Jump to content

shoplifting nonsense

puzzled

By puzzled
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

Pearson

Pearson

Posted
Posted

Gimme Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> hadenuff Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Doesn't matter whether the person is Blue,

> Purple,

> > Green or any other pantone colour... They are

> > theives. Good on the shop-keeper. She has to

> > defend her small business & try & deter them.

> > But who on earth thinks it is Rascist???????

> > Probably some Uber Liberal type.

>

>

> Who on earth thinks that racist has a capital

> letter and is spelt 'Rascist'??????

> Or thinks that 'thieves' is spelt 'theives'??????

> And who on earth thinks that being liberal is an

> insult??????

> Hmmmm....



---------------------------------------------


Dude... have a drink, relax :)


We all understood the post which is the main thing.

It's not cool being Forum English Teacher :(

peterstorm1985

peterstorm1985

Posted
Posted

Alex K Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Let us hope that none of US has anything so

> shameful to hide. Yes, I mean Midlands origin.

> For Heaven's sake, what did you think I meant?


Midlands? Racist comment without doubt.

Gimme

Gimme

Posted
Posted

Pearson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Gimme Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > hadenuff Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Doesn't matter whether the person is Blue,

> > Purple,

> > > Green or any other pantone colour... They are

> > > theives. Good on the shop-keeper. She has to

> > > defend her small business & try & deter them.

> > > But who on earth thinks it is Rascist???????

> > > Probably some Uber Liberal type.

> >

> >

> > Who on earth thinks that racist has a capital

> > letter and is spelt 'Rascist'??????

> > Or thinks that 'thieves' is spelt

> 'theives'??????

> > And who on earth thinks that being liberal is

> an

> > insult??????

> > Hmmmm....

>

>

> ---------------------------------------------

>

> Dude... have a drink, relax :)

>

> We all understood the post which is the main

> thing.

> It's not cool being Forum English Teacher :(



Not sure it is that cool using the word 'dude' either these days... a little 1980's Midwest perhaps ;-)

ianr

ianr

Posted
Posted

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Home Bargains does it ...

>

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6041510/CCTV-images-of-shoplifters-shown-on-retail-chains-website.html

>

> http://www.tjmorris.co.uk/crimebusters/


Note that both these articles speak of 'suspected'. The only assertions I know of that any photographs displayed in LL were of shoplifters are those that have been made in this thread.

Rock N Roll Paddy

Rock N Roll Paddy

Posted
Posted

I've run a small business. It's hard enough trying to make ends meet without people making off with your stock. So some people will not use the shop again because of vigilanteism?


Sounds to me like some people would be happier if, instead of displaying a poster showing people making off with their stock, they had put a poster in the window saying "Welcome to Celestial. Payment is optional. Please feel free to help yourself if you'd rather."


Sigh!

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

Rock N Roll Paddy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've run a small business. It's hard enough

> trying to make ends meet without people making off

> with your stock. So some people will not use the

> shop again because of vigilanteism?


xxxxxxx


Yes I agree. What is the shop owner supposed to do, just shrug their shoulders and put up prices to cover the cost of the stock that's been lifted?


It's not as if they're shooting the people concerned :))

Ridgley

Ridgley

Posted
Posted

I think it is a good, idea to show shoplifters on display as JohnL pointed out there are many shops around the country that do this. I not sure if this reduces the rate of shoplifting but it does shame the individual or any relatives that possibly see it I am guessing.


Not sure what is racist about it though?

Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted

Seeing as presumably the only people effected by this are the theives, I don't see the problem.


The photos are a clear warning that if you steal, your photo will be put up. If you don't want your photo there, don't steal stuff.


If anyone is guilty of presenting a certain race in a negative light, it is the criminals themselves.

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seeing as presumably the only people effected by

> this are the theives, I don't see the problem.

>

you don't see a problem in publicly calling people theives when they (presumably) haven't been tried and convicted? is it for a shopkeeper to decide who is and isn't a thief?


(although, i wonder whether in fact the posters go so far as to brand people thieves so explicitly or whether they actually go for 'we wish to talk to' these people approach instead)


>

> If anyone is guilty of presenting a certain race

> in a negative light, it is the criminals

> themselves.


?

Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted
pk - you are correct, I don't have a problem with it. I am assuming the shopkeeper has enough basic intelligence to tell whether the person was shoplifting or not. If someone has been incorrectly accused, they can come forwards and take the appropriate action. Let's see if that happens.
Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Ridgley Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you saying, pK a shopkeeper is not intelligent

> enough to make a judgement? if you walk, into a

> shop and you stuff an item in your bag or on your

> person and run out the shop it stealing.


Only if the person is tried and convicted. If you accuse them publicly without them being found guilty by a court, you run the real risk of being sued.


Of course, you could put their picture up just say 'These people are banned from this shop'. But saying that it is because they are shoplifters would leave you open to legal action.

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

Ridgley Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you saying, pK a shopkeeper is not intelligent

> enough to make a judgement?


i am sure that some shopkeepers are, some aren't


some might have personal venedettas, some are probably criminals or fraudsters themselves (just like the population at large - there'll be some good egss and some wrong 'uns, some bright and some stupid ones). i certainly don't assume that because they're a shopkeeper they can always be trusted in every respect and should be entitled to brand others as criminals


in relation to the specific shop (and keeper) in questions - i've no personal experience

Twirly

Twirly

Posted
Posted

But according to the OP, this was done with the approval of the police. If that is true, they must be pretty sure that these people did shoplift. Presumably they don't actually know who they are, and so cannot go and arrest them or prosecute. If the accused shoplifters did come and complain, presumably the police would take appropriate action against them for shoplifting, so it's unlikely that they will come forward.


However, it would be inadvisable for anyone to do this without consulting the police first.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which bit don't you understand, pk? "Appropriate

> action" could be anything from going into the shop

> and asking for the photo to be taken down, through

> to full-on legal action.


... or going into the shop and nicking the photo, though the irony might be too much to bear.

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

cate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy, PK is very chippy and argumentative.

> She? obviously doesn't like people being described

> or pictured at all - see my post on Disgusting

> Litterer.


i don't think that it's right to describe people in detail and then label them criminal or disgusting lazy mares (for dropping a tissue when changing a baby, and then picking it up) without giving them a chance to respond (as would happen e.g. in court before you were labelled a criminal)


you never did answer my question as to why you felt it was necessary to describe the litterer in so much detail on that thread - care to answer now?

huncamunca

huncamunca

Posted
Posted

Twirly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But according to the OP, this was done with the

> approval of the police. If that is true, they must

> be pretty sure that these people did shoplift.

> Presumably they don't actually know who they are,

> and so cannot go and arrest them or prosecute. If

> the accused shoplifters did come and complain,

> presumably the police would take appropriate

> action against them for shoplifting, so it's

> unlikely that they will come forward.

>

> However, it would be inadvisable for anyone to do

> this without consulting the police first.



Nothing personal, but who would in their right mind ask the filth for legal advice ?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...