I’m not sure but this is why I stop at $999 at each Target and find a new target.
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
90 points (93.3% liked)
No Stupid Questions
35764 readers
1010 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Thanks, Satan's Maggoty Cumfart, I know I can always count on you.
What the fuck did you just call me?
Reliable, I think.
Oh, okay.
Gamer
First thousand’s free. Yep, genius policy. (Which is why I doubt they do this).
I have heard this same story except with employers tracking employees who steal money. That one makes a lot more sense to me because they know the identity of the person involved.
Someone gonna tell me that the second I walk into Target their system is like “here comes Mr. Scara Bic, currently at $570.” ??
So, you're asking if there is a shoplifter whose small-dollar.spree was stopped by target, who was then arrested by the police, who then refused an initial plea offer from the DA, who was then charged by a grand jury, refused a pre-trial plea offer, went to trial, refused the pre-verdict plea offer, and was then found guilty?
Well, what about someone who hit 60k over 120 visits?
(edit: shortened url.)
Yes, finally. This is exactly the kind of case I'm looking for. Now I can dig into the details of the court documents.
But whyyy
It interests me.
We're the Internet people. Hehe
Jeez. In that case it wasn’t someone poor just trying to get by, she was running a business. She sold the merchandise.
Does anyone else feel like 3 years is way too lenient? That kind of greedy shit should send the person away for like a decade.
Lol, America has more legal slaves than it did before the civil war and has higher incarceration rate than anywhere and you want to lock someone up for a decade for non-violent property crime where the only victim is a multibillion dollar corporation that she stole less than 100k from.
https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/target Here's records of target having stolen 185 million dollars mostly from the American public, how long do you think anyone was in prison for that? Do you think any penalty there even meaningfully affected any executive or major shareholders life?
Target has their own crime lab. No joke.
I think those would be multiple misdemeanors not one felony.
That is just one of the things that seems very off to me about the claim.
It depends on the state, but they often can be combined to add up to a felony.
Jaywalk enough times and they'll get you for murder
If it’s consecutive incidents of the same transgression it think it’s seen as a spree, like one crime carried out in pieces. It makes sense from a legal reasoning point of view.
I got all of you thieves. I think I might look shady or at least like someone that is going to steal. It's prolly cause of my demeanor, behaviors, attire, and tattoos. I also act pretty weird when I'm by myself, so that's when it usually happens. On a few occasions when I felt like I was being followed, I have tested it by going in directions that another shopper likely wouldn't go in. Yep, I get followed. They send a stock person to the aisle to move shit around. Like the Publix macaroni really needed to be neatly replaced. Sometimes they make it evident that they are watching me at the self checkout scanner like a warning. They stand at the end. Why are they getting paid to stand there just as I showed up? Hmm. Now that I think about it, I have a good idea for a YT channel. I'd wear a discrete body camera every time I go shopping alone and post myself getting following or warned.
If you see me in the store, I got their attention, so you can go at all the good stuff. If there is a Target security person in here, from what I've heard people confess to me, the ones that are stealing are the ones you would least profile: middle-class light-skin women that appear aloof. They're only running half the shit thru the self checkout scanner. If you catch them, "Oops! I must have not been paying attention. Silly me." I'm not stealing shit. I know I have eyes on me everywhere I go.
Not for nuthin’ but I’d subscribe to that channel!
Right‽ I think it's a great idea. I am going to look into it. I need to figure out what kind of camera I can use, but also need to consider the ethics with it. I don't think people would appreciate me posting them on the internet without their consent, especially if it is with negative connotation. The public can go on a manhunt and hurt people's lives when they may have just been having a bad day, following orders, or their behaviors were misinterpreted. If anything, I'd likely blur out their faces to protect their identity.
Thanks for the encouragement 🙂
Most editing software can blur faces. Problem solved.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Target/comments/1aiualn/how_does_target_keep_track_of_people_stealing/
Someone who claims to be Target LP goes into some interesting detail about their loss prevention, and doesn't bring this up, in a context where it seems likely that they would have, if it were accurate.
I don’t think they want to publicize every aspect, since this would likely give a distasteful kind of vibe. Doesn’t mean they don’t do it. I’m not saying they do, but not including it in an exposé is not exactly conclusive that it’s false. Am I making sense?
Perfect sense. I don't think that's any kind of official expose by Target, only one person talking about their experience. But you're right that it's not conclusive one way or another.
Agreed.
It also might make sense that they don't want to give details about exactly when people are successfully prosecuted, so they don't give a new guideline of how to skirt around the rules.
I recall Valve has effectively acted the same way about anti-cheat; they tend not to go into detail about how some new release works, and will silently collect data on who they know to be cheaters for a long time.
You could try court records in various states, but Florida has some of the most complete and easily accessible court records online. Try Miami-Dade or Orange county records and start searching.
As infamous as Target's stoploss is, I figured people more plugged in would already know where to look.
In addition to the daily dot arricle, Business Insider also has one:
If you want to read a court case in detail, that will take some work. Maybe someone on Lemmy has found one.
Maybe someone on Lemmy has found one.
And so, my question.
I've seen the claim about Target online for years now, sometimes even with people in comments saying they know someone (or know someone who knows someone) that this happened to, but even after all this time no easily found court case. Nobody who ever says they have first hand knowledge ever comes back to say what case it is. It seems like this would be a slamdunk piece of content for one of the various YouTube channels that covers legal drama, but I haven't seen it. None of the news articles covering Target's Judge Dredd tier stoploss ever have an update linking to a case. I just want to see it.
Given the number of people this law firm has represented and the fact that for the most part they were not prosecuted for felony theft according to this article, my guess is that it happens sometimes but isn't standard practice.
my guess is that it happens sometimes
I just want to see one case.
I've been trying to Google it and haven't come up with anything. It's been literally article after article of "ex-target" employees making the claim. Might mean it's an old wives tale they spread around to each other. Might be that it actually does happen infrequently (probably to repeat offenders who don't get caught in the act but do get caught when footage is reviewed).
The internet can be extra silly sometimes lol