder. Left a huge hole but our only problem was avoiding them…..which is impossible since they’re not there till they collapse with you in them. Glad you’re ok.

                    Let me preamble the socks with the fact I’ve chewed thru countless pairs of the same in my life.

                    When I did electrical oilfield work I wore out a pair of cotton socks every day, not much left on the sole at all(I told you this was some mofo work).

                    A friend suggested I go to a fiber like those made from oil. OH, what a difference they were and kept my feet a lot dryer and in the winter, a lot warmer.

                    Later in life I’d find such as Patagonia and Kenyon, my fav. All that stuff was for super cold wear like sitting on a post in 20 degree weather with 20 mph wind waiting for Bambi.

                    But back to socks. I was at Dick’s one day and found some much better socks and bought them. They seemed to be in it for the long haul but long haul for me is just a few months or was until I went back to get some Rocky boots and found Thorlos.

                    I just wore a hole in the first pair of quarter socks I had been wearing for 11 years, no typo.

                    I have been ordering Thorlos since 2009 and believe me, they outwear and outperform anything I ever wore and I even tried another brand or two since. I still have the original Thorlo long socks I bought in ’08 and they’re still good but I rarely wear full socks, even in winter. And yes, I wear boots and no, I don’t have any hair on my legs. That saves me shaving to be beautiful for all my gals ha ha.

                    Seriously, Thorlos makes every sort of sock you might want. I wear their “made for hurting feet” jobs, in a quarter sock and they’re lifesavers.

                    They put up with trucks with clutches so hard to push I wear the soles out on the left foot of my top of the line Timberland’s.

                    I don’t have to have a Mercedes but with clothes made for the long haul, you can’t go wrong buying the expensive stuff.

                    I’ve had people gasp when I say they’re $14/pair but really, when you buy 3 pair for that price, they send you 4 so it’s a good deal. They keep my feet dryer than anything I’ve worn including Kenyon and Patagonia. I have Kenyon and Patagonia wear from 1985. It’s all still good and will save your life in really bad cold. If you like, have eric give me your email and I’ll send you a link for Thorlos. You won’t believe what you’ve been missing out on and how they just keep on going. They dry so fast I rarely put them on the line and never in a dryer. I can put them over a line in the bedroom and they’ll be very dry in 20 minutes. I wear the very thick ones for cushioning but you can get whatever floats your boat so to speak.

                    They make a hard day easier and make buying socks constantly a thing of the past.

                    I wish I had stock in Thorlos. I’d make it my mission to tell everyone about them. In the 11 years I’ve been wearing them, I’ve only had the original pair wear a hole. I’ve thought about framing them. The pair of long socks bought at the same time are still fine but they haven’t been worn like the quarters.

                    I have tried various socks that were expensive over the years since I started with Thorlos and every brand wore out fairly quickly like before.

                    If you have injuries to your feet, they really protect your feet from your footwear, and for the last 40 years, I have worn footwear made specifically for health and longevity. Been through many pairs of Rocky’s.
                    When the big old clunky look took over more than a decade ago, Rocky quit making their time honored walking shoes, which were waterproof, shockproof, and kept your feet dry and weighed 12 ounces each for my size 11. I had boots made from the same cordura, leather and soles of a great type of foam for many years till they stopped making them. Haven’t had a Rocky product except for their laceup lined boots since then.

                    I wish they hadn’t changed completely. The only problem I had with them was their inability to live through cow shit. The lined Rocky’s are not affected by manure. I have a hard time finding footwear to fit my feet but Timberland and Rocky’s work just fine. I suspect Dr. Marten’s with their really cushy sole(a good friend won’t wear anything else)are great boots too but the last couple times I tried to find some I could only find steel toe and I don’t do steel toes.

                    First thing I ask when I got to another company is look to see what everyone is wearing. If I see other guys wearing non-steel toe boots, I don’t even bring up the subject.

                    I’ve never had any of the steel toe rated boots that aren’t steel toe but qualify.

                    Steel toes cause me to develop bad habits, like dropping heavy things you don’t want to hit concrete on your toe. You’ll remember instantly you aren’t wearing steel toes when you do that with regular boots. I can’t kick a bolt back in or such but that’s what hammers are for. Good luck with Thorlos. You won’t regret them.

                    • Thanks, Eight!!

                      I found the Thorlos site…

                      ELEVEN YEARS???!!!!

                      I love things that last a long time; I’m in it for the long-haul.

                      Something is mine; I want it to still be mine 10, 15, 20 years from now- The modern notion of buying something, and it’s obsolete or busted in a few months or a year, doesn’t fly with me.

                      But I’ve never had a pair ofd socks last 11 years! I have some that are fairly old- I already had them when my pitbull died- and that was five and a half years ago [Best dog I’ve ever had!] -but they have holes in ’em. Trouble is, I can’t find suitable replacements.

                      Been trying a few here and there….but trouble is, I don’t care for the ‘real heavy’ cushioned ones…and yet everything else seems to be too thin these days- they feel like freaking women’s nylons! I feel like I’m gonna catch gay from ’em!

                      Wore ’em once and that was it- can;t stand the thought of putting them on again.

                      The worn-out ones I have (and continue to wear) were just cheapies from Walmart. Cotton, done up in a nice weave, that offers some texture and thickness. After trying a pack, and seeing how good they were, I went and got a bunch more…and they’ve been all I’ve been wearing….but alas, like all good things, they disappeared from the store shelves shortly after I got ’em- and try as I might, I can’t find anything comparable. I’ll certainly give the Thorlos a try!

                      Boots…yeah. I’ve been wearing Woverine lace-ups, and Georgia motorcicle-style zipper boots (Kinda look like Pa Ingalls’s). They’re comfortable; love the way they look; and they’re relatively cheap ($100-$150)- but they don’t stay waterproof very long…and the uppers get scraped-up apparently just from walking through the grass- but overall, they do last a long time.

                      Was curious how Red Wings might do….but in the styles I wear, Red Wings cost between $300-$400, and I ain’t paying that for no boots! (Hey, I’ve come a long way since I was a kid, when I had to wear whatever the Army-Navy store or Fayva had for 20-something bucks! LOL- I still remember some of those gems… Had one pair that I called “My Li’l Abner shoes”- but they were comfortable for all the walking I used to do…and the price was right- c. $22 if memory serves)

                      If these damn Georgia zip-up motorcicle boots would stay waterproof, they’d be ideal. I could live with the uppers getting ugly in short order.

                      Hey, I might be from the city, but I quit wearing sneakers when I was a kid! I find it hilarious these days, when you see grown men wearing these ridiculous-looking sneakers, and over-sized huge shorts…..they look like fat overgrown elves!

                    • Nunz, they have all sorts of weights and pure running socks for speedsers.

                      I bought a pari of socks once(and still have them) I call my Michael Jackson socks. They are ultra-thin and shiny like a chrome bumper but they’re woven aluminum and will allow you to put on your heavy Patagonias and endure just about any cold. I don’t recall the name brand but I’d buy another paid if I could. And yes, at first they look like a joke. Lots of really great things look like a joke the first time you see it. As they say, The proof is in the pudding.

                  • the problem is there ends up to be a lot of single men and they become dangerous to the power structure. Never mind the feminist course is taking things in same direction and will probably argue for polygamy at some point.

      • This is like bullies in government school. The bullies have nothing to lose so punishing them or not makes no difference. Control is gained by punishing the victims of bullies. And that’s how everything seems to work now. Punish the people who aren’t the problem. Let the problem people run amuck. It grows control.

      • Nun, I live in Oz. In the shops where this happens, the cash register is at the back of the store, while the store entrance is at the front of the store. The cashier is helpless to do anything without leaving the register exposed. Also, the criminal gangs from Somalia and Sudan are allowed to operate freely here, whereas if you are white, you WILL be caught and charged. And screw the thoughts of racism, the gangs are brought here to take away our security and freedom so the government can take away more of our rights “to protect us”. It’s happening all over the western world, we have fascist governments that want more than the nazis ever wanted in the way of total dictatorial life removing powers.

    • The majority of the theft is SHRINKAGE from their own staff. I have a daughter that works at a WalMart in Utah in a town that’s 75% LDS (to be fair, only about half of those actually attend Church, so go figure…), and the stories she’s told me not only of patrons that steal or otherwise scam the store, but also employees…what gets her is that all you have to do to keep your job is SHOW UP ON TIME and DON’T STEAL, and it’s amazing how many still can’t hack it!

      • They should hire Mexicans. Far better workers and more honest than most bottom-rung ‘Mercans these days. They could probably cut their labor force in half- replace every 2 Americans (or 3 blacks) with one Mexican!

        • Joke- STOP right here if you will be offended by racial stereotypes-
          Why aren’t Mexicans allowed to marry blacks ?
          Because their kids would be too lazy to steal.

          • When does a spick become a ‘Spaniard”?
            When he marries your daughter.

            When does a black man become a nigger?
            When he leaves the room!

            What begins with ‘N’; ends in ‘R’, and is something you NEVER want to call a black person?
            >
            >
            >
            >”Neighbor”.

      • I’m glad I live in west Texas. People are just more courteous. I don’t agree with nunz. White people here are still the most helpful and courteous and willing to help. Don’t seem like they hire Mexican men, probably because those willing to work can make better wages. Most of the short fatties have a hard time getting out of their own way.

        • Eight,

          You talking recent immigrants or born-heres?

          Been my experienc e, in NY and here- that the recent immigrants/true migrants are ‘the good ones’- but then again, you never see them working in stores or offices. They do the real [unskilled] work that most ‘Mercans won’t do anymore.

          The ones who have been here a while though….different story. They’re too often just like the white-trash/niggers/etc.- lazy; dysfunctional; opportunistic; seeking out easy jobs in retail and security.

          The best ones stay in their own country and with their own people, not wishing to sell their souls for the mythical streets paced with gold; welfare; and checks for just showing up.

          • Just speaking of Mexican descent people. They don’t try, and this goes on from generation to generation, to understand the written language which is amazing to me. I write resume’s for my friends who can’t really do it. They are competent in some ways but simply don’t try to be literate and hence, unable to do follow instructions. Imagine buying some product that has easily understandable instructions…..but you just can’t understand it. A few do, very damn few. And it’s mostly men. The women are just juvenile adults weighing twice what they should and think they’re sexy. I suppose they are to someone since they always seem to be pregnant or have just had a kid or both.

        • And then too, I guess it’s all relative. Mexicans among entitled snowflake incompetent millenials in NY look like gods; while among real men, may lose some of their lustre.

LEAVE A REPLY