If you think the Circuit City threads are silly, don't read this

[proud2BlibKansan]

Please don't click on this thread if you are disgusted by the Circuit City story.

If you are curious and have no idea what I am talking about, here is the story: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?At=023277&From=News

But if you think that guy was just borrowing trouble or stirring up shit, then you need to move on to other more important threads. If you think it is okay for a store to treat customers like thieves by demanding to see their receipts as they leave the store, in spite of the fact that there are probably numerous security cameras in the store and it is also most likely impossible to exit the store without passing through the cashiers' lanes, then you need to be reading a different thread.

If you think it is okay for a police officer to arrest a man for the crime of refusing to show his ID, then you really don't need to be reading this. If it wouldn't bother you to have to show your ID to any cop who asks you, even after you call the police for help, then go on to one of the other threads.

If you have an ID and always carry it with you and don't mind producing it to prove your identity, move along. If you aren't like my mother who didn't even have an ID, and don't believe anyone in the USA in 2007 has no ID and no way of getting one, then there are surely other threads that will seem more interesting to you.

If you think it is okay to be treated like a citizen in a country with a dictator as a leader, then read something else. Go shopping, watch American Idol and don't ever leave home without your ID. Maybe you could even buy one of those tags and wear it around your neck so you can always produce it for the nice police officers who ask.

And be sure to read some of those other more important threads here. Cause this one is just too silly.

[liberal N proud]

1. In theory, If a store keeps treating customers like shit, soon they will not have any

But with these mega stores like Circuit City and others you can name if you like. They will never run out of customers.

[jayfish]

12. Not Only That, With More And More...

stores resorting to this practice; What happens to the "don't shop there if you don't like it" argument when there is no where else to shop?

Jay

[lligrd]

114. The Ones Out My Way Are Pretty Empty

Only time I have ever gone to one was when I needed something in a hurry and didn't want to wait in line.

[asthmaticeog]

2. Point for point:

"If you think it is okay for a store to treat customers like thieves by demanding to see their receipts as they leave the store, in spite of the fact that there are probably numerous security cameras in the store and it is also most likely impossible to exit the store without passing through the cashiers' lanes, then you need to be reading a different thread."

You speak of rights very often in these threads. Do businesses not have the right to verify that goods leaving their stores are doing so legitimately?



"If you think it is okay for a police officer to arrest a man for the crime of refusing to show his ID, then you really don't need to be reading this. If it wouldn't bother you to have to show your ID to any cop who asks you, even after you call the police for help, then go on to one of the other threads."

If you engage the police, you should absolutely be prepared to verify your identity. Identifying the principals involved in an alleged crime is essential to investigating it, and hindering an investigation is itself a crime.



"If you have an ID and always carry it with you and don't mind producing it to prove your identity, move along. If you aren't like my mother who didn't even have an ID, and don't believe anyone in the USA in 2007 has no ID and no way of getting one, then there are surely other threads that will seem more interesting to you."

Being asked to identify yourself in the course of a police investigation that you yourself had instigated is hardly the same as the SS asking random people for their papers in the streets and spiriting away the people unfortunate enough to be without them. And conflating those things trivializes those who survived that regime (like my father, since we're apparently bringing our families into this, though I don't get why) and who live in states like that today. This line of argument is not only irrelevant, it's monumentally insulting.



"If you think it is okay to be treated like a citizen in a country with a dictator as a leader, then read something else. Go shopping, watch American Idol and don't ever leave home without your ID. Maybe you could even buy one of those tags and wear it around your neck so you can always produce it for the nice police officers who ask."

There are so many logical fallacies in that line of argument it's hard to know where to begin. There's certainly a straw man construction and a slippery-slope argument, neither of which constitutes anything approaching valid rational discourse and can often, though of course not always, serve as a red flag that the person resorting to their use has no valid argument to begin with.



"And be sure to read some of those other more important threads here. Cause this one is just too silly."

So does the "lib" in "proud2Blib" stand for "libertarian," or what? You sure have been obsessing over this story.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jayfish]

14. I Don't Care If It Was The Ghost Of Howard Hughes.

Being treated like shite is being treated like shite regardless of your socio-economic standing.

Jay

[proud2BlibKansan]

37. If indeed he is wealthy, it matters not to me

This is about how he was treated by a store and the police. Wealth doesn't enter into it.

[notadmblnd]

46. I didn't see that. could you post the link?

I saw one where that reported he was wealthy. But I didn't see any threads of people's attitudes about the situation changing. Any link with evidence of this that you could provide would be greatly appreciated.

[DancingBear]

30. She is "obsessing" because she knows where it leads

You, however, seem perfectly content with the way things are, and use some of the most banal "arguments" to prove your points.

Or lack thereof.

This one is my favorite: "If you engage the police"

You mean, like, if you are exercising your constitutional rights and the police arrest you for disturbing the peace because Georgie told them to? THAT kind of "engaging"? Gee, I can sure see why you should be absolutely prepared to identify yourself. Wouldn't want to get a jolt of that nasty old taser if we don't "cooperate" now, would we?

BTW, the "lib" stands not for libertarian, but for something you would never understand.

Brown shirts on line two - probably for you.

Something about wiretapping...

[asthmaticeog]

97. Good god, you're way around the bend.

"You mean, like, if you are exercising your constitutional rights and the police arrest you for disturbing the peace because Georgie told them to? THAT kind of 'engaging'?"

No, not that kind of engaging. That's not even in the ballpark of what happened here.

Calling my arguments banal without refuting them accomplishes jack. Calling me a brownshirt shows that you're a hysteric.

[iamthebandfanman]

133. i think the police action was wrong

but as far as the stores right to check receipts and bags....

sorry they can. if you dont like it, do as others suggested and dont shop there.

they may do as they please in their store and if you refuse then they can deny you the goods or service or right to shop there if they please.


they are not treading on your rights by doing so. if you think right to privacy applies when you are buying things from them and the thing they want to look at is something you bought from them then you are wrong because technically they already know what you bought.. they just want to confirm it.


ill say again what i said in another thread.

save yourself the hassle and buy over the internet.
nobody will look in your bag then for sure... but they will probably double check the box before they send it out.

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. 1. Businesses have the right to do whatever they want

However, a customer also has the right to shop elsewhere and to refuse to succumb to draconian 'show us your receipt' rules.

2. So I guess my mother who had no ID (and whose struggle to register to vote after her state passed a horrific voter ID law I documented here over and over just last year) had no right to EVER call the police? After all, she had no way to "prove" her identity!! Therefore, by your logic, she also has no right to expect police protection. Is that what you are saying? BTW, just who has the insulting argument here?

3. Yes I am VERY concerned about this story. Sorry that you are one of the few 'progressives' here who don't see the big picture behind this 'SHOW ME YOUR ID OR GET ARRESTED' story.

4. As a longtime DUer, I refuse to explain my screen name. That is just downright insulting.

[jpgray]

60. That's just a string of misrepresentations

Can't you do better? Provide the quotes where asthmaticeog said any of those things. He didn't.

[proud2BlibKansan]

61. His post is there right above mine

You claim misrepresentation. So you get to back up your claim. I stand by my post.

[jpgray]

68. Okay

Him:

If you engage the police, you should absolutely be prepared to verify your identity. Identifying the principals involved in an alleged crime is essential to investigating it, and hindering an investigation is itself a crime.

You:

So I guess my mother who had no ID (and whose struggle to register to vote after her state passed a horrific voter ID law I documented here over and over just last year) had no right to EVER call the police? After all, she had no way to "prove" her identity!! Therefore, by your logic, she also has no right to expect police protection. Is that what you are saying? BTW, just who has the insulting argument here?

Verifying your identity is not limited to producing an ID. And by no ID you mean what? No social security card, no credit cards, no -anything-? Even in those cases cops verify identity, just through different means. Pretending the law to prevent hindering an investigation includes denying ID-less people the right to call the police or even their right to police protection is just a bald misrepresentation of what the above poster said.

SHOW ME YOUR ID OR GET ARRESTED

Again this is a vast oversimplification. The guy engaged in suspicious behavior by refusing to allow a receipt check, so of course the manager is thinking "shoplifter." How many noble defenders of trivial civil liberty infringements does the manager see? Probably none. How many shoplifters trying to dodge receipt check does he see? Lots. Again with the cop, it's the same suspicion. Refusing to identify himself and refusing to cooperate with the cop he himself called makes zero sense, and is just going to create suspicion. The cop didn't arrest him for not having ID, but for being uncooperative and behaving suspiciously. It wasn't a good call on the cop's part, but it's certainly understandable, and is the kind of call cops make and have made at almost all times in this country's history. In other words it's just not the cause celebre people are making it out to be--there are plenty of egregious examples that are indicative of our -current- erosion of civil liberties. This one just isn't.

[proud2BlibKansan]

73. My mother had no identification

If she had any of the documents you mention, she would have had identification. So I ask you once again - does that mean she had no right to call the police if she needed help? That is certainly what you are implying.

[jpgray]

74. Did your ma have a home? A job? A bank account? A birth certificate?

But it's pointless to argue this, because ID is not necessary to verify identity. 911 doesn't ask for a driver's license number when you call. The police, however, WILL ask you for your name. If you don't have an ID, they don't care unless you are driving, so long as you identify yourself. If you have an ID, refuse to provide it and are belligerent and uncooperative, you're going to get a suspicious and frustrated cop who might be miffed at you for disrupting the investigation you yourself asked them to undertake to no purpose, and that scenario is hardly unique to these times. It's happened for decades in many countries.

[proud2BlibKansan]

75. Yes she had a home. Paid cash for it.

No she was retired. Yes she had a bank account. No she did not have a birth certificate. She was born at home.

[Hangingon]

85. A light bill, utility bill or property tax receipt is sufficient for id...

when you call thye police for a problem. In most places one of these will even get you a library card.

[proud2BlibKansan]

87. So you need to carry your utility bills with you

More PAPERS!! LOL

[Hangingon]

88. You are misrepresenting my comment.

In your post you said...

"If she had any of the documents you mention, she would have had identification. So I ask you once again - does that mean she had no right to call the police if she needed help? That is certainly what you are implying."

I responded that to call police for a problem, a light bill, utility bill or a property tax receipt is sufficient for identification. I never stated that these needed to be carried on your person.

It seems to me you are overreaching for controversy.

[proud2BlibKansan]

89. The documents needed to OBTAIN identification

Sorry I didn't make that clear.

[Hangingon]

91. I went to Mo. DMV site...

http://dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/idrequirements.pdf

I don't suppose that it is easy to get a non driver Mo. ID card, but it doesn't look impossible. From 2005 onward, it appears that there are documents - SSAN, Medicare - that can be used. A lot of people born before WWII were born at home and were not given a birth certificate.

[proud2BlibKansan]

92. We spent 6 months on this last year

She couldn't get an ID.

[Hangingon]

93. Sorry. Glad I don't live in Missouri.

[proud2BlibKansan]

94. My mom lived in Kansas for nearly 80 years

Then we moved her to Missouri. Worst mistake we ever made. She could at least vote when she lived in Kansas.

[Hangingon]

104. Well then, glad I don't still live in Kansas.

My daughter and her family are still there. I expect they always will be. They love it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Then by your logic I should be detained EVERY TIME

I leave Fryes or the local electronics store

You see, I also refuse to submit to a VOLUNTARY SEARCH

Key words here

VOLUNTARY

They have a right to ask

I have an absolute right to say no

If they detain me, WITHOUT MEETING THE BARE MINIMUM OF PROBABLE CAUSE they've crossed a line

Indicentally refusal to agree to a VOLUNTARY search does not MEET probable cause

[jpgray]

79. Don't shop at the store. Just as if you're uncomfortable about airport searches, don't fly

I see airport searches as far more unreasonable and invasive--do you support those?

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Two different animals

Airport Searches are MANDATED by the Federal Government.

These searches DO NOT have the force of law behind them

They ARE VOLUNTARY

What part of probable cause are you having a problem comprehending?

[jpgray]

81. So a far more invasive, no-probable-cause search is okay if there's a law behind it

Great. What a morally consistent defender of the Constitution! This douchebag was detained for suspicion of theft, pissed off the officer he himself called by being uncooperative, and created this whole situation all by his lonesome. Had he cooperated with the manager or the cop and explained his position (assuming he's even being honest in the blog post, which you take as a given I see), nothing unreasonable would have occurred.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. Didn't say that

What I said is that you are comparing apples and oranges

The airport search, though more invasive, has been mandated by law

To fight that one I need to change the law... and refusing to at the airport is not the place to change that law.

I also need to proove to a body of legislators that the law is not doing crap to protect me when flying.

But refusing to submit is not going to get me anywhere, except a night at your local county hotel

This one, on the other hand, I can do something IMMEDIATELY

By the way... once again... since he was acting like a thieve for refusing to submit to a volunatary search, by this logic of yours, me and many others who refuse to submit to this VOLUNARY search... are also behaving like thieves... FYI the search at the airport is NOT voluntary.

By the way... if you were in Mexico (Napoleonic Law System) I'd advise you to show your receipt. There, you are PRESUMED GUILTY and the standards of probable cause are different

Don't live by those standards... by advising people to just show the fucking receipt, since otherwise they are behaving like criminals, you have bought into the napoleonic standard of law

[asthmaticeog]

98. 1. Our subject had the right to shop elsewhere. He didn't.

2. As jpgray argued extensively in this thread, that's just ridiculous. You're putting words in my mouth. There are many, many ways to verify one's identity.

3. Funny, you're screaming about fascism, and yet I see you're the one applying ideological purity tests. While we're pn #3, you still haven't answered for your original fallacious arguments.

4. Of *course* it was insulting.

[Xipe Totec]

108. 1. Our subject had the right to leave the premises to shop elsewhere. They stopped him

That's unlawful imprisonment.

[asthmaticeog]

109. Go back a re-read the self-professed victim's own version of events.

Shouldn't be hard, as it's the only one that's been published yet, AFAIK.

Then come back and tell me why your post isn't comically stupid.

[Xipe Totec]

110. I read it before I posted

Don't assume what you don't know.

Your comment regarding his "right to shop elsewhere" is off the mark, and has nothing to do with the issue; he wasn't trying to get into the store when he was stopped, he was trying to leave.

I will grant you the courtesy of not characterizing your remarks with the derrogatory language you chose to characterize mine.

There is nothing comical about being held against your will.

There is nothing comical about being arrested.

So explain to me why you think my post is "comically stupid".

[tabasco]

51. Do businesses not have the right to verify that goods leaving their stores are doing so legitimately

If they have no reason to believe a crime has been committed, no, they don't.

Why can't you get this through your head.

They invite you on their property. If they make it a condition to be searched to come upon the property, they might have the right.

But they do not have the right to search you at will after unconditionally inviting you on the premises.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

[TahitiNut]

59. Some folks seem deliberately obtuse regarding the key phrase "probable cause."

What's VERY disturbing is that it's an absolutely essential discriminant that delineates legitimate law enforcemtn from a police state. It's an essential idea even in habeas corpus. Far more disturbing than those who'd not choose to deny such a search it that they're apparently so ignorant of the underlying legal principle that they open ALL of us up to abridgements of essential civil liberties.

[asthmaticeog]

99. The "invitation" to their premeses is certainly NOT unconditional.

That right there destroys your whole argument. Is that "difficult to understand?"

[tabasco]

102. Where is the warning that you are liable to at- will search when entering a Circuit City?

I have been to Circuit City many times and have not seen this warning.

I'll be waiting.

You were saying something about my argument? It's not only my argument, it is the existing law in every state.

[asthmaticeog]

105. It doesn't need to be posted.

You go to private property, you tacitly agree to obey the property owner's rules, period. Got a question about 'em, ask. Like saying "mind if I smoke" in someone's house before you light up.

And anyway, you've changed the subject in quite an amusing way. You argued that the invitation to enter the store's premises was "unconditional." It is not. You failed to show how it is. Which is because it isn't, but I hesitate to say so as you'll almost certainly post another smugged-up irrelevancy.

[tabasco]

106. That's hogwash.

You know nothing about the law. You do not consent to be searched when you are an invitee on private property.

As an invitee, you are invited under conditions made aware to you. If Circuit City does not make you aware that you are subject to at-will searches, they do not have the right to do so.

And before you make another uninformed retort, it is an implied condition that invitees do not commit crimes. But it is not implied that a customer is subject to a search on no suspicion.

[asthmaticeog]

107. A reciept check is not a BCS.

You're making a fool of yourself.

[progressoid]

112. Hey...

Stop making sense.

(Apologies to David Byrne)




p.s. good post.

[ProudDad]

123. I don't carry ID when I walk around town

"you should absolutely be prepared to verify your identity"

fuck that shit.

there's no law against walking around without ID...yet...

[asthmaticeog]

125. You shouldn't have to produce ID when you go to an age-restricted business?

When you purchase an age-restricted product? It's OK for shopkeepers to demand ID, but someone who calls the police to ask for an investigation of an alleged crime in which he himself is the professed victim can refuse to identify himself? AGAIN, FOR THE ZILLIONTH GOD DAMN TIME, THIS IS NOT THE FUCKING SAME THING AS SS OFFICERS DEMANDING PAPERS FROM RANDOM PASSERSBY.

[ProudDad]

126. Sure it is

He DID identify himself. He told the cop his name. He told him that he was the one who called to report a crime.

That's all the cop needed to know. "Yep, I called you and my name is <....> and this is what happened".

This cop admitted later that he assumed that the man who was reporting the assault must have been GUILTY of something since he was complaining about the managers of a BUSINESS. Here in the Amerikan Empire of Corporate Capitalism (U.S.E.C.C.), business ALWAYS trumps individuals and the presumption of guilt is paramount.

This cop could have asked all of the assembled persons what happened; the man, the circuit city folk, the relatives, any bystanders who may have seen something and all without having to ask for ANYONE'S ID cards. That's the way it used to be done when I was younger. That would be the reasonable thing since there was no hint of or danger of any violent action (beyond the Circuit City employee's battery on Mr. Righi).

The cop didn't have to get ID in order to ascertain the facts of the situation. The COP initiated the difficulties with his mindless adherence to police state "procedures" and instant show of force when his unnecessary desires were resisted.


AGAIN, FOR THE ZILLIONTH GOD DAMN TIME, WHY ARE YOU SO FUCKING EAGER TO GIVE UP YOUR RIGHTS TO THE FUCKING POLICE STATE????

[asthmaticeog]

131. Once you spell "America" with a K, you're off my list of people whose opinions count.

But if you spell it with THREE of 'em, I'll picture you in a straitjacket every time I see one of your posts. :thumbsup:

[ProudDad]

132. Having been the object of Cointelpro harassment in the past

among other tender mercies from the Amerikan Gestapo and the Amerikan criminal-injustice system...

I have earned the right to spell Amerika with a "K", any time I like...


As for three "K"s, well check it out

the AmeriKKKan Congress' Capital Police in action:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2985577

[ProudDad]

127. I don't even need to show ID

to get senior discounts...

red herring...

[fasttense]

3. Interesting.

I didn't know you got arrested.

I read some of your comments on another thread (the beginning of an argument that I got bored with) but I didn't hang around for the details. I always wondered what would happen if I told those lurking security inspectors, at every door in low-priced marts, to go jump in the lake. I always felt it was borderline search and seizure without a warrant or probable cause. I mean unless the alarm goes off, what probable cause do they have to search you? But I'm a retired Navy officer and I'm use to random searches. I just assumed they had signs posted saying that if you enter, you are consenting to a search, which is what they do at most naval bases.

Please keep us posted.

[proud2BlibKansan]

43. It's not my story

It happened to some guy in Ohio, not me.

[madokie]

4. I have to ask, why oh why the wedge issues

don't the neo'CONS give us enough of them so that we don't have to do it to ourselves. I'll just steal a line from one of our fellow DU'ers here, peace and low stress :hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

44. I don't see it as a wedge issue at all

Gay marriage is a wedge issue. Terry Schiavo was a wedge issue.

This is about the loss of personal freedoms under the bush regime and the increasing draconian rules that regulate our daily lives - and the acceptance of these rules by 'progressives'. This one really hit a nerve with me because my own mother had no ID for the last several years of her life.

[Hangingon]

64. I don't think receipt screening started with the Bush Admin.

As for the need for an ID being a draconian rule seems absird. For decades I have been asked for an ID to cash a check, buy beer (sadly not for the last few years) and for lots of other minor things. I'm sorry for your mother's problem, but life without an ID would be difficult to imagine. I think this issue has passed us by.

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. My mom lived a rich and full life without an ID

And so do many many other people. While helping her register to vote last year, I learned quite a bit about this ID issue. Not only elderly and not only poor people do not have IDs. Many handicapped people and other people who don't drive don't have identification. It is estimated that in many large cities with public transportation there are tens of thousands of people with no legal identification.

And with plans to implant RFD devices in IDs, this issue has really not passed us by.

[Hangingon]

86. Where do I find out about these RFD plans?

I have see microchips in IDs. The new military ID has a chip and it is very useful. Don't know that I would support the idea of this for everyone. What would it be for? Who would pay for it? Sounds like a red herring to me.

[proud2BlibKansan]

95. There are a couple states that are mandating them in drivers licenses

I think one of them is Washington?

[ProudDad]

128. Cashing a check and buying beer

are arguably reasonable times for an ID to be requested as proof of age or identity. The person can then decide to not show ID and not cash the check or buy the beer.

In this case, there was NO reasonable need for the cop to ask for the ID of a citizen reporting a crime perpetrated against his person by the Circuit City employees.

The problem is that the creeping police statism of both right-wings of the Big Business Party (Dem and repuke) have instituted these instrusive, unnecessary "procedures" that cops and the other Gestapo of the Empire mindlessly follow.

This is a substantially different breed of cat. I'm old enough to remember that it wasn't this way in my youth and to have watched the erosion of our rights and privileges under the Constitution accelerate in the last 40 years or so.

What happened to Mr. Righi is a very important and telling symptom of the slide toward fascism occurring here in the belly of the Beast.

[BlueJazz]

5. I think the most Hilarious, ironic thing about "Checking your Receipt"....

...is the fact that if I go into Circuit City and palm (and steal) something like a flashdrive, I can walk right out...providing no one saw me.

If I pay for the flashdrive, I get stopped and have to show "My Papers".

:rofl:

[TahitiNut]

24. Bravo ... someone else who sees the 'Through The Looking Glass' insanity.

Walk out without purchasing anything and nobody asks to see a receipt - or the goods hidden under their jacket. But their CUSTOMERS are asked to prove they're not criminals. So, the 'theory' here is to profile customers only. It's a fascinating exercise in authoritarianism - indoctrination has become banal.

[Swamp Rat]

96. "indoctrination has become banal"

That's it in a TahitiNutShell.

[Demit]

6. Best explication of the whole story here:

"An adult man and his adult sister were invited to spend Labor Day weekend with their father, his second wife, and their half sibling children from the second marriage.

Upon arrival, the man was informed that it was one of the childrens' birthdays.

Not having dealt with the pain of his parents divorce and feeling he was suckered into celebrating the birthday of a child from that resented second marriage, he generated a crisis in order to make the little girl cry while becoming a "martyr" in the act of buying her a present.

He succeeded in making her cry and in making her birthday all about him.

Also in the process, he supported corporate America and forced labor by buying a Chinese manufactured Disney media product.

There are several DU threads scolding him endlessly for making two children hostages to his passive aggressive acting out, and for supporting a corporate empire founded by a racist eugenicist.

He is now collecting money for his trouble, despite being a successful entrepreneur."


That was from a thread on Thursday started by someone who didn't know what the hooha was all about. Best post ever.

[snappyturtle]

9. I read that post too. Who was it now who wrote it?...Dr.Phil? n/t

[Demit]

31. Nope, it was an astute DUer who was able to read between the lines.

And to see, from the details the guy felt compelled to put into his story (including an entire family of six piling into the car to go buy ingredients for a food dish?) just how self-serving the whole story was. I don't know if the DUer saw the guy's links to the other publicity he's gotten in the past, but all of it together just screams 'Look at MEEE! Pay attention to MEEEEE!'

[snappyturtle]

36. Number one--

I was being facetious. Number two--for you to pick this out of the account makes me think you're the one to think divorced/re-mixed families is a problem. You know nothing of their personal relationships other than the fact they rode together to shop....probably just a fun outing. Number three...I don't see a lot of support here for your "analysis" of the situation.

[Demit]

45. That's a reach, to accuse me of thinking remixed families are a problem.

I looked at the details the guy insisted on including in his account of his confrontation by store representatives. They weren't germane. What they did do was highlight how he made himself the center of attention in the middle of a family reunion on the very day of his little half-sister's birthday because of his decision to dramatize his 'principles'.

Who on earth considers going to the grocery store such a fun outing that six people crowd into a car to do it? And speaking of principles, now that I think of it, there being four people in that back seat and two seat belts, what principle is operating there? I'm telling you, the story as told by this guy has suspicious holes in it.

[snappyturtle]

7. I think what needs to be emphasized is the overall implications

of this situation, which is what I think you're alluding to.

I do not feel obliged to the store for it to discover checker errors by these inspections and I do not like the implication that I may have stolen items. With all this is mind, I think ANY search, without probable cause, is an invasion of my privacy.* Rest assured if this search tactic is to curb stealing and it subsequent loss to the store, it has to be offset by the wages paid to the searcher. I think it would be interesting how fruitful these searches are.....does it pay? I wonder.
If it does pay, why don't stores advertize this loud and clear how much cost is held down through these maneuvers? THEN, at least, it might not seem so invasive.


I think it's an intimidation technique to warn customers that stores are "series" about shop lifting. It is definitely aimed at the customer; why not the checker?


*This goes for airport searches too. Until the government searches everything that is put on an airplane and secures the luggage loading areas, I feel like these personal searches(a pseudo attempt) are implemented to assure us that we are safe, is a laughable fiasco. I do think it is a good technique to accustom us to searches, to make us more sheeple like.

[WinkyDink]

8. I shop, watch "American Idol", carry ID, and STILL don't think CC is okay!!

The one and only time this happened to me (a Wal-Mart), I was seriously taken aback! I kept saying, "I'm not stealing!"
I didn't know this was some stores' SOP.
But I didn't like how I felt.

[Dorian Gray]

119. Gosh...

Here in New York City, there are loads of rules for stores like these. Anytime I enter into a Circuit City, Best Buy, Home Depot, Costco, Target, Macy's, etc.... there is a recipt checker. I don't even think twice about it.

One thing that did surprise me is that during the school year, you have to show ID to get into the store before 3:00 p.m. They have rules that if you are under 18, you can't come into the store before school hours end. (I guess lots of playing hookey!) There were a bunch of kids trying to get on a Martin Luther King day last year, and the receipt checker/ID checker wouldn't let a bunch of kids in the store. I said to him that it was a school holiday, and he said that it didn't matter. They'd have to wait until three. (I think it was two in the afternoon.) If they had refused to show their ID, I'm sure they would have met with the same resistance.

[Zodiak]

11. Even though I agree with you, Proud2BLib

I think this OP is flame-bait and picking at a newly-formed scab.

As a community, the over-arching issue of Libertarian vs. Authoritarian should be addressed because this story sure did enhance the dividing line between these two schools of thought. I believe that is the heart of matters, but it gets lost with all of the strawmen and ad hominems ("go back to watching American Idol, Good German", "you guys are childish for not wanting to show your receipt")

I notice that those that tend to defend the actions of Democrats in recent news also are on CC's side in this story. There is an inherent trust of authority there. This is a tendency, though, and not a hard and fast rule.

Those that tend to not trust the Democrats because of recent capitultions tend to be on the side of this Michael fellow on principle, as well. Here is an inherent distrust of authority.

This same dividing line has been the source if innumerable flame wars on DU, and little of these wars have resulting in any mutual understanding or any consensus thought. Why? Because the libertarian/authoritarian divide on DU goes to our core beings, and we resort to underhanded tactics to defend these core beliefs, effectively stifling debate.

[John Q. Citizen]

20. Great analysis. Your post sums up the core of the debates on both sides of the

divide.

[Demit]

34. No, there are those of us who don't trust the motives or the actions of the storyteller.

I don't like Circuit City. I am wary of authority for authority's sake. I'm not sure I trust most of the Democrats in Congress these days. Maybe if this story had unfolded differently I would have been inclined to sympathize with the guy. But there are things in his story that lead me to believe he orchestrated and manipulated the whole event for attention. I would DEARLY love to hear what he left out. Because how he narrates events it isn't quite logical.

[marions ghost]

40. I disagree Zodiak...

your analysis sounds good in theory--but not when you break it down. I do agree that some protection of "core beliefs" is going on. However I object to your categorization-- I don't see it as a Libertarian/Authoritarian dichotomy at DU.

How can this be a debate between 'Libertarian VS Authoritarian?'

This is not a freeper website right? We do not have very many people around here who kowtow to authority, do we? Not very many people around here who would agree with unreasonable search and seizure, who just love the idea of a Police State? Are there many here who aren't smart enough to see that non-cooperation is sometimes necessary?

This is the fallacy behind automatically assuming that everyone who sees another way to handle this particular situation is supporting a fascist state. It does NOT mean that you "trust the government" (or anything about trust). It does NOT mean that you are on the side of corporations such as Circuit City. That's just really bizarre black & white thinking.

This Circuit City thing is a good discussion though, because it gets down to what methods you use to fight loss of individual rights and what's really effective. It's obvious that a lot of people want to see changes, but is this the right way to go about it? Does it work?

So what core beliefs ARE being protected in this heated debate? I really don't think it's an us vs. them situation. It's another arbitrary divide that can be used to whip up people who are basically all on the same side. We live in a society that thrives on conflict though, so it's what gets attention.

What I think we have at DU is just a lot of progressives/liberals of different stripes expressing their extreme frustration at our collective impotence in the face of abuses of power on every level.

[progressoid]

116. Sorry, I too have to disagree except with this part:

"I think this OP is flame-bait and picking at a newly-formed scab."

[benEzra]

130. Exactly.

As a community, the over-arching issue of Libertarian vs. Authoritarian should be addressed because this story sure did enhance the dividing line between these two schools of thought. I believe that is the heart of matters, but it gets lost with all of the strawmen and ad hominems ("go back to watching American Idol, Good German", "you guys are childish for not wanting to show your receipt")

I notice that those that tend to defend the actions of Democrats in recent news also are on CC's side in this story. There is an inherent trust of authority there. This is a tendency, though, and not a hard and fast rule.

Those that tend to not trust the Democrats because of recent capitultions tend to be on the side of this Michael fellow on principle, as well. Here is an inherent distrust of authority.

This same dividing line has been the source if innumerable flame wars on DU, and little of these wars have resulting in any mutual understanding or any consensus thought. Why? Because the libertarian/authoritarian divide on DU goes to our core beings, and we resort to underhanded tactics to defend these core beliefs, effectively stifling debate.

Exactly.

This divide also crops up quite a bit on the gun issue, IMHO.

[Hangingon]

13. I find it unbelievable that so many people went off the end on this.

Is it a sign of what is happening on DU? There are many important issues to talk about. If you don't like store policies, don't shop there. Most are "corporate America" any way - WalMart, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. As to producing ID, I don't personally feel the invasion. I had to show ID most of my working life. I think airport searches are essential. I don't want to get on a plane with people who refuse to be searched - I would assume they have something to hide. There are a lot of places I think people should show ID in order to obtain entry - schools. The OP and all the off shoots wasted a lot of bandwidth and produced a few "hero" stories I would have expected to find on the freeper site.

[John Q. Citizen]

23. So do you believe there should be a law that requires everyone have and carry an ID?

My kids attend school, and thay have never needed an ID to obtain entry.

Do your kids have to produce ID to get into their school? Did you?

Do you feel safer knowing people boarding planes are searched, yet the baggage put onto planes isn't searched?

One person's wasted bandwidth is another persons salient comment. Do you feel you are better able to determine what is wasted bandwidth than anybody else? If so, what qualifies you to be a better judge than anyone else?

Just what do you expect to find on DU, and what do you expect to find on Freeper sites?

[dsc]

26. Schools are starting to consider ID's

I am required to wear mine as a teacher and there is talk of making students do so as well. The only reasons we don't require it now are logistical and cost ones not moral ones.

[John Q. Citizen]

29. Yes, I recall ducking and covering back in the early sixties. Many schools

considered and adopted that plan, including mine.

It was intended to keep us safe. And the cost was minimal.

How difficult would it be to forge your Teacher ID? And if someone did, would that person then be able to gain access to instant enhanced credibility?

People adopt all sorts of schemes to enhance their security. But that doesn't mean that their security is necessarily enhanced.

Just something to think about.

[AwakeAtLast]

32. That is my experience, too.

:hi:

[Hangingon]

58. My wife was required to use an ID card key

the last place she taught. It was a special ed school. In other places she taught, she was required to stop any adult in the building who did not display a ID.

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. I don't have a problem with that

I am a special ed teacher too and part of our job requires us to keep our kids safe while they are at school. So yes, I don't object to wearing an ID and asking strangers in the halls who they are.

[progressoid]

118. What? Really?!

You don't have a problem with that?

Can't you see the potential for invasion of privacy and erosion of civil rights from this?

Sure, they (the man) say it's to protect the kiddies.
But, consider this: Schools register their employees and tag them. State keeps a data base of these employees and their numbers. Republican Governor of State realizes that most school employees are Democrats. Said Governor uses this data base to some house keeping (voter caging, IRS audits, spying, etc).

See? This is how fascism gains a footing. People rolling over. People deluding themselves into thinking "it's for good of the kids". Wake up, you're enabling the MAN!

[ekelly]

113. My son had to wear an ID

(visible at all times) at his public high school here in northeast Texas, (and the school charged $5 for it). It is required of all students at the school. There were lots of ridiculous rules at this school.

My son now attends a charter school, where he is actually learning something, and is treated like the individual, free-thinker that he is.

[Hangingon]

57. I don't believe everyone should have to carry an ID...

If you don't and you don't get to enter somewhere or you have a problem with law enforcement, you should be prepared to live with it.

I did not have to carry an ID and my kids didn't have to have ID to enter school but it was an earlier time. My 10 year old granddaughter has to carrry a military ID but doesn't have to show it to enter school -only to enter the base or housing area.

Yes I feel safer having people searched to enter an aircraft that I am traveling on. I wish therte were more stringent searches or cargo, luggage and mail or aircraft.

One person's salient comments are another person's BS. Live wioth it.

I expected to find rational people - they used to be here. Now I see people wishing for a draft, war on Iran and going bonkers about life in todays world. That is what I expected to find or right wing boards.

[John Q. Citizen]

72. I'm not sure I understand you.

Why would one have a problem with law enforcement if there is no law requiring people to possess and carry an ID? Is it their job to enforce non-laws?

Five minutes ago was an earlier time also. Do you imagine that a school ID makes people more secure? How hard would it be to forge one? Who would check to see if one were forged?

Is the illusion of security what's important to you? Because that is often the casewith humans.

So then your opinion isn't superior to other's opinions? I can live with that. In fact, as I recall, you were the one having problems with others opinions, not me. So I guess you are learning to live with it. That's a good thing, in my opnion.

I think your expectations are what the problem is. This is a quasi-public board with a wide number of varying opinions. You are just going to have to learn to live with your expectations not always being met, I guess.

[Hangingon]

83. Well let see if this can be explained

We encounter law enforcement for a lot of reasons - not just because we are stopped for an ID check. I was once stopped near Waco because Crime Stoppers ran a story about a killer in Maryland and my car then had a Virginia plate. I showed my license and it was over. I guess I should have cited my constitutional rights and said I will not show you my ID.

Yep 5 minutes is a long time ago especially on DU. And yes I do in fact believe that IDs make schools safer. It is an opinion shared by a growning number of school districts. Can they be forged? Yes, so can money. School staff and administration would check. They should be trained to spot a forgery. Liquor store employees have to face this issue all the time. Most are probably less educated that a teacher. There is no perfect solution, but not trying just isn't satisfactory.

I don't believe in the illusion of security. I believe in trying to be secure.

I never claimed my opinions were superior. That must be your inference. I do not have to agree with the all or any of the opinions stated here. That was my message and it is MY right to say so if I choose to speak. I have learned to live with the opinions of others even though it is sometimes bothersome. I find it irritating when someone chooses to assert their "rights" when they are ahead of me in airport security.

[John Q. Citizen]

121. what is an "ID Check?" Is there a law that requires a person who isn't driving

a motor vehicle to posses an ID to be checked? Please tell me where I can find this law. You were operating a motor vehicle and the law states you need a license in possession. But what law states that a person walking or bicycling, or a passenger in a car is required to carry ID?

How much are you willing to pay in taxes so a six year old can have their school ID checked? If they forget it, who is going to supervise that child outside the school? Or do they have to show it to the bus driver to get on the bus?

I believe school IDs are a stupid idea, for a number of reasons. Cost, necessity, and practicality all come to mind. How long do you imagine it would take top have all students in a day pass security? Let face it, the real danger faced in our schools today is minuscule compared to driving to the store and back. Let's get real here. How many kids who are killed or seriously injured at school every year would be spared by carrying an ID? Got a number? Or are you just into the Nazi Germany preoccupation with showing your papers. Until you can quantify the benefits of school ID's then it's just an illusion that makes you feel better. You need to at least come up with the problem and how a school ID system would address that problem. So far you haven't address either. You instead have come up with a "solution" that neither explains what it solves or how it solves anything.

You complained about people posting to threads about the guy who didn't want to show his receipt and merchandise to the bag checker at Circuit City. You claimed it was somehow wrong or bad to post to those threads opinions that didn't agree with yours. When was the last time you saw anyone claim to have a right not to go through airport security to board a plane? My bet is never. You just made that up.

[TahitiNut]

25. Yep. Sounds like a corollary to "America: Love It Or Leave It"

"If you don't like store policies, don't shop there."

Yep. If you don't like Bush, don't vote for him. (But please shut up and don't aggravate folks with criticism.)
If you don't like how gays are treated, don't Act Up and inconvenience others. (Just stay in the closet.)

There will ALWAYS be those who trivialize any act of conscience. Any!

I again say that I celebrate the acts of defiance, challenging authority, even if I'd probably not choose to invest my time and effort in protesting that particular issue myself. I regard such acts of defiance as essential to a Democracy and refuse to trivialize another person's choice of issues.

[proud2BlibKansan]

47. But not everyone has an ID

or the ability to easily get one.

[pennylane100]

15. I do not shop at Circuit City but Fry's Electronics has the same policy.,

I always ignore the people posted at the exit to check you receipt and walk right out. I have read that legally you are not required to show the receipt. They have never stopped me yet.

However I did have a discussion with my son-in-law about it, he felt that it was OK for the store to conduct illegal searches and to make life easier I should just show the receipt. However I think it is a dangerous precedent to give up a right to make life easier for corporate america, they already have too much power.

[TahitiNut]

27. Same here ... since 1983, or shortly thereafter when Fry's adopted that practice.

Dozens upon dozens of times in the 15 years I lived in Silicon Valley ... I merely said "No thanks!"

[AAARRRGGGHHH]

117. Your way is the solution ...

How is this at all a problem? The way you handle the situation is the answer.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. OK, I didn't read it, but I still think that...

anyone who reads only that self-serving, self-promoting asshole's side of the story and believes it without question is a flaming idiot.

and,

of all of the problems in this world, having someone check my receipt at the door is way down on the bottom of the list and not normally worth even thinking about, much less complaining about.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. So it is okay that he was arrested?

Remember, he was arrested for not showing ID; the arrest wasn't because he refused to show his receipt.

[TreasonousBastard]

67. Sez who? Him? Read up on Terry searches and talk to...

a real lawyer who knows about such things.

Then get back to us about our rights.

[skygazer]

71. A Terry search is a patdown search for weapons

No more. In fact, several cases have thrown out illegal Terry searches that went beyond the narrow parameters set for them. I fail to see what it has to do with this.

[TreasonousBastard]

120. Actually, my understanding of a a Terry stop is...

any time you are stopped to "investigate possible suspicious activity." It could end up in a search.

That "suspicious activity" is pretty much whatever the cop says it is. Sure, sometimes it ends up as bad news for the cop, but it's usually bad news for the stoppee. And a stoppee that rather loudly explains to the cop how to do his job is probably in for even more bad news.

In the case of this Righi asshole, the cops could simply say that demanding his ID was one of standard exceptions where they were investigating a possible crime that they were called to investigate. That Righi made the call just puts him on track for a Darwin award.

But, again, only your local public defender knows for sure.

[Kajsa]

17. Has anyone every bought merchandise( clearly visible)

and then walked out of Costco without showing his/her receipt
at the exit?

Just curious.

[hlthe2b]

18. Considering that Costco tends to put their most elderly staffers

at the front of the store to do this, I doubt it would be hard to just exit. Most of the slowest, overweight, middle age consumers probably could (!) and I've been sorely tempted to do so, when they had a long line. However, Costco would "have you" on this because it is a membership warehouse. As such you are agreeing to the terms of their membership. I would think other stores that do not have such posted policies, may have a harder time prevailing in court. But, we shall see...

[Kajsa]

66. Damn!

"slowest, overweight, middle age consumers probably could"

just rub it in, why don't ya?

--signed,
a slow, overweight, middle age consumer.

:rofl:

;-)

[hlthe2b]

84. Back at ya...

ditto here...LOL :)

[TahitiNut]

28. Yes, I have.

More often than not, at Costco, I show it. When, however, several people are lined up I'll often just choose NOT to queue up like some drone so I merely walk past saying "No, thanks!" I've been a Costco member since it was Price Club - almost 25 years.

:shrug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

49. Costco is a members only store

Circuit City is not.

[Katherine Brengle]

19. Ugh.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kenny blankenship]

33. And on the very same day we were arguing about this

A Federal Judge in Georgia upheld our blatantly discriminatory "Photo-ID Required To Vote" Law. There are thousands and thousands of poor and minority voters in GA without photo ID, because they don't have a car to drive, and who may even fear to get a special Voter ID, or who don't feel like or can't afford submitting to what is, in effect, a poll tax levied only on them.

I posted a notice about the decision, and it passed without remark aside from one comment.
And THAT is what comes of a society where individuals have been conditioned for years to lay down their liberties and freedoms at the preemptory commands of some larger entity, be it the megastores or a political party that seeks to monopolize power by disenfranchising classes of citizens.

[proud2BlibKansan]

50. A friggin men

Sorry I missed your thread. This is a very important issue.

[Gormy Cuss]

52. Photo IDs/Voter laws should be struck down for just the reasons you mentioned

but instead as we allow more and more insistence that we show ID in our every day lives people who have IDs no longer see the problem.

Stupid corporate intrusions aren't civil rights violations, but they do train people to stop thinking about it even when it's the government imposing the restriction.

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. Authoritarians are found in every group

[eFriendly]

22. This is exactly the reason why. . .

I do not shop at Circuit City nor CompUSA. I can easily get whatever I need at other stores without being treated like a criminal or having to submit to these gestapo-tactics.

[cherokeeprogressive]

35. Please remind me HOW many of our young treasures have died in iraq this month?

Nothing important so see here... please move along!

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. 16 last count I saw, I can chew gum and walk at the same time

hell eight of them just two days ago at the Ambar province

[cherokeeprogressive]

39. Last time I tried that, I stubbed my toe

Had to call a toe truck.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. I'm sorry

but in this household I can actually pay attention to more than one issue

And since I see the CC threads just as a continuum in the conditioning of the US population to OBBEY and submit to authority, the are part of a larger continuum

[cherokeeprogressive]

62. Forgive my ignorance

for not being able to make the connection between Circuit City and the erosion of my Civil Rights.

And kudos to you for being so intellectually superior.

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. It has nothing to do with intellectual superiority

just with being able to chew gum and walk at the same time

And yes, this is part of a continuum and conditioning in the creation of a surveillance society

I am actually astounded at how many people fail to see this

now I hope your stubbed toe gets better

[On the Road]

111. I Also Fail to See Why a Business Being Allowed To Require Receipts

has anything to do governments being allowed to perform unreasonable searches and seizures.

On Edit: And yes, I can walk and chew gum at the same time. So can the lawyers at the ACLU.

[skygazer]

54. The thing is, the erosion of civil liberties doesn't happen in a vacuum

The administration didn't wake up one day and say, "Hey, lets put all protesters into a "free speech zone."

I've seen people defending the whole Circuit City thing because "it doesn't have anything to do with 9/11 or the Patriot Act - it was going on long before." So what? The erosion of civil liberties has been something that has been happening gradually for a long time.

Things like this are indicative (to me) of the way people have been subtly conditioned to accept things unquestioningly. "He should have just showed his receipt," "He was being obnoxious," "He's got a lot of money." Those have been tossed out as reasons we should not take stuff like this seriously.

Why? Why shouldn't a person rock the boat if they feel they're being unfairly treated? Why would obnoxious behavior invalidate their point of view? Why should his wealth do the same?

Maybe the particular incident isn't all that important but I think the reaction to it and what it says about our collective submission to authority is pretty sad.

[proud2BlibKansan]

56. Yes my thoughts exactly

There is a bigger picture here and I am sorry that some just don't see it.

[progressoid]

115. Oops, you exposed the underlying problem with all of this gnashing of teeth

"Maybe the particular incident isn't all that important"

Well, that pretty much sums it up!

[Blue-Jay]

55. OK. I won't.

[mudesi]

65. Amazing, isn't it? How people allow the corporations to run the government

I'm shocked and frightened at how many "good Germans" there are here on a liberal message board.

[TahitiNut]

69. It's not enough that some (like me) usually comply and show a receipt ...

... so many (unlike me) have to DEMONIZE and ATTACK someone who chose not to comply. (Wow.) How can (alleged) liberals be so intolerant? Then we have the "there's more important issues" folks who apparently stop showering, flushing the toilet, changing their underwear, or doing laundry when a member of the family is sick or in the hospital. (Can't seem to do both, right?)

[proud2BlibKansan]

76. Yeah me too

[KoKo]

90. Hey...you are speaking to a person who won't give her e-mail or phone number

at stores who keep asking for them whether I pay by CASH or Credit Card. And, when they hassle me about "Preferred Customer Card" ...I say...no thanks. But, I've been harrassed by sales persons (Many DU'ers tell me the Sales Persons at Check Out are FORCED to ask you all that info...and they are just "doing their job") but I've been polite on the first two attempts but when they keep after you ...it's time to tell them to "please tell your management, that this customer who shops here often doesn't appreciate being harrassed for personal info or pushed to sign up for store credit card to save 10% that will keep me indebted to your store for life."

I think if these stores understand that not all customers are willing to give out e-mail, phone or other info to fill out on a form to save 10% on that day's purchase...they will maybe start to get that their shoppers have had ENOUGH! But the stores management (these days some Hedge Fund our Buy Out Operation) is really working to get you hooked on the credit card and pass your personal info off to telemarketers and statisticians who are monitoring your every purchase so they can suck you into some deal or another.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! If my phone is unlisted why should I give it out to anyone? Why should I give my Zip Code or Date of Birth (so they can send me a Birthday Card with a 10%) which sounds good but it's more Privacy Invasion with the ultimate goal to hook me to come back into the store and hopefully charge more merchandise.

Our Privacy is eroded in small steps because folks are so addicted to Credit Cards they think the store they shop in is doing them a favor by asking all this info. I can't tell you how many people just give out everything...without a peep because the Check Out Person had an aggressive voice. And, the elderly in our society are the few I've seen give those people a hard time. My very quiet Mother in Law refused to purchase when she was harrassed by an agressive Check Out asking for her Drivers License, Phone, E-Mail, ZipCode and Courtesy Card Number. She was visiting me and we were shopping in Kohl's and she decided to pay by credit card rather than cash (since she was visting) and she couldn't believe that an 85 year old woman would be harrassed like this.

[Ms. Toad]

100. I shop at Kohls, and a number of other places that ask for

phone numbers, zip codes, and/or email addresses (TJ Max, Marshall's, Best Buy - to name a few). I just tell them no, and have NEVER had anyone ask even a second time, let alone a third.

[KoKo]

101. TJ MAXX is the best...No questions asked.. But Kohls, Coldwater Creek, Rite Aid

the new MACY's, Christopher & Banks and many Outlets require that info and harrass you if you don't give it.

[Ms. Toad]

103. I've never been to MACY's or Christopher & Banks,

but I have been to Kohls, Coldwater Creek, and Rite Aid in the last month and a half (and to two of those in multiple states). NONE of them have asked again once I said "no." It is certainly would not appear to be a company policy for the chains I have mentioned or I would have run into it - perhaps it is a local problem. If it continues, I would contact the corporate office.

TJ Maxx locally reqeusts something - I believe a phone number, but it may be zip code. Same story - I say no, they complete my purchase and I'm out of there.

Edited to add comment about TJ Maxx.

[ProudDad]

122. I Hope he fights it all the way

The police state has been allowed to fuck with us for way too long!


On Edit: He said it all here: "I can reluctantly understand having to show a permit to fish, a permit to drive and a permit to carry a weapon. Having to show a permit to exist is a scary idea which I got a strong taste of today."

Makes a lot of sense to me...

This is the kind of Libertarian "looniness" I can ally with...the police state has been getting away with too much for too long...

[ProudDad]

124. Don't shop at Circuit City anyway

they're a fucking Red Company....

Give lots of dough to repukes, nearly nothing to Dems...

[ProudDad]

129. You think this is trivial...

Watch/Listen to this video...a DUer catches the police state in action...

Insane cop video - threatens citizen with false charges

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2715792117793977759&hl=en

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1773373

This is where this sort of shit is heading...ooops, it's there already...

[iamthebandfanman]

134. Say you had a yard sale...

and gave out bags to people who had purchased things....

someone leaves with a bag that seems a lil big to you and you ask to look in it.. they refuse and leave your proporty...

what do you do ?

you have no proof they stole anything... so what do you do ?
are you violating their rights by asking them to look ?

maybe its a bad analogy ... but..

i really think you should think in the shoes of the business owner.

yes, the police arresting people for no ID is outrageous.. im sure most people agree with that(unfortunately the Patriot act makes that okay apparently and we all know we hate the patriot act and have for years for reasons just like this..no new news on that front).

a business has the right to protect itself from fraud and theft.
sorry.

by all accounts, in your way of thinking, they shouldnt have cameras either.. because its spying on the customer.
you are still in the store when they ask you to look, they are violating no privacy law. you give up privacy everytime you walk into a public place or private business. privacy only exsists in your home these days, and even then that unfortunately has some boundries. lol.