If showing a receipt and goods at stores such as Costco, Circuit City, Best Buy, etc reduces theft and thereby keeps prices lower - I have no problem with the policy. If this guys doesn't like the store policy, he can shop at other stores.

Why he refused to show an officer of the law his driver's license is beyond me. Paranoid perhaps?

I doubt it. Probably a young person testing how the law actually works, as opposed to how it's supposed to.

He wasn't driving. He doesn't need a driver's license. That part is kind of scary. But I doubt that that aspect of his conduct will ultimately result in any kind of criminal penalty.

"Why he refused to show an officer of the law his driver's license is beyond me."

Burk54, did you read the article? What ever happened to "There is no law"? Mr. Himmler is reequest-ing to zee your National I.D. card now zank you vary much!

As Ernest Hancock says, there are those who want to be left alone, and those who just won't leave them alone. Obviously Burk54 falls into the latter camp, like the other sheep.

Man I've always wanted to walk out of a store and refuse to show my receipt. They've got no right to stop you and you've got no duty to stop. Still, it's a hell of a lot easier to just show your damn receipt than to cause a ruckus.

Yep.

I read the article heckofajob, the decision to not cooperate with the law officer was confusing unless one is paranoid or has something to hide. At the time the officer asked for identification there was still a question of the contents of the bag.

It isn't a question of being sheep, but rather the guy was making a mountain out of a molehill. The trouble he had, and will be facing is all of his own doing...

@Burk54

It's the molehills that will get us in the end. It's all for national security, right? I mean you are either for Circut City or you are against them.

Why is it that people like you seem so easy to give up your rights in the name of "security"?

They ask to see inside your bag and for the receipt at Frys too. I refused once, just for fun. The guy at the door was kinda dumbfounded when I said "no". I just kept walking. I expected the gestapo to follow me outside, but nothing happened.

I think the CC employee was WAY out of line in this case. I mean getting in close with the car? He's lucky he didnt get run over.

As for the "national security" thing...I dunno. I mean, this stuff at the store is BS, but I agree with some of the things the Feds are doing. So I dunno where to draw the line.

I would disagree about Circuit City having the right to verify you aren't walking out the door with stolen items. I think they can. It's their house, you don't have to go there.

I'd have arrested him too. He decided to waste the time of the store, the police and his family by acting like an idiot. If you want to stand for something, stand for something that matters. This just makes you look like a supercilious little jerk.

I used to only my receipt at Frys when there wasn't a bottleneck at the exit, otherwise I'd just smile and say "no thank you".

Unless they have some reason to suspect you of shoplifting they will let you go by.

Then a couple months ago I watched their security guards take down a shoplifter in the parking lot. Some kid with some video games shoved into his baggy pants. He struggled and they let him have it (deservedly so).

Since then I just show them the receipt, bottleneck or not.

What's so hard about showing a receipt? For the vast majority of merchants it's simply about identifying possible shoplifters, and if there is enough evidence, prosecution of the shoplifter.

It really isn't some conspiracy and it isn't about giving away my rights.

"They ask to see inside your bag and for the receipt at Frys too. I refused once, just for fun. The guy at the door was kinda dumbfounded when I said "no". I just kept walking. I expected the gestapo to follow me outside, but nothing happened."

I tried the same thing, and got the same result. (Friends, they may thinks it's a movement!)

More seriously, it seems to me that this guy did not do anything wrong. He did not steal, and no one ever accused him of stealing.

They did accuse him of failing to let their exit guardian verify the receipt matched the contents of the bag... but the cashier packs the bag after scanning the items. Why is the exit check needed? (At CC's I've been to, the cashiers are clustered around the exit and there is essentially no merchandise stored between the cashiers and the exit.) In the fifteen steps from the cashier to the exit, do they imagine a shoplifter is going to transfer stolen merchandise from under his shirt into the bag?

Lastly, he appears to have been acting within the law to refuse to show ID to the policeman. He may have been rude to do so, and he certainly had a harder time because of it. But I think he is very much on the right track when he explains why he did this:

I am interested in living my life on strong principles and standing up for my rights as a consumer, a U.S. citizen and a human being. Allowing stores to inspect our bags at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates an atmosphere of obedience which is a dangerous thing. Allowing police officers to see our papers at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates a fear-of-authority atmosphere which can be all too easily abused.

"What's so hard about showing a receipt?"

Carol, have you ever seen one of these receipt-checkers examine both your bag/cart and the receipt in enough detail to detect a small stolen item? I think I've seen maybe twice that a receipt-checker actually read the receipt and checked my bag's contents against it. I'm pretty sure that I did not have more than five items on either occasion.

To use Mr. Schneier's phrase, this is security theater. It is an annoyance to honest folk, but probably not a serious obstacle to any but the most casual thief.

It is used as a tool to make sure that you were charged properly. More often than not, if there is a mistake, it is in the customer's favor. Helps cut down on cashier fraud also.

Showing the receipt when you leave is a condition precedent in allowing you to patronize their store.

The cop can ask you to show him identification. If you tell him that you won't do it because you don't have to, niener, niener, neiner, then you'll get it for not cooperating and/or interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duties.

To have a fruitful day one is better off just showing the receipt.

I resisted joining Costco for years back in the 80s because of the little indignity of being checked when you leave, but eventually relented. Then, early on in my Costco experience one of those door-checkers found a store error on my receipt, saving me both time and money, ever since which I don't mind it all nearly as much.

"Why is it that people like you seem so easy to give up your rights in the name of "security"?"

Why is it that people like you seem so easy to imagine this petty policy is "giving up your rights".

You have the right to not shop there.

So very sad, after reading the wllingness to give up rights, I find I'm in agreement that American's deserve Bush and a fascist government.

I've always been tempted to walk past the door checker at Fry's, but then I've had to return too many defective items there over the years. I shudder to think how difficult a time I might have returning an item if my receipt doesn't have their little highlighter tick on it.

I guess I could just add my own mark before attempting the return.

Oh and if you read the article, he complied with Ohio law in providing ID to the officer. He is not obligated to provide a photo ID, only to give the officer his name and, if asked, his address and DOB. He was in the right and the officer crossed the line.

i could care less about the receipt part of the story.

but i'm worried when i hear it's fine for a citizen to be drug away, fingerprinted and thrown in jail for failing to show identification when (illegally) demanded.

Jefferson said rights are not lost all at once--they are lost one at a time, starting with the smallest of matters.

Jeff: "It is used as a tool to make sure that you were charged properly. [...] Helps cut down on cashier fraud also."

Worthy goals, and I'd guess more credible reasons to have the policy.

But still, how often do you actually get your receipt examined closely enough to uncover a mistake? I almost never see the receipt-checkers anywhere look at them for long enough to count the items on it, let alone check the prices. (Maybe they're trained and experienced enough to be really good at it, but I wonder how much information they can really glean from the usual half-second glance.) Is it real protection, or just theatrics?

Ben: "You have the right to not shop there."

Sure do. Guess how long it's been since I've shopped at Fry's? Costco's the only place I'll put up with this... the rest usually lose my business. (And oddly, the Circuit City in Salem doesn't do this.)

"I am interested in living my life on strong principles and standing up for my rights as a consumer, a U.S. citizen and a human being. Allowing stores to inspect our bags at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates an atmosphere of obedience which is a dangerous thing. Allowing police officers to see our papers at will might seem like a trivial matter, but it creates a fear-of-authority atmosphere which can be all too easily abused."

Sounds like the kind of person I admire. If we had more people like him, we'd have fewer of these nonsensical laws for our "safety." God bless him.

What I just don't get is why Fry's, Wal-Mart, etc. don't STAPLE THE GODDAM RECEIPT to the top of the bag, like dime stores used to do, if they know they want to examine it at the door.

I've refused to have my bags examined before. Nothing happened.

But I think a friend of mine has the best idea. When stopped at the door, he drops his bags and invites the door person to go through his bags and find the receipt himself. They always refuse and tell him to do it, and he tells them that they're welcome to examine his receipt, but he's not going to help them.

So just what did he do wrong, Jack? Stand on principle?

I'm amazed at how many people here think this person deserved to get arrested for refusing to show his driver's license.

Someone above describes him as a young person who doesn't know the law. No, clearly he knew exactly what the law was and the officer did not.

The city case will get dropped and Circuit City will settle quietly for 10 grand or so.

It's too bad a law professor fails to see the value of defending one's legal rights. Sometimes people "look for trouble," jack. It's called civil disobedience (and this wasn't even "disobedient"--he was well within his legal rights!)

I'm hard pressed to think of a more trivial issue to get all "civilly disobedient" about. What in heaven's name did he expect the security guard and the cop to do -- suddenly become constitutional law scholars and make a ruling? They did their jobs, he'll get off the hook, they'll go right back to doing what they always do, and he'll have wasted a whole lot of his time. Next time they'll want his DNA -- and they'll probably get it, perfectly legally under the Bush Supreme Court, no doubt.

"I'm hard pressed to think of a more trivial issue to get all "civilly disobedient" about."

If there were more ordinary citizens engaging in civil disobedience about more weighty matters, I'd agree.

As it is, I figure every little bit helps.

"Showing the receipt when you leave is a condition precedent in allowing you to patronize their store."

No its not Zeb. Is that displayed on a sign anywhere in the store or explained at the register? "Sir, I can only take your money for this purchase if you understand that showing your receipt is required before you leave the premises."

More to the point, after you pay for the item, can the store require you to return it if you fail to show the receipt? Nope. Upon the store's acceptance of money, it is your proprety. If it was a condition precedent, the store could require you to return the item for a refund as a refusal would be a breach.

At most, the store can, upon failure to show a receipt, refuse to allow you back on the premises and charge you for trespass if you return.

The book you sheep need to read is The late great usa by jerome corsi-if you can read.By going over the 10 planks of the communist manifesto we already have 9 in place. You sheep enjoy being communists and don't even realize that you are communists. It makes me sick to look and listen to stupid and dumbed down people that don't know what the original constitution gave us. Law enforcement gods do not have a right to demand you to show your papers or id without probable cause. We have a right to video tape anyone in public including the public gods. I still call them what they are-civil servants. I am their employer the tax payer. What a bunch of slaves this country has become. I need my own talk show like Alex Jones-so go to infowars.com and learn something.

the man that was arrested at short circuit city need's to sue the cop and the store for the crime's they committed against him! the cop did not have probable cause to even ask for his national id card in the first place! i would have done the same as the falsely imprisoned customer gee aint it great being an american under communism.kc9geu is exactly right about everything he said we do live in 9 of the 10 planks of the communism manifesto this is fact i can back this up with facts. hell you cant even protest in many cities across the us now. i hate how dummed down american's truely are it makes me ashamed to be an american.