Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 64

Thread: Will you boycott walmart now?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , Utah, USA
    Posts
    13

    Will you boycott walmart now?

    Here's an interesting article about four walmart employee's fired for disarming a thief.
    http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14319284

    In the article is the stores policy for brandishing a weapon.

    So, to put this into my perspective, if you are a shoplifter, shop at walmart. They are not suppose to confront you in case of injury or liability.
    I can only assume by the wording of the policy, the four people questioning the thief should have opened the door from the office and allowed the thief to take the laptop and walk out into the crowd of shoppers at the store.
    Basically the employee's of walmart are required to ignore any and all mischief.

    Ahh, I remember now why I don't shop at walmart anymore.

  2. #2
    State Researcher Kevin Jensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santaquin, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,313
    So according to the policy, if I enter the restroom at walmart with an item visibly in my hand, but come out of the restroom and said item is no longer visible, then I am not considered to be a suspected shoplifter. I am also no to be accused of theft, according to the policy.

    Interesting.
    "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." Robert A. Heinlein

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Absolutely disgraceful that Walmart would actually enforce such a policy, to such an extent, in such a case as this. I can almost understand why they would have such a policy given the way lawyers and HR types get companies paranoid about any possible liability issue. An official slap on the wrist with a private wink, nod, and "good job" would have been sufficient I think even in the face of such a policy. But to actually fire good employees? Beyond the pale.

    But my question is, which stores have a materially different policy? Is the fact that Smith's or Walgreens or Costco has not yet fired someone for this because of different policy, or just because the situation hasn't arisen in those stores yet?

    It's like the Pizza Hut thing. Which pizza stores don't prohibit their drivers from carrying a self-defense weapon? Do we refuse all delivered pizza because all pizza stores that deliver have the same policy?

    It's like trying to find a business that respects the Sabbath. I shop at Macey's grocery store whenever possible to reward them for being closed on Sunday and allowing their employees not to work on the Sabbath (most commonly observed by Christians). But I can no longer effectively "boycott" stores that do conduct business on Sunday. There are just not enough stores that don't to entirely avoid those that do.

    So it is with anti-gun policies. Find me a large grocery, household goods, department type store that has a materially better policy than Walmart and I'll patronize it....assuming they are not grossly more expensive or provide even worse service that Walmart does. But until then, why should I give business to one anti-gun store over another anti-gun store just because this one got some bad press today?

    Or, maybe I'm way off base. Maybe visibly punishing Walmart would result in a change of heart and policy as it did with Blockbuster video a few years back. Of course, Blockbuster was hurting and needed every customer. Not sure Walmart is in that same boat.

    Charles

  4. #4
    Regular Member jpm84092's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,068

    Thumbs down Taking The Word Of A Felon With A Gun - What Nonsense!

    I sort of understand the Wal-Mart policy and the disciplinary action. What we know to be fact is:

    1) Bad guy was armed and the handgun was loaded.
    2) Bad guy threatened to shoot one or more employees if they did not let him go.
    3) Employees did not let him go, but brought him to the ground and disarmed him (Thank God the handgun did not discharge in the process due to the bad guy pressing the trigger).
    4) The decision to challenge the bad guy was a "judgment call" (or perhaps just an instinctive reaction) by the employees.

    So, yes, since on the surface it appears that the threat to the employees was contingent on the bad guy being allowed to leave, I could see the store taking the position that their policy regarding deadly force had been violated. I think it is Chicken-Sh*t, but I believe they were sending a message to other employees. That message: give the bad guy what he wants - do not put your own life at risk.

    On the flip side of this coin, an employee's life was already at risk.

    It is apparent that Wal-Mart did not give due consideration to the direct threat of deadly force to one of their employees. Under the circumstances, there is no way to know if the bad guy would not have shot all 4 to eliminate future witnesses who might testify against him had the employees not acted as rapidly as they did. The Wal-Mart executives and lawyers who made the decision to discipline were not in the room with the armed bad guy. I wonder if the Wal-Mart chief counsel would think differently if it were his ribs that the pistol was thrust into and his fellow employees intervened to help.

    It comes down to this. Four (4) Wal-Mart employees did not take the word of a man who they knew to be a thief and a Bad Guy With A Gun to leave them unharmed if they just let him go. I suggest that a more effective campaign might be to send a letter to Wal Mart managers detailing this situation and asking them if they would believe the bad guy and follow the policy - or - do what they could to insure that they could kiss their wife and kids later that night.

    Just saying......
    My cats support the Second Amendment. NRA Life Member, NRA Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, & Personal Protection - NRA Certified Range Safety Officer, Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor.
    "Permission Slips" from Utah, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. _ Verily, thou shalt not fiddle with thine firearm whilst in the bathroom stall, lest thine spouse seek condolences from thine friends.

  5. #5
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    I havent shopped at WalMart in any sort of willing manner for many years..

    Unfortunately, them being the biggest store in my area, if I cannot get it at BiMart, and I need it now. I've had to go there twice this past year.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    343
    Against policy or not, the employees did the right thing because they are still alive!!

    They are free to find other jobs, maybe with a company that values thier judgement this time.

    What is some of your tag lines, judged by 12 instead of carried by 6?

  7. #7
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    I believe these policies were enacted in response to the 1998 slaying of two Walmart employees who followed a shoplifting suspect in vehicle. The incident started at a Walmart that I used to shop at.

    http://www.dmcantor.com/news-article...e-killing.html

  8. #8
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Jensen View Post
    So according to the policy, if I enter the restroom at walmart with an item visibly in my hand, but come out of the restroom and said item is no longer visible, then I am not considered to be a suspected shoplifter. I am also no to be accused of theft, according to the policy.

    Interesting.
    You can't be accused of shoplifting until you exit the store.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by sharkey View Post
    You can't be accused of shoplifting until you exit the store.
    In some states there is a charge of "willful concealment"; basically, hiding merchandise just as if you intended to shoplift, but it applies before leaving the store.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Murray, ,
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    In some states there is a charge of "willful concealment"; basically, hiding merchandise just as if you intended to shoplift, but it applies before leaving the store.
    +1

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    It's like trying to find a business that respects the Sabbath. I shop at Macey's grocery store whenever possible to reward them for being closed on Sunday and allowing their employees not to work on the Sabbath (most commonly observed by Christians). But I can no longer effectively "boycott" stores that do conduct business on Sunday. There are just not enough stores that don't to entirely avoid those that do.
    Charles
    The Sabbath is a Jewish law, not necessarily a law for modern Christians. Colossians 2:16-17 (KJV) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

    By boycotting those businesses, could we be judging people improperly based on their respect of the Sabbath day? I personally believe withholding money from them is a form of judgement. Many families today must work on Sunday (or Saturday the true Sabbath) to make ends meet, make a profit on the weekend, catch up in the family business, etc. They should feel no guilt for doing so, and should not be judged for doing so.

    Legalism is a dangerous path to take. We must never forget the freedom we have in Christ. Now that we have Christ we can rest in him. He is our Sabbath.

    Edit: This being said... you should not be judged either for your choice in observing portions of the Sabbath. Other Christians should not have a problem with your personal convictions.
    Last edited by combatcarry; 02-12-2011 at 12:27 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    10
    Utah has a very high LDS population and the leadership of the church has asked that we avoid work or activity that would require others to work on the sabbath. For this group of Christians that makes the sabbath relevant.

    Sent from my Droid

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    The Sabbath is a Jewish law, not necessarily a law for modern Christians. .....

    Edit: This being said... you should not be judged either for your choice in observing portions of the Sabbath. Other Christians should not have a problem with your personal convictions.
    If you or any other Christian chooses to hold such beliefs regarding the Sabbath that is entirely your choice. But it is entirely off topic to this thread and this forumn. My use of it in an example was clearly not intended to raise any debates about doctrine or differences in religious beliefs, but merely to cite an example with which I believe most of the audience here are familiar. Many Christian sects do observe the Sabbath, as do many Jews. And personal desires not to encourage or reward businesses that choose to do business on that day is very familiar to most adult in this nation.

    I have not and will not attack nor belittle your religious beliefs, combat. I once again ask that you refrain from any inclinations to nit-pick over what you might see as failings in my religious beliefs. Coming from an ex-mormon, any such criticism on your part is likely to be seen as untoward, at least.

    Thank you.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 02-13-2011 at 04:17 PM.

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,619
    Quote Originally Posted by sharkey View Post
    You can't be accused of shoplifting until you exit the store.
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    In some states there is a charge of "willful concealment"; basically, hiding merchandise just as if you intended to shoplift, but it applies before leaving the store.
    There are other applications. In Virginia for example:

    SHOPLIFTING
    Shoplifting is a commonly charged offense in Virginia. It can be either Petit Larceny of Grand Larceny. Virginia Code Section 18.2-103 separates a Felony from a Misdemeanor based on the value of the merchandise involved, with shoplifting of items valued $200.00 or more constituting a Felony offense. Shoplifting is the taking merchandise from a store without permission and with the intention of making the merchandise your own without having paid the full purchase price; or simply by defrauding the owner of the value of the goods or merchandise – which means paying less for it than the merchant was asking without the merchant’s permission. Thus, shoplifting can be either walking out with unpaid merchandise, changing price tags or stickers on merchandise, or paying a lesser price for merchandise without negotiating with the owner.

    Specifically, the Virginia Code criminalizes the following acts as shoplifting:

    (1) purposely hiding, concealing or taking merchandise in a store,

    (2) altering the price tag or other price marking on merchandise,

    (3) transferring items from one container to another.

    It is important to understand that simply concealing or hiding merchandise while you are still in the store is enough for a shoplifting conviction in Virginia because it is considered direct evidence of your intent to steal the merchandise or defraud the owner of the sticker price value. The Court explained in the famous case of Welch v. Commonwealth that as long as the item is in the possession or personal control of an unauthorized person, who acts in a manner that is inconsistent with an actual possible purchaser, he can be guilty of larceny without actually leaving the premises.

    http://medvinlaw.com/alexandria-virg...charge-appeal/
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    ...And personal desires not to encourage or reward businesses that choose to do business on that day is very familiar to most adult in this nation.... I once again ask that you refrain from any inclinations to nit-pick over what you might see as failings in my religious beliefs. Coming from an ex-mormon, any such criticism on your part is likely to be seen as untoward, at least.

    Thank you.

    Charles
    Sorry you were again offended. I wasn't nitpicking the Mormons. My comment applied to many faiths.

    Here are the Old Testament rules that apply to the Sabbath, its pretty tough to obey and involves much more than not shopping on Sunday (or actually Saturday). http://www.teshuvah.com/articles/shabbat/sabbath1.htm

    I get it... Only Mormons in good standing can talk about religious issues on the Utah open carry forum. I will go stand in the corner now and keep my mouth shut like a good ex-Mormon.
    Last edited by combatcarry; 02-13-2011 at 07:02 PM.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    In answer to the titular question:

    NO.

    I will continue to shop where I get good value for my money and where my right to carry is respected. I carry in Wal-Mart so that I don't have to care if the employees are prohibited from taking self-defense actions. It is their choice to take the job or not, so, if they do, they are merely doing something we all have the right to do, and do quite regularly: enter into contracts whereby, for consideration, we agree to subordinate certain of our rights to the desires of the person providing the consideration.

  17. #17
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    Here are the Old Testament rules that apply to the Sabbath, its pretty tough to obey and involves much more than not shopping on Sunday (or actually Saturday). http://www.teshuvah.com/articles/shabbat/sabbath1.htm
    Again, off topic for this forumn and this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    I get it... Only Mormons in good standing can talk about religious issues on the Utah open carry forum. I will go stand in the corner now and keep my mouth shut like a good ex-Mormon.
    Actually, nobody should be talking much about religion on this forumn. And anyone who claims to be mature enough to carry around a deadly weapon in public should immediately understand the difference between what you are doing and an example of the difficulty of finding stores to patronize in lieu of stores that have some policy we don't like for whatever reason. If you honestly cannot see and understand the difference in your post about religion and my post obliquely referencing widespread religious beliefs as an example of or corollary to the subject at hand, then yes, with all due respect, you should avoid the subject altogether. But like too many "ex" anythings, you seem to have a hard time not talking about whatever it is you chose to leave.

    Look, I don't mean to be rude or demanding. But I'm getting sick and tired of the number of persons who seem to think that the LDS Church, its members, and its beliefs are the last topics open to every form of criticism and attack. I read it daily in the user comments of the daily media. I don't need to tolerate it, in any form, here. I come here to discuss RKBA.

    If I want to get into it over religious beliefs, I'll go find a forumn for that. Ditto if i want to engage in the long since tiresome shouting matches over the politics of homosexuality. Or whether Obama is a natural born citizen or not. Or UFOs or immigration.

    So I'm going to be pretty quick and blunt about calling out such off topic, needlessly and uselessly divisive topics when I see them here. I used to just try to ignore such things. But it has become obvious that ignoring those who can't stay on topic, or even who insist on getting in their little jabs where they can, just leads to even more little jabs.

    I was not harsh with you in my first response and simply asked you not to nit pick religious differences. In response to that polite, civil request, you over-react as if you've been sent to your room. Do you really not see the disproportionality in that?

    Great. YOU have a different view of Sabbath observance than do I. Did that difference prevent you, for so much as one moment, from fully and completely understanding the analogy I was drawing? If it did, you should have simply asked for clarification. If not, then your post did NOTHING to further the discussion on the topic at hand and served merely to highlight where we have differences of opinion. And how exactly does that benefit us in the least when those opinions have nothing to do with RKBA?

    Think man think. What is your reason for posting?

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 02-13-2011 at 09:17 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by sharkey View Post
    You can't be accused of shoplifting until you exit the store.
    Ok, I'm wrong on more than one count. You can be accused of anything, anytime.

    I read my state's law and they don't mention leaving the premises at all, I guess a good lawyer could argue it though.

    The most troubling thing I saw was this:

    ARS 13-1805

    C. A merchant, or a merchant's agent or employee, with reasonable cause, may detain on the premises in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time any person who is suspected of shoplifting as prescribed in subsection A of this section for questioning or summoning a law enforcement officer.

    D. Reasonable cause is a defense to a civil or criminal action against a peace officer, a merchant or an agent or employee of the merchant for false arrest, false or unlawful imprisonment or wrongful detention.
    I never allow any store to look at my receipt when I exit. I have even asked if they plan on unlawfully detaining me. I don't think it would be "reasonable" to detain me for refusing to provide my receipt but "reasonable" is always subject to interpretation.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post

    Actually, nobody should be talking much about religion on this forumn.

    .... I come here to discuss RKBA. ....

    Think man think. What is your reason for posting?

    Charles
    You often post Mormon fodder to this forum. I don't know why? If you don't want anyone discussing religion on a gun forum why do you bring it up? Whenever you post anything on a public forum it is open to further discussion, different opinions, etc even from Mormon apostates.

    My reason for posting... I disagree with your view on the Sabbath because it doesn't align with the teachings of the New Testament. Mormons love to claim Christianity yet diverge on not only the side issues of Christianity, but the MAJOR core issues. Your statement that most Christians today observe the Sabbath is ignorant. Do some research on that if you don't believe me. If you choose to you can start here: http://www.gospeloutreach.net/sabbath.html

    I was very clear to say I respected your belief and the Sabbath should not be an issue to judge you on if you choose to observe certain portions of it (then you blew it out of proportion).

    I could go on... but I won't. I was ready to drop the issue, but you asked why I posted what I did.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Wal-Mart staff may never accuse you of shoplifting, doing so can get the employee fired. The reason for this is that they do not want employees randomly accusing people of theft, especially in situations where it is unwarranted. It's bad business and it's a potential liability.

    Most associates are not permitted to confront a suspected shoplifter, but are expected to approach them. As in, walk up to the individual, introduce yourself and ask if they need some assistance. They do not have to if they feel it is too dangerous. In any case, they are expected to promptly inform management or security(AP). Management and AP may confront shoplifters and AP may apprehend. But if the shoplifter is armed, they are expected to allow them to walk.

    As far as Wal-Mart is concerned, you are not shoplifting until you leave the store.

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    My reason for posting... I disagree with your view on the Sabbath because it doesn't align with the teachings of the New Testament. Mormons love to claim Christianity yet diverge on not only the side issues of Christianity, but the MAJOR core issues.
    So you freely admit that your point in posting was NOT to enlarge any understanding of gun issues, but specifically to nitpick at LDS religious beliefs?

    This despite your earlier claim that you were not nit picking at LDS religious beliefs?

    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    Your statement that most Christians today observe the Sabbath is ignorant.
    Frankly, that is irrelevant even if true (and I don't concede it is). Furthermore, my statement was that most Christians observe the Sabbath on Sunday (rather than say Saturday). That was made in a failed attempt to avoid those who feel a need to point out that Saturday is the Biblical Sabbath.

    Unless there was something offensive in what I posted there was no need to nit pick at differences in religious beliefs. I specifically nodded to the fact that not everyone observes the Sabbath on Sunday. That some of us do and prefer to avoid patronizing businesses that are open that day was used merely as an example of how difficult it is to avoid businesses that have policies with which a person might disagree.

    Had I chosen to instead use the example of how few stores cover up magazine covers that some people may believe are too revealing or otherwise inappropriate for children to be looking at as they wait in line would you have felt a burning urge to engage in some debate about what is or is not pornographic or immodest?

    Quote Originally Posted by combatcarry View Post
    I could go on... but I won't. I was ready to drop the issue, but you asked why I posted what I did.
    And I think in this most recent response, you've been far more honest and open than you were in your initial response where you claimed not to have been nit-picking differences in religious beliefs.

    I'm going to ask you again: was there any confusion or question in your mind, for even a moment, about the point I was attempting to make with my example? Did you think I was attempting to push, advocate, or proselyte any particular religious view or practice by using that example? Did you think that your post was going to do anything at all to increase understanding of the RKBA issues?

    I tell you in all sincerity and honesty, that my purpose in using the example of businesses open on Sunday was to merely give an example, ANY example I thought would not be controversial, of how difficult it is to avoid businesses with policies we don't like. It is not just gun policies, it is what days they are open, it is what merchandise they carry, it is how items are displayed, it is how they treat their employees.

    And if you'll go read again, my initial response to you was VERY low key. Here is the total of it. If you honestly think this was "overboard" I think you need to reevaluate your "Christian" beliefs regarding being offended too easily.

    If you or any other Christian chooses to hold such beliefs regarding the Sabbath that is entirely your choice. But it is entirely off topic to this thread and this forumn. My use of it in an example was clearly not intended to raise any debates about doctrine or differences in religious beliefs, but merely to cite an example with which I believe most of the audience here are familiar. Many Christian sects do observe the Sabbath, as do many Jews. And personal desires not to encourage or reward businesses that choose to do business on that day is very familiar to most adult in this nation.

    I have not and will not attack nor belittle your religious beliefs, combat. I once again ask that you refrain from any inclinations to nit-pick over what you might see as failings in my religious beliefs. Coming from an ex-mormon, any such criticism on your part is likely to be seen as untoward, at least.

    Thank you.
    Charles

  22. #22
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241
    Not now and not later!
    While I do agree it’s BS for Walmart to fire them for allegedly defending their life I also have to wonder did they have full opportunity for catch-and-release. How can I be sure they couldn’t have just opened the door, and de-escalated, stilling having jobs?
    How many possibilities?
    ·Alive and pissed.
    ·Alive, pissed and sue.
    ·If they let the gunman go as asked, praised?
    ·If the let the gunman go as asked, shot or killed as the gunman flees, they or family would sue walmart for not protecting them?
    ·If they let the gunman go as asked, fleeing gunman shoots store patron in his escape, fired for not protecting, sue by victims?
    · You add the other possibilities.
    Bottom line! Why would I stop shopping at a store that’s affordable, cheep #6 steel shot, 9MM, and a ton of other foods and merchandise? I swear if I boycotted every store someone else had a personal problem with I would need my own farm, manufacturing plant’s, gun store, car dealership, retail and warehouse chain on-and –on… But really! The four should count their lucky stars, and sue even though I don’t believe they have a chance in hell, as they accepted the policy as terms of employment. And finally do as someone else suggested find an employer that suits their fancy.

  23. #23
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    If the store policy is to check your receipt when you exit and it is not done consistently (every customer checked) then you may have a case. If every customer is checked, you may refuse and walk out and they may (will) call a cop and have him detain you until your receipt is checked. Remember, if they check everyone expect to get a cop on you. They, the business, is engaged in theft prevention.

    Just because Costco does not check very well does not mean that your case could be made to a LEO.
    I've never once allowed anyone at Walmart to check my receipt when I leave, and have yet to see the police about it. When asked "Can I check your receipt?" my reply is "No thanks." and I keep walking.

  24. #24
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,619
    Quote Originally Posted by buster81 View Post
    I've never once allowed anyone at Walmart to check my receipt when I leave, and have yet to see the police about it. When asked "Can I check your receipt?" my reply is "No thanks." and I keep walking.
    Once purchased the merchandise and the receipt are my private/personal property.

    If they want to accuse me of shop lifting, they are welcome to be my guest - they may be assured they will learn how that works out.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by buster81 View Post
    I've never once allowed anyone at Walmart to check my receipt when I leave, and have yet to see the police about it. When asked "Can I check your receipt?" my reply is "No thanks." and I keep walking.
    There is nothing they can do except file a report.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •