There Is Zero Evidence of a Shoplifting ‘Epidemic’

Friendly reminder that if you see someone shoplifting food, no you fucking didn't.

Sure, but do you think the right wing nutjobs who get angry about things like this care about evidence?

They're glad of another excuse to validate their anger against "them", and even if later evidence comes out to suggest something never happened, their rage and hatred has by this point only grown deeper.

We're on a path to a return to bring openly run by these sorts of people, and eventually all that deep hatred of "them" will come pouring out once there's the power to act against them on a national scale.

Us decent people are, by our nature, not angry and hateful enough to do anything to stop this until it's far too late. History repeats itself over and over :-(

Way back in time I worked in a supermarket that first trialled self shopping. At the time this was done with special trolleys and boxes and hand scanners people took around the store to scan their own goods. The scheme survived about two years. The system was designed to gradually ramp up rescans by the checkout operators if prior scans had shown missing items. Certain people were clearly making a lot of mistakes (usually with expensive items like Whiskey) but many weren't. The increased waits for rescans for the people who often made such "errors" destroyed the value for everyone else and they became increasingly angry on what should have been near instant checkouts.

Its notable I think that almost all supermarkets today use self scanning despite all those earlier experiments showing that some people would use it to hide theft. This goes very much against the image of the pocket and exit that people have in their head. That was actually very uncommon and being a person who often greeted on the door it was my job to spot them. Most of the theft occurred through items that were smuggled through the checkout in some way.

I don't think self scanning is contributing to an increase in theft losses and the data shows its not. What I think it potentially contributes to is making it hard to identify the theft because there are less employees effectively as the security force. The decline in prosecutions is likely due to these changes that the supermarkets have adopted which they knew 25 years ago resulted in hidden theft.

If you see someone stealing food or baby stuff. It is a case of observational error, in reality you didn't see shit.

Questions for retailers (who probably won't see this, but whatever):

1. Do you have a security guard? Yes/No

a) If yes, and you're still getting shoplifters, hire better security. Problem solved.
b) No? Get a security guard. Problem solved.

1. Still here? Are you complaining about having to pay for a security guard? Yes/No

a) If No, why are you still here? Go hire that competent guard.
b) If Yes:

1. What's the cost of the shoplifting compared to having a security guard, taking wages, insurance and premiums into account? Less/More

a) If Less, stop complaining, you're getting a bargain.
b) More? Looks like hiring a security guard might be worth it after all.

Do I shoplift? Ha. I'm currently agoraphobic and don't leave the house. My arms aren't that long.

The last time I was in a physical store, I was of the opinion that as long as I can afford something I need, I'll pay for it. For things I merely want and can't justify the expense, I'll do without. (Sounds a bit like 3a.)

And the last time I nicked something (calm down, put your monocle back on) it was probably a sweet from the pick & mix at Morrisons when I was 10 or something.

Interesting analysis.

There’s pretty large evidence of a car theft epidemic tho tbh