Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

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

> It's a fair comment. There's a serious risk when

> people touch shared food. Not everyone has good

> hygiene standards.


Yes there is. However hepatitis is not "rife" in south London and anyone who knows uncleglen's history knows the agenda he's pushing here. No evidence at all.

Another example of hijacking a thread. Back on topic what, I wonder, is the role of security staff in stores? To act as a deterrent or are they instructed to ignore these seemingly brazen steals with, presumably the costs factored into the prices of food or to go for easier targets - what would be the point? Very hard to understand.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20180730/281754155125191


Haven't shopkeepers been told to arrest shoplifters

themselves. Link above explains citizen arrest

procedure that can be used. I remember hearing police

May not attend if goods under a certain amount. I feel it was inevitable shopliftifting would become the norm, in connection and in the same way food banks have.

TE44 Wrote:

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

> https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20180730

> /281754155125191

>

> Haven't shopkeepers been told to arrest

> shoplifters

> themselves. Link above explains citizen arrest

> procedure that can be used. I remember hearing

> police

> May not attend if goods under a certain amount. I

> feel it was inevitable shopliftifting would become

> the norm, in connection and in the same way food

> banks have.


What if they then give a false name and/or address to security ?

TE44 Wrote:

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

I

> feel it was inevitable shopliftifting would become

> the norm, in connection and in the same way food

> banks have.



But people are not stealing things like bread. According to the above they are taking things like steak.


That is greed, not need.


I doubt most of it has anything to do with food banks.


It seems to be opportunist theft, as took place during the riots.


ETA: Opportunist in the sense that they can see they can steal without being caught.

Sue, i was not thinking of theft only witnessed in ED.

The reasons behind needing food banks, benefit delays,cuts etc, play a part in why many people are shop lifting.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/stealing-to-eat-foi-request-finds-the-poorest-in-society-continue-to-be-criminalised/11/05/amp/


Here's a link to a FOI question regarding people stealing to eat, who have been through the judicial system. I would imagine this has brought about the change in how thesse cases are being dealt with.

I would like to see the actual FOI question and full response.


The first person mentioned in the article you linked to had 245 previous convictions, btw. https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/serial-thief-jailed-for-stealing-steak-and-candles-from-belfast-supermarket-34378018.html. I doubt magistrates are generally keen on imprisoning people for minor offences. They also have the sentencing guidelines to adhere to.

Ianr, I wouldnt imagine magistrates are keen on imprisoning people in many of these cases hence why there is people being sent to food banks instead of being arrested, no charges being brought under a certain amount being stole. There have been numerous different suggestion about how these cases can be dealt with. As Sue says there will be oppertunist theft amongst cases of people who are genuinely hungry. You cannot just turn up at a food bank, there are independent food banks who are giving on a more individual level, where criteria is not so rigid.

cella Wrote:

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

> Another example of hijacking a thread. Back on

> topic what, I wonder, is the role of security

> staff in stores? To act as a deterrent or are they

> instructed to ignore these seemingly brazen steals

> with, presumably the costs factored into the

> prices of food or to go for easier targets - what

> would be the point? Very hard to understand.



Does anyone know?

TE44 Wrote:

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

As Sue says there

> will be oppertunist theft amongst cases of people

> who are genuinely hungry.



I didn't actually mean people who are genuinely hungry, though no doubt some shoplifting is done from desperation.


I meant chancers who see an opportunity to get something for free either because they know nobody will bother to challenge them or because they know the police will not prosecute.

cella Wrote:

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

> cella Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Another example of hijacking a thread. Back on

> > topic what, I wonder, is the role of security

> > staff in stores? To act as a deterrent or are

> they

> > instructed to ignore these seemingly brazen

> steals

> > with, presumably the costs factored into the

> > prices of food or to go for easier targets -

> what

> > would be the point? Very hard to understand.

>

>

> Does anyone know?


Not let in people who are banned for previous theft suspicion ?


Rather doorman like role to be honest that.

Sue, i understand what wou meant, there have always been people who have chanced shoplifting along with the chance if being imorisoned. I believe the social climate has brought about a more desperate, hungry kind of shoplifter. There have been deaths associated with benefit changes, i do nt want to go into individual cases of people who have died with nithing in there cupboards. This is also why food banks have become the norm as have suicides and terminally ill people dying in fear they may lose there house. I suppose it depends on how you see connections, whether that be from a distance or close up.

Some people may be motivated by hunger, but that alone does not make moral people steal. There are alternatives to theft, food banks being one.


What you do see is opportunistic theft - people who see an opportunity to get something for free for their own financial gain, be it cost avoidance or resell.


Police are not interested, security are interested to a point and shop staff are instructued to not interfere but they can use physical presence to deter (i.e. I can see you). Once off the premises, the thief is gone.


When people don't have money, this is an easy option.


At least it's not violent. The impact for most people is the costs being covered by higher prices.



The sad fact is, it's a reflection of society where people just don't give a hoot. The poor security guard in Primark who people just watched and filmed and laughed. There is a sense of entitlement people have and - serious to god - shoplifting from Primark? FFS.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-45512468


Reading this link above it appears to be law, anyone caught stealing goods under ?200, if charged, does not have to appear in court but can plead by letter. By home office statistics shoplifting is up by 23%, it does

not show an understanding of the problem as it is linked with a need to make cuts with policing, as has been said by other posters.

There was an excellent drama documentary back in the late 90s or early 2000?s set up North can? remember the name but was set on an estate up North where people were living in what could be described as abject poverty and was called something like Sharon goes shopping, think it was on Channel 4 at a time when they were a little less mainstream. Can anyone remember it? it was not unlike a Ken Loach film

I can't remember that, but I grew up on an estate up north where almost everyone knew the local shoplifters, their families and their backgrounds. It wasn't out the norm to get a knock on your door, especially this time of year, asking if you wanted to order anything. They were your neighbours, friends and part of the community. It may seem easy to see things right or wrong but many people felt they would not manage, whether that was food, clothes or christmas presents. Not everyone needed them but i never heard anyone speak bad of them or report it. I remember

The local shop refusing to employ anyone from the estate, when they did they wouldnt charge the full price or give food for free cause they knew they were skint. It's not as simple as right or wrong all the time.

A friend of mine, was given a voucher for the food bank, Peckham, he was hospitalised before using this, this coincided with his benefits being cut. On leaving

hospital he went to food bank waited a very long time, until being told his voucher had ran out. He had friends who helped, if he hadn't , yes I believe it would be understandable if he stole some food, as i've said it's not as simple as right or wrong.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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