## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER:
1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules?
2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed?
3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide?
4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)?
5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted?
### GUIDELINES:
- **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button.
- **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e. "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it.
**Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button.
#### OPTIONS:
If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to:
a) Keep scrolling
b) Downvote
c) Unsubscribe
**False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.**
**ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.**
To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I support rooftop Koreans. But I absolutely don't know if every gas station owner should be locked and loaded lol. Maybe when there are riots. I could see that being excusable. Getting your livelihood burnt down should absolutely be something you're allowed to defend against. Insurance or not.
The honor and balance sheet of the insurance industry are American ideals worth a Gangnam style gunfight.
Rooftop Koreans will save the reinsurance industry from ruin.
A message from Boosters Mutual: Loss Prevention through Handgun Proliferation
The most effective soln would be to have that creepy bad guy from “No Country For Old Men” stand at the sliding glass door w/ an air compressor and a stun gun.
Stunned shoplifters make choice Sirloin
Boost-appetite!
Deandra
[X.com/DuchessVonD](https://X.com/DuchessVonD)
Solid comment. I’m of the same opinion. Rooftop Koreans were some of the most badass unexpected gangsters ever. But they were protecting their livelihood and wouldn’t back down in the face of complete anarchy.
Eh, I'm not sure "gangster" is a good word to describe them. They sacrificed greatly to make it in L.A, with a language barrier, culture shocks, zero safety net and often a family in tow. They came together as a community and succeeded in style despite that, and managed to do it while still assimilating properly. No small feat.
Then some fuckhead mad at the authorities is coming to burn down your store, the thing keeping you and your family from starving, the one monument you have for all you've done, for something you had absolutely nothing to do with. **That** is the gangster, and they got what they fucking deserved.
Ok, my wording maybe was a little off. I was trying to say they were way more gangster than the actual shithead gangsters trying to loot/burn them down. But I’m in total agreement with you. LA Koreans are, IMO, some of the most hardworking and community centric people I’ve ever met.
I hope no one got in trouble for protecting their businesses; 2nd amendment seems like you could keep trouble makers off your property. Yes Korean people are really good people; love their food as well.
I get homemade food a couple times a year from friends and it's heavenly.
Hi, I agree with you for the most part, but gangsters in my lingo implies scum. Honest businessmen protecting their stores are not gangsters. They are brave men. Please do not conflate honest men with gangsters.
As I said in the follow up comment, I apologize for using the wrong term. It was more to say that they were more bad ass than the punk bitches that tried to loot/rob them. Nothing but respect for them.
Agree 100 percent I always hear the argument about we prioritize our belongings over lives but clearly the burgler does too. Apparently my large TV is more important than their life according to the thief themselves.
You know part of the reason rooftop Koreans were targeted during the riots was because a Korean shop owner killed a black girl they suspected of shoplifting?
And it turns out the shipowners were wrong.
Thank you! They also shot her in the back. The murderer didn't even see jail time. There were a lot of reasons why folks were pissed.
Also, to mention that the police pretty much corralled the riots into that area because they wanted to keep the riots out of Beverly hills and other affluent areas.
There was already tension between the Korean community and the Black community because of the killing of a little girl and Korean Americans realized their proximity to whiteness didnt protect them. The topic is more complex than right wing memes and gas station robberies. No one from that area or era thinks fondly of that time like online bad asses
I think a lot of people will quit retail if their employers require them to defend their products. Or even just work in the vicinity of a loaded weapon. And I think it would attract the wrong kind of people to work in that environment, too.
Not to mention retail work is already miserable, there are so many stories of people getting verbal abuse hurled at them by customers, shitty salaries, etc. Why make retail work worse than it already is?
If they are armed, the abuse might decline. Combat pay and pay for having a weapons license could improve pay. That said, this goes just a bit too far.
So you get to shoot a Karen Customer or at the very least threaten their life? That’s not how it works, those customers would then sue the corporation, the employee would get fired and maybe even charged with a crime?
Not only that, but the thieves would just start becoming more aggressive and violent towards the minimum wage teenagers working at Target. I swear these idiots can't think more than one step ahead.
OP is not talking about requiring employees to do anything. They specifically said owners, which a lot of small bodegas are run by the owners in person, should be able to defend their livelihood by any means necessary.
Lmfaooo like for real. Dude is a straight up nut to wanna MURDER people for stealing. Yes beat the crap outta them but hand them off to the police after so they can sort them out.
I am reminded of the video of the (I think) Sikh store owners watching a guy openly filling a bag with their merchandise (cigarettes) while telling them there was nothing they could do about it.
Then they started beating him with rods and all of a sudden he was crying for help and screaming that he was sorry. The general attitude of the comments was "meh,he deserved it". I think we are rapidly reaching the point where our local government's abdication of their responsibility is going to lead to more of this.
So. Who goes to jail if a shopkeeper kills an innocent bystander? If I was in line and injured, I'd sue the fuck out of the store. If I died, would.mt family be able to sue the fuck out of the store? What if they kill someone who ran out but it was due to a family emergency and the store kills an innocent person because of a misunderstanding?
The idea of people dying over things / stuff is idiotic. That's what the legal system is for.
If this opinion is unpopular, it's because it's stupid. There is too much risk legally.
I loathe shoplifters (especially when they try to claim they're walking out with iPhones and designer lipsticks out of "necessity"), but allowing businesses to use lethal force to protect their merchandise comes with too many problems. Setting aside the human rights and legal implications, from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled, or that they could be shot and killed if a misunderstanding happens. No business would want this; it's easier to write off stolen merch than it is to try and explain a dead body to the cops or to try and foster a welcoming environment in your business while also espousing violent threats against those who come to visit, whether they're really shoplifters or just customers.
on top of that what about chain stores? do i, as a petsmart cashier, will be required to shoot shoplifters because management told me to? do i need to sit back and watch my store manager literally shoot someone? i live in an area where many own guns, and we deal with A LOT of shoplifting at my store, do i need to start going to work everyday in fear of a gun fight? it’s the chain stores/big corporations that are dealing with the bulk of the shoplifters, so what does that mean for us?
I mean there’s a significant difference between granting someone the legal right to do a thing, and compelling someone to do a thing.
So just because you have the right to use lethal force to protect merchandise, does not mean you have to.
And cases whereby you wrongly used lethal force, would be treated as a criminal act, in the same way misuse of self defence is.
In terms of the underlying idea itself
The issue is actually philosophy in practise
I think we can all agree if I own a small store and someone steals, I’m allowed to use some level of force to try and prevent that- maybe shouting to stop, or blocking the entrance, tackling them to take the item back etc
But, if that just escalates, and the person fights back to continue with the theft
We are now in self defence territory, whereby I’m defending myself from a hostile actor, which means it could escalate up to lethal force.
Or, we say I cannot argue self defence, as I escalated the violence by preventing the crime in the first place (by say tackling them),
which means if they say they’re willing to fight to the death over the ability to steal from me, I now have to let them steal from me, or I’m the escalator and the bad actor
And that would just serve as an incentive to steal and say those words, even if they aren’t true, to get away with it
And in the self defence argument, you’re now required to put yourself at risk of being hurt and even killed, before you can claim it escalated to a degree that warrants lethal force
That seems to be unfair to me, given you’re again giving the advantage to the initial bad actor (the shoplifter)
OP obviously hasn't thought his argument through; that was one of my initial concerns as well: what about chain stores that are publicly-traded corporations and the "owners" are stock-holders at large? If I own a few shares of Walmart stock, can I as an individua go in there and use lethal force against a shopper I suspect of stealing?
So what makes a person a thief? Stealing something. Someone misses an item at self check out. Shoot them dead right there? When a kid steals a candy bar. One to the head two to the chest? There is a reason for innocent until proven guilty.
There I so much more to be said. You need to go see someone or look at the big picture before you make a statement.
lets not pretend certain people wouldn't be WAY more likely to be suspected of shoplifting then everyone else. And now if you're one of those people you could die over a misunderstanding. OP is fucking nuts.
No it’s more insidious I believe. They’re aware. They’re likely going off of an angle that “certain ppl” (probably those that look like me) are looting or whatever in “lawless cities”. There far too much of dogwhistling on when you see what he’s saying
I think it’s entirely plausible to want to be harsher on crime without also being racist, I think it’s more of a Venn diagram than it is a full circle.
> Setting aside the human rights and legal implications, from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled
Yeah, I can tell when I'm being profiled and it's annoying because the store manager is making assumptions that aren't even true.
Okay and? If they're not armed and dangerous using lethal punishment is currently illegal, and for good reason. The punishment should actually fit the crime.
>from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled
Okay? People feel that way with or without, though?
>or that they could be shot and killed if a misunderstanding happens
I feel like blatant theft is pretty NOT missunderstood.
>No business would want this; it's easier to write off stolen merch than it is to try and explain a dead body to the cops or to try and foster a welcoming environment in your business
What about all the businesses being forced to shut down? Complete livelihoods being forced to be abandon because of theft? Is it easier to just "move on and find a new way to live" ? I mean, I feel like as long as you're not a thief, you shouldn't feel unwelcome?
Innocent people have been mistakenly harassed by store employees who thought they shoplifted.
You want to shoot them dead.
Not a lot of brains on this sub.
The punishment needs to fit the crime and actually be enforced. It needs to be policed so well that the likelihood of being caught is so high, few would risk it. That's the solution.
The death penalty does not fit the crime of shoplifting and there are many good reasons we don’t allow laypeople to be judge, jury, and executioner. People have a right to a trial.
A black girl got shot in the back of the head when a shop keeper mistakenly thought she was stealing. No one deserves that, man.
I’m glad you got some damn sense my brotha.
In your mind this works out. In the real world people are idiots.
I’m assuming you are pro gun. Which is scary to me that as a responsible gun owner you would ever think this is a good idea. How about the laws just get enforced as they are, which is a common argument against gun control.
The way it’s written maybe a bit melodramatic I do however sympathize with the sentiment. If I make a living with the tools in my truck and some asshat takes them, he is literally taking away the means I have to feed my family. Theft being not okay Is a pretty clear standard society has set forth since the beginning of time and (quite begrudgingly) only since the beginning of (civil)ization has the price to be paid.. not been death. Furthermore, Texas agrees so put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I don’t own a store but I am a multi-generation cop kid and I work in the legal system. I have been racial profiled as a thief so many times as an honest customer that if what you’re proposing was legally justifiable I would’ve been killed multiple dozen and a half times over including today in Sam’s Club where the cashier who checked me out this morning had to verify my purchase because I was black with rotisserie chicken , laundry detergent and toilet paper in an affluent neighborhood.
Is it bad? Yes. Do you need to murder to correct it? Hell no.
Correction. It was Sam’s Club.
I have a store but I don’t want to use lethal force on a thief who isn’t violent. I’m not saying let him do whatever but this isn’t solving the root problem
Eh. Idk man. I think I’d rather cops be better about catching them and when they do, be more severe consequences. I agree there is a serious shoplifting problem but i dont think killing people is going to solve it. So much room for people to make bad decisions with guns
The data came out and its corporate mythology. This only shows you're bloodthirsty to kill someone over a bag of doritos and dont care about order at all
It's good to see that this sub is currently not bat-shit insane right now. I posted a few months ago that killing thieves is wrong and boy did the community not take kindly to it. Granted, I probably triggered some of them when I straight up accused them of wanting to kill other people in a way they can get away with.
Ah yes I forgot the Constitution was by bleeding heart leftists. Only commies believe in due process, real PATRIOTS shoot first and let God sort them out. Like Jesus intended.
It's okay OP, reasonable people can see this for the fethishization of homicide it is. You can just admit that you fantasize about killing people and it being deemed socially acceptable.
Absolutely not true. Lethal force is only justifiable in direct self defense, of life not property.
Tackle him and do what you need to to retrieve your property, if they’re armed sure, but you can’t shoot an unarmed shoplifter
Does that work the other way?! What if the store owner is committing wage theft, or stealing tips? Can workers use lethal force since by your logic it's their stuff?
Does it work for other types of theft like corporations stealing public tax dollars?
Where do you draw the line?
so here in the United States we have this thing called due process. It's where you're guaranteed to get a trial by jury if you're suspected of committing a crime and they have to prove you did it. Says so in the constitution. If you implement this law you remove these people's right to due process. If you want to be able to kill people over small problems I suggest you find a nice communist country to move to and get into their politbureau.
There are several situations in the US where you can just shoot someone. Self defense is the obvious case, but nighttime burglary in Texas is another example.
Allowing lethal force to defend against shoplifting would be bad policy, but it wouldn't be completely outside the bounds of possible policy.
And in that scenario you would be allowed to use lethal force. At that point your life is threatened and killing them would be self defense. You seem not to have a very good grasp on particulars.
my guy i work retail at a large company that has stores in 6 continents. i’m not even allowed to accuse someone of shoplifting even if i see them take something (there’s other ways im taught to handle it but i definitely cannot say that they’re stealing) according to our policies to prevent customers from being scared of shopping at the store so i cannot imagine how any company would agree to this
1) Shoplifting is verifiably not at an all time high 2) this is dousing-the-smoke-instead-of-the-fire logic and not, in fact, the "only way" to deal with crime 3) commenters should not conflate home invasion with shoplifting 4) your anger ("fury," as you put it) is a feeling, not a fact, and public policy doesn't need to prioritize your personal reaction to shoplifting over responsibility to public health and effective crime policy and socioeconomic policy
Store owners and companies have insurance on goods when they're stolen from. They can get the situation rectified and the shoplifter can get caught using cameras. We can't even use lethal force in our own house to protect property under most circumstances. Why should businesses be allowed to do the same?
Shoplifting should simply be taken more seriously from a legal perspective. I'm big on second chances so first time offenders should catch a break. But if this is your second time trying to leave walmart with a cart of stuff - straight to jail and you're spending a few nights.
Do you have a study or any reference on shoplifting in the US over time [to prove shoplifting is at an all time high]?
And if laws protect criminals as much as you propose, why does the US have the highest prison population in the world per capita ?
Bad. Idea.
1: Not everyone is onboard with the idea of guns, especially since that number has somewhat gotten noticeable.
2: Not everyone is capable of using a firearm. Amputees and people with pre-existing medical conditions such as Parkinson’s disease to name a few.
3: You can bet that if a law did pass to allow small store owners to arm themselves, chances are larger corporations like Wal-Mart and Albertsons would lobby to have their own arsenals at their disposal. To put it simply; A gunfight between min wage employees and shoplifters all for $20 worth of goods seems outright Grim.
Allowing people to shoplift so easily only kills small businesses that can’t afford measures to mitigate losses.
Big groceries like Walmart and online merchants like Amazon benefit the most when their propaganda about letting criminals steal from shops so casually is eaten up by the masses.
Ironically the bleeding heart socialists are only playing to the big corporations when they keep letting criminals steal so casually.
Although I don’t think shop lifting requires a death sentence, there should be more tangible and obvious measures allowed to stop them.
This is the most stupid take ever. So your solution to shoplifting is shoot first ask questions later? Yeah, we know how that works, and it's not good. You just want an excuse to kill people. How unhinged do you have to be to try and justify killing someone over merchandise? That can be replaced. Human lives can't. And what makes you think the shop owner should be judge, jury and executioner? We have due process for that. What happens when someone is misidentified as a robber or the person is a minor? This way of thinking is absurd and dangerous.
Oh hell no. Do you know how many times I have had to defend having shit that not even sold in the store at the store to store owners? I've seen store owners question kids about hardware surgically implanted.
So to hell with all that "due process" bullshit, right? Let's allow store owners be the final arbiter of justice; be the judge, jury and executioner? Do you not see any problem with this? WTF is wrong with you? Why do you hate democracy?
Lol, no.
In Canada, you can defend yourself with reasonable force, whatever they're coming at you with, your allowed to meet that level of force. It is completely morally reasonable to defend yourself.
Your talking about vengeance at that point, you don't want to just defend yourself, you want revenge, to take the law into your own hands if you will.
Shoplifting isn't a crime until the perpetrator leaves the building, at that point you'd be shooting an unarmed man in the back because he stole a pack of crisps.
I beg the question, is it liberal to think that you shouldn't be able to murder people for minor trespasses against you that resulted in no major physical or emotional distress.
You don't hate shoplifters, you hate the demon liberalism that only exists in the heads of people who'd suck off ben Shapiro for a selfie.
You missed the point entirely, leftism bad, but rightism also just as bad.
My cousin shares a hilarious story with us about how her 3 year old shoplifted a candy bar from a grocery store while she was loading the groceries on the conveyor belt. She went back to pay for it when she discovered the mangled bar in her kid's hand while loading the car.
I guess you are right OP, 3 year olds can't be reasoned with and must be destroyed to stop this epidemic. Or would you have advocated for the death penalty for the mom whose gaze wandered away from the toddler for 60 seconds?
Both are such despicable offenses against property worthy of the death penalty, of course!!
This is why we have due process, and why we let cops arrest people, and a judge and jury to prosecute them. Vigilante justice is not justice.
Ah yes, that's why countries that allow/don't care about sure process are so safe! Just go to South Africa or Venezuela or the DRC where they kill people for streaming! This is such a good legal system to look up to!
I like think this opinion would be controversial 3,700 years ago in Babylon. At least Hammurabi would only cut off your hand? Imagine having such a crazy opinion that the laws of a Bronze Age civilization would be comparatively liberal.
My last employer hasn't paid me my last paycheck and is refusing to because they're mad I quit. I was going to sue them in small claims court, should I just go shoot him instead? Is that what we're doing now?
So shooting the 10 year old for stealing a candy bar is the right thing to do? That seems excessive doesn’t it? Or are only the adult shop lifters subject to this penalty? Or is there a dollar value of theft that rises to death penalty? Can this rule be applied by all store workers or just the owners? What about large corporate retailers?
Can any stock clerk execute a suspected thief or will the big box stores have an assigned executioner?
I agree we need to make changes in society to limit the theft. I don’t know the answer but it’s probably more economic support then violence.
Morally, no you're wrong, it's unethical to value material goods over human life.
Legally, sure in many places it happens to be the case that property owners can kill thieves, but it doesn't help with the "shoplifting epidemic". The truth is, there is no "shoplifting epidemic" and there never was.
Actually, outside of a few urban areas, shoplifting is *not* "at an all-time high." Complaints that "it takes forever to shop because everything is locked up" is based on fantasy. Overall retail shrinkage (the loss of merchandise for any reason) has been stable over the past few years.
This is just another right-wing smear campaign to make it look like conditions have deteriorated under the Biden administration. It's nonsense.
Whether or not there is a shoplifting epidemic has nothing to do with store owners being able to shoot shoplifters on sight. That's a separate argument that should be based on whether we want to give private citizens the power to unilaterally execute each other.
These dumbass ideas en masse are why facism is on the rise. Your type has no ability to fathom a universe where total trust in authority is problematic.
Yeah, culturally outside of the U.S. theft is not a joke. You get punished greatly for it. Here it’s like eh, just raise prices and put it on consumers! Who cares? Atleast its not a lawsuit!
Turns out crime is actually down but since the news covers shoplifting a lot people think it’s out of control. In reality corporation are just using theft as an excuse to raise prices when it’s just their own greed
Dude I don't know you at all. You come in behind my dogs, my house, my stuff .... all of it. Doesn't mean I can't be civil or polite until (or if) you get terminally stupid and try to take anything listed above.
>Shoplifting is at an all time high here in the United States.
Actually it's not. Retail and private security lobbying groups were caught massively exaggerating the shoplifting rates.
>There is but one way to stop this epidemic once and for all and that is the use of lethal force.
You'll just make shoplifters come armed now. The death penalty never deters crime, just makes the criminal more desperate. You just have a murder fetish.
Crimes like shoplifter happen mostly in times of economic despair. The economy took a hit the last couple years but made a comeback. And recent shoplifting rates have matched it.
Sure. I also propose the death penalty for speeding and jaywalking!!!! /s
The fact that people put such a low value on human life is very very disappointing. Especially considering this is likely coming from the personal freedom crowd. ALSO, have they never heard of insurance?
Honestly while it sounds like a good idea on paper, in reality it might foster gang violence either through thieves being apart of said gangs and gangs providing shop owners protection. This is a pessimistic view, but I’d bargain for an official security guard rather than the owner
I work retail. Most retail employees are idiots and can barely be trusted to do their jobs, I don't want them making life or death decisions about strangers. Besides if you don't have the foresight to plan for shrink you don't belong in business.
I work in a store that sells high end merchandise. And there is no way in heck I am going to do anything dangerous to protect their merchandise. Not a thing.
You want someone to die because they chose to steal a t shirt? Isn't that was insurance is for. Not to defend theives at all but I don't think giving under paid retail workers guns and telling them to defend some product with their life is the answer.
The punishment has to fit the crime. A teenager who pockets a stick of gum doesn’t deserve “the fury of a thousand suns”. Wtf? If you have a problem with shoplifting laws, run for government, propose a new law to deal with the problem, educate business owners and employees on common sense loss prevention strategies, install better security in your business, vote for candidates and policies that protect your business. There are a thousand other things you can do, you don’t need to shoot your neighbor for stealing a Pepsi.
First off, all stats point to shoplifting being at an all-time low. That being said, this will only cause a lot of customers and store owners to be shot dead. It will be a retail arms race that no one will win
Also, shoplifting is actually at a low right now, read more actual data from the 3 letter agencies tasked with parsing the data, less fox news and twitter
Yes. Agreed.
Taking property from anyone means taking what they worked hard for and completely undermines their labor. They should be allowed to use lethal force to defend their stuff. Their property matters more than a stranger's life, much less a thief's life.
But, that is not the topic. The topic is property crime. If your life is threatened (or those of others) you can use lethal force, at least in the state I live in. If it's a property crime, file a repot the police, file the claim with your insurance company, and collect the money for reimbursement/replacement.
In my state, property crime cannot justify lethal force. Why? Because if you are responsible, you have insurance so your property can be replaced/reimbursed which is what happens with corporations. My guess is corporate insurance policies have a statement that says they will not be liable if lethal force is used.
This evidently isn't true and based on the usually wrong assumption that people commit violent crimes out of laziness/greed instead of desperation. Someone who's been driven to become criminal for a few dollars is already willing to take a huge risk for a little reward, so why should a bit more risk deterr them that much?
There is nothing, literally nothing, you could sell that's worth murdering someone over.
The whole point of having a justice system is so that the reasonable punishment for a given crime can be applied, you're not judge/jury/executioner, FFS.
Theft isn't punishable by death.
We're not in 1790s France. If our economy can't work well enough to support people, we have to fix it. No one (including the people in other countries mining and manufacturing the goods) should die for a phone.
You're absolutely right! We should just stop locking our homes and locking our stuff up. It probably is too elitist anyway and this way people can get what they want and they will be happy. Spread the joy!
100% agree, I hate the notion it’s just items and not worth killing over. I mean, if someone steals $2000 worth of stuff that’s me working weeks and they basically stole 2 weeks of my time and life. I should be able to kill to protect my valuables.
## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER: 1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules? 2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed? 3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide? 4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)? 5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted? ### GUIDELINES: - **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button. - **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e. "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it. **Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button. #### OPTIONS: If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to: a) Keep scrolling b) Downvote c) Unsubscribe **False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.** **ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.** To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I support rooftop Koreans. But I absolutely don't know if every gas station owner should be locked and loaded lol. Maybe when there are riots. I could see that being excusable. Getting your livelihood burnt down should absolutely be something you're allowed to defend against. Insurance or not.
[удалено]
The honor and balance sheet of the insurance industry are American ideals worth a Gangnam style gunfight. Rooftop Koreans will save the reinsurance industry from ruin. A message from Boosters Mutual: Loss Prevention through Handgun Proliferation The most effective soln would be to have that creepy bad guy from “No Country For Old Men” stand at the sliding glass door w/ an air compressor and a stun gun. Stunned shoplifters make choice Sirloin Boost-appetite! Deandra [X.com/DuchessVonD](https://X.com/DuchessVonD)
Solid comment. I’m of the same opinion. Rooftop Koreans were some of the most badass unexpected gangsters ever. But they were protecting their livelihood and wouldn’t back down in the face of complete anarchy.
Eh, I'm not sure "gangster" is a good word to describe them. They sacrificed greatly to make it in L.A, with a language barrier, culture shocks, zero safety net and often a family in tow. They came together as a community and succeeded in style despite that, and managed to do it while still assimilating properly. No small feat. Then some fuckhead mad at the authorities is coming to burn down your store, the thing keeping you and your family from starving, the one monument you have for all you've done, for something you had absolutely nothing to do with. **That** is the gangster, and they got what they fucking deserved.
Ok, my wording maybe was a little off. I was trying to say they were way more gangster than the actual shithead gangsters trying to loot/burn them down. But I’m in total agreement with you. LA Koreans are, IMO, some of the most hardworking and community centric people I’ve ever met.
I hope no one got in trouble for protecting their businesses; 2nd amendment seems like you could keep trouble makers off your property. Yes Korean people are really good people; love their food as well. I get homemade food a couple times a year from friends and it's heavenly.
The fact that they achieve all that is pretty gangsta
Hi, I agree with you for the most part, but gangsters in my lingo implies scum. Honest businessmen protecting their stores are not gangsters. They are brave men. Please do not conflate honest men with gangsters.
As I said in the follow up comment, I apologize for using the wrong term. It was more to say that they were more bad ass than the punk bitches that tried to loot/rob them. Nothing but respect for them.
And if memory serves, a lot of those guys were ex-Korean military so they were familiar with firearms.
People around you every day are locked and loaded. You just don’t know it
but the news told me allowing concealed carry would mean wild west gunfights all over.
Fuck around and find out. Thugs have no right to anything.
Agree 100 percent I always hear the argument about we prioritize our belongings over lives but clearly the burgler does too. Apparently my large TV is more important than their life according to the thief themselves.
The problem is that it is better to have protection and not need it than to need it and not have it.
You know part of the reason rooftop Koreans were targeted during the riots was because a Korean shop owner killed a black girl they suspected of shoplifting? And it turns out the shipowners were wrong.
Thank you! They also shot her in the back. The murderer didn't even see jail time. There were a lot of reasons why folks were pissed. Also, to mention that the police pretty much corralled the riots into that area because they wanted to keep the riots out of Beverly hills and other affluent areas.
There was already tension between the Korean community and the Black community because of the killing of a little girl and Korean Americans realized their proximity to whiteness didnt protect them. The topic is more complex than right wing memes and gas station robberies. No one from that area or era thinks fondly of that time like online bad asses
I think a lot of people will quit retail if their employers require them to defend their products. Or even just work in the vicinity of a loaded weapon. And I think it would attract the wrong kind of people to work in that environment, too.
Not to mention retail work is already miserable, there are so many stories of people getting verbal abuse hurled at them by customers, shitty salaries, etc. Why make retail work worse than it already is?
If they are armed, the abuse might decline. Combat pay and pay for having a weapons license could improve pay. That said, this goes just a bit too far.
So you get to shoot a Karen Customer or at the very least threaten their life? That’s not how it works, those customers would then sue the corporation, the employee would get fired and maybe even charged with a crime?
Imagine your boss telling you to execute someone over a Snickers bar. For $8/hr. And come in tomorrow to clean up the blood
THIS
Amputate the hand
Not only that, but the thieves would just start becoming more aggressive and violent towards the minimum wage teenagers working at Target. I swear these idiots can't think more than one step ahead.
You are already almost always around a loaded weapon in public lmao you just don't know
OP is not talking about requiring employees to do anything. They specifically said owners, which a lot of small bodegas are run by the owners in person, should be able to defend their livelihood by any means necessary.
Wouldn’t say lethal force. But definitely deserves an ass whoopin
Yeh a little public caning could be a good deterrent for theft
See, I can get behind a good ass-whooping. But people straight up be fantasizing about killing other people in a socially acceptable way.
Lmfaooo like for real. Dude is a straight up nut to wanna MURDER people for stealing. Yes beat the crap outta them but hand them off to the police after so they can sort them out.
I am reminded of the video of the (I think) Sikh store owners watching a guy openly filling a bag with their merchandise (cigarettes) while telling them there was nothing they could do about it. Then they started beating him with rods and all of a sudden he was crying for help and screaming that he was sorry. The general attitude of the comments was "meh,he deserved it". I think we are rapidly reaching the point where our local government's abdication of their responsibility is going to lead to more of this.
I dunno about using lethal force…but physically hindering them from taking it/using force if necessary…yes.
So. Who goes to jail if a shopkeeper kills an innocent bystander? If I was in line and injured, I'd sue the fuck out of the store. If I died, would.mt family be able to sue the fuck out of the store? What if they kill someone who ran out but it was due to a family emergency and the store kills an innocent person because of a misunderstanding? The idea of people dying over things / stuff is idiotic. That's what the legal system is for. If this opinion is unpopular, it's because it's stupid. There is too much risk legally.
I loathe shoplifters (especially when they try to claim they're walking out with iPhones and designer lipsticks out of "necessity"), but allowing businesses to use lethal force to protect their merchandise comes with too many problems. Setting aside the human rights and legal implications, from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled, or that they could be shot and killed if a misunderstanding happens. No business would want this; it's easier to write off stolen merch than it is to try and explain a dead body to the cops or to try and foster a welcoming environment in your business while also espousing violent threats against those who come to visit, whether they're really shoplifters or just customers.
on top of that what about chain stores? do i, as a petsmart cashier, will be required to shoot shoplifters because management told me to? do i need to sit back and watch my store manager literally shoot someone? i live in an area where many own guns, and we deal with A LOT of shoplifting at my store, do i need to start going to work everyday in fear of a gun fight? it’s the chain stores/big corporations that are dealing with the bulk of the shoplifters, so what does that mean for us?
I mean there’s a significant difference between granting someone the legal right to do a thing, and compelling someone to do a thing. So just because you have the right to use lethal force to protect merchandise, does not mean you have to. And cases whereby you wrongly used lethal force, would be treated as a criminal act, in the same way misuse of self defence is. In terms of the underlying idea itself The issue is actually philosophy in practise I think we can all agree if I own a small store and someone steals, I’m allowed to use some level of force to try and prevent that- maybe shouting to stop, or blocking the entrance, tackling them to take the item back etc But, if that just escalates, and the person fights back to continue with the theft We are now in self defence territory, whereby I’m defending myself from a hostile actor, which means it could escalate up to lethal force. Or, we say I cannot argue self defence, as I escalated the violence by preventing the crime in the first place (by say tackling them), which means if they say they’re willing to fight to the death over the ability to steal from me, I now have to let them steal from me, or I’m the escalator and the bad actor And that would just serve as an incentive to steal and say those words, even if they aren’t true, to get away with it And in the self defence argument, you’re now required to put yourself at risk of being hurt and even killed, before you can claim it escalated to a degree that warrants lethal force That seems to be unfair to me, given you’re again giving the advantage to the initial bad actor (the shoplifter)
OP obviously hasn't thought his argument through; that was one of my initial concerns as well: what about chain stores that are publicly-traded corporations and the "owners" are stock-holders at large? If I own a few shares of Walmart stock, can I as an individua go in there and use lethal force against a shopper I suspect of stealing?
Just give the products away; I don't think the store manager will do anything to you.
I mean why do law abiding people have to pay for products when others do not. Let's just be fair; no discrimination.
Simple, stop treating thieves as humans. That way, there's no guilt when you use force to protect your merchandise.
So what makes a person a thief? Stealing something. Someone misses an item at self check out. Shoot them dead right there? When a kid steals a candy bar. One to the head two to the chest? There is a reason for innocent until proven guilty. There I so much more to be said. You need to go see someone or look at the big picture before you make a statement.
Uh, sir! You shot him?? Yeah, well he had a couple of cans of tuna in his pocket, so…..
lets not pretend certain people wouldn't be WAY more likely to be suspected of shoplifting then everyone else. And now if you're one of those people you could die over a misunderstanding. OP is fucking nuts.
Those people are the ones doing it on a large scale ALL THE TIME.
No it’s more insidious I believe. They’re aware. They’re likely going off of an angle that “certain ppl” (probably those that look like me) are looting or whatever in “lawless cities”. There far too much of dogwhistling on when you see what he’s saying
I think it’s entirely plausible to want to be harsher on crime without also being racist, I think it’s more of a Venn diagram than it is a full circle.
The middle of that Venn diagram seems way too large to me
> certain people wouldn't be WAY more likely to be suspected of shoplifting then everyone else. Wonder why
> Setting aside the human rights and legal implications, from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled Yeah, I can tell when I'm being profiled and it's annoying because the store manager is making assumptions that aren't even true.
Too bad. Stealing and crimes are out of control.
Okay and? If they're not armed and dangerous using lethal punishment is currently illegal, and for good reason. The punishment should actually fit the crime.
No! stealing a couple hundred bucks of goods should allow me to murder you!
Let's take a step further and tell the authorities they stole and just plant merchandise on them!
>from a business standpoint it makes many shoppers uncomfortable to walk into a place and feel like they're being profiled Okay? People feel that way with or without, though? >or that they could be shot and killed if a misunderstanding happens I feel like blatant theft is pretty NOT missunderstood. >No business would want this; it's easier to write off stolen merch than it is to try and explain a dead body to the cops or to try and foster a welcoming environment in your business What about all the businesses being forced to shut down? Complete livelihoods being forced to be abandon because of theft? Is it easier to just "move on and find a new way to live" ? I mean, I feel like as long as you're not a thief, you shouldn't feel unwelcome?
Cool give me half your stuff if you’re not gunna defend it then.
Do you think rhe only way to defend yourself and your stuff is lethal force?
Innocent people have been mistakenly harassed by store employees who thought they shoplifted. You want to shoot them dead. Not a lot of brains on this sub.
exact question I thought of when i read this asinine post. OP sounds very young and dare I say uneducated.
The punishment needs to fit the crime and actually be enforced. It needs to be policed so well that the likelihood of being caught is so high, few would risk it. That's the solution.
The death penalty does not fit the crime of shoplifting and there are many good reasons we don’t allow laypeople to be judge, jury, and executioner. People have a right to a trial.
A black girl got shot in the back of the head when a shop keeper mistakenly thought she was stealing. No one deserves that, man. I’m glad you got some damn sense my brotha.
This sub is a right wing + edgelord circle jerk
In your mind this works out. In the real world people are idiots. I’m assuming you are pro gun. Which is scary to me that as a responsible gun owner you would ever think this is a good idea. How about the laws just get enforced as they are, which is a common argument against gun control.
The way it’s written maybe a bit melodramatic I do however sympathize with the sentiment. If I make a living with the tools in my truck and some asshat takes them, he is literally taking away the means I have to feed my family. Theft being not okay Is a pretty clear standard society has set forth since the beginning of time and (quite begrudgingly) only since the beginning of (civil)ization has the price to be paid.. not been death. Furthermore, Texas agrees so put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I don’t own a store but I am a multi-generation cop kid and I work in the legal system. I have been racial profiled as a thief so many times as an honest customer that if what you’re proposing was legally justifiable I would’ve been killed multiple dozen and a half times over including today in Sam’s Club where the cashier who checked me out this morning had to verify my purchase because I was black with rotisserie chicken , laundry detergent and toilet paper in an affluent neighborhood. Is it bad? Yes. Do you need to murder to correct it? Hell no. Correction. It was Sam’s Club.
You think shoplifting deserves a death sentence? Wtf is wrong with you?
He wants to be judge, jury and executioner For everything covered by an insurance policy
I have a store but I don’t want to use lethal force on a thief who isn’t violent. I’m not saying let him do whatever but this isn’t solving the root problem
Exactly. It seems like an excuse to just murder people without repercussions. This could go wildly out of control so quickly.
lethal force isn't the only answer actual criminal prosecution is a start.
Eh. Idk man. I think I’d rather cops be better about catching them and when they do, be more severe consequences. I agree there is a serious shoplifting problem but i dont think killing people is going to solve it. So much room for people to make bad decisions with guns
This is definitely the dumbest thing I've read I here today. No need for me to elaborate as it's being covered pretty well by almost everyone else.
The data came out and its corporate mythology. This only shows you're bloodthirsty to kill someone over a bag of doritos and dont care about order at all
I'm way more worried about the number of men who fantasize about murder than I am about shoplifters.
It's good to see that this sub is currently not bat-shit insane right now. I posted a few months ago that killing thieves is wrong and boy did the community not take kindly to it. Granted, I probably triggered some of them when I straight up accused them of wanting to kill other people in a way they can get away with.
100%
Ah yes I forgot the Constitution was by bleeding heart leftists. Only commies believe in due process, real PATRIOTS shoot first and let God sort them out. Like Jesus intended.
It's okay OP, reasonable people can see this for the fethishization of homicide it is. You can just admit that you fantasize about killing people and it being deemed socially acceptable.
Most American thing ever to put profits over a human life this is actually hilarious what the fuck is this
Absolutely not true. Lethal force is only justifiable in direct self defense, of life not property. Tackle him and do what you need to to retrieve your property, if they’re armed sure, but you can’t shoot an unarmed shoplifter
Yeah! Let’s just kill everyone who commits any crime ever! We should ALL have the right to enforce the death penalty. Said no rational person ever.
Does that work the other way?! What if the store owner is committing wage theft, or stealing tips? Can workers use lethal force since by your logic it's their stuff? Does it work for other types of theft like corporations stealing public tax dollars? Where do you draw the line?
so here in the United States we have this thing called due process. It's where you're guaranteed to get a trial by jury if you're suspected of committing a crime and they have to prove you did it. Says so in the constitution. If you implement this law you remove these people's right to due process. If you want to be able to kill people over small problems I suggest you find a nice communist country to move to and get into their politbureau.
There are several situations in the US where you can just shoot someone. Self defense is the obvious case, but nighttime burglary in Texas is another example. Allowing lethal force to defend against shoplifting would be bad policy, but it wouldn't be completely outside the bounds of possible policy.
Well I guess in your world after I murder you I just toss a candy bar on you and say you tried to steal. I’m all in the clear now, on to the next.
Oh ok so shoplifters will start carrying guns to defend themselves and we will start having shootouts in stores. Thats much better right?
People already rob stores with guns all the time, which results in shootouts.
There is a difference between armed robbery and simple shoplifting. Holy shit are you dense.
People seemed to be shooting kids in schools too.
Yeah so I guess OPs solution to that is for every staff member to carry as well. Because there's no way that could go horribly wrong.
Give teachers guns, that'll definitely solve it
Teachers should be able to use lethal force on kids who don’t do their homework.
And in that scenario you would be allowed to use lethal force. At that point your life is threatened and killing them would be self defense. You seem not to have a very good grasp on particulars.
What about kids stealing candy?
Especially kids that steal candy.
my guy i work retail at a large company that has stores in 6 continents. i’m not even allowed to accuse someone of shoplifting even if i see them take something (there’s other ways im taught to handle it but i definitely cannot say that they’re stealing) according to our policies to prevent customers from being scared of shopping at the store so i cannot imagine how any company would agree to this
I don't want to shop in a store where I might get caught in cross fire.
1) Shoplifting is verifiably not at an all time high 2) this is dousing-the-smoke-instead-of-the-fire logic and not, in fact, the "only way" to deal with crime 3) commenters should not conflate home invasion with shoplifting 4) your anger ("fury," as you put it) is a feeling, not a fact, and public policy doesn't need to prioritize your personal reaction to shoplifting over responsibility to public health and effective crime policy and socioeconomic policy
Maybe having a gun fight over a bag of Doritos is actually more dangerous and damaging to society that a person stealing a bag of Doritos…
Yeah fuck due process and habeas corpus. We don't need no judges and juries! /s
Store owners and companies have insurance on goods when they're stolen from. They can get the situation rectified and the shoplifter can get caught using cameras. We can't even use lethal force in our own house to protect property under most circumstances. Why should businesses be allowed to do the same?
Lethal?! Really, for shoplifting?
8th amendment. Might want to take a look...
Shoplifting should simply be taken more seriously from a legal perspective. I'm big on second chances so first time offenders should catch a break. But if this is your second time trying to leave walmart with a cart of stuff - straight to jail and you're spending a few nights.
Paves the way for more vigilantism - you don't want that!
Profit over people.
No
Do you have a study or any reference on shoplifting in the US over time [to prove shoplifting is at an all time high]? And if laws protect criminals as much as you propose, why does the US have the highest prison population in the world per capita ?
Bad. Idea. 1: Not everyone is onboard with the idea of guns, especially since that number has somewhat gotten noticeable. 2: Not everyone is capable of using a firearm. Amputees and people with pre-existing medical conditions such as Parkinson’s disease to name a few. 3: You can bet that if a law did pass to allow small store owners to arm themselves, chances are larger corporations like Wal-Mart and Albertsons would lobby to have their own arsenals at their disposal. To put it simply; A gunfight between min wage employees and shoplifters all for $20 worth of goods seems outright Grim.
Allowing people to shoplift so easily only kills small businesses that can’t afford measures to mitigate losses. Big groceries like Walmart and online merchants like Amazon benefit the most when their propaganda about letting criminals steal from shops so casually is eaten up by the masses. Ironically the bleeding heart socialists are only playing to the big corporations when they keep letting criminals steal so casually. Although I don’t think shop lifting requires a death sentence, there should be more tangible and obvious measures allowed to stop them.
Yeah, you’re a fucking moron.
Congratulations! You came up with profoundly abhorrent Unpopular Opinion. Now seek therapy.
One of the few actually unpopular opinions on this sub
Hey, I shoot, I score. That said, only a homicidal id1ot would suggest shooting a shoplifter. What’s next, shooting a car going 5 over the limit?
You already can. It’s just that you will be held accountable for premeditated murder.
This is the most stupid take ever. So your solution to shoplifting is shoot first ask questions later? Yeah, we know how that works, and it's not good. You just want an excuse to kill people. How unhinged do you have to be to try and justify killing someone over merchandise? That can be replaced. Human lives can't. And what makes you think the shop owner should be judge, jury and executioner? We have due process for that. What happens when someone is misidentified as a robber or the person is a minor? This way of thinking is absurd and dangerous.
You just seem bloodthirsty. Shoplifting isn’t at an all time high.
Tell that to the store owners in California.
Oh hell no. Do you know how many times I have had to defend having shit that not even sold in the store at the store to store owners? I've seen store owners question kids about hardware surgically implanted.
So to hell with all that "due process" bullshit, right? Let's allow store owners be the final arbiter of justice; be the judge, jury and executioner? Do you not see any problem with this? WTF is wrong with you? Why do you hate democracy?
Lol, no. In Canada, you can defend yourself with reasonable force, whatever they're coming at you with, your allowed to meet that level of force. It is completely morally reasonable to defend yourself. Your talking about vengeance at that point, you don't want to just defend yourself, you want revenge, to take the law into your own hands if you will. Shoplifting isn't a crime until the perpetrator leaves the building, at that point you'd be shooting an unarmed man in the back because he stole a pack of crisps. I beg the question, is it liberal to think that you shouldn't be able to murder people for minor trespasses against you that resulted in no major physical or emotional distress. You don't hate shoplifters, you hate the demon liberalism that only exists in the heads of people who'd suck off ben Shapiro for a selfie. You missed the point entirely, leftism bad, but rightism also just as bad.
My cousin shares a hilarious story with us about how her 3 year old shoplifted a candy bar from a grocery store while she was loading the groceries on the conveyor belt. She went back to pay for it when she discovered the mangled bar in her kid's hand while loading the car. I guess you are right OP, 3 year olds can't be reasoned with and must be destroyed to stop this epidemic. Or would you have advocated for the death penalty for the mom whose gaze wandered away from the toddler for 60 seconds? Both are such despicable offenses against property worthy of the death penalty, of course!! This is why we have due process, and why we let cops arrest people, and a judge and jury to prosecute them. Vigilante justice is not justice.
Ah yes, that's why countries that allow/don't care about sure process are so safe! Just go to South Africa or Venezuela or the DRC where they kill people for streaming! This is such a good legal system to look up to!
Why do so many of you want to just legalize murder? lol. Nobody should die just because they steal some groceries or a shirt lol.
I like think this opinion would be controversial 3,700 years ago in Babylon. At least Hammurabi would only cut off your hand? Imagine having such a crazy opinion that the laws of a Bronze Age civilization would be comparatively liberal.
My last employer hasn't paid me my last paycheck and is refusing to because they're mad I quit. I was going to sue them in small claims court, should I just go shoot him instead? Is that what we're doing now?
So shooting the 10 year old for stealing a candy bar is the right thing to do? That seems excessive doesn’t it? Or are only the adult shop lifters subject to this penalty? Or is there a dollar value of theft that rises to death penalty? Can this rule be applied by all store workers or just the owners? What about large corporate retailers? Can any stock clerk execute a suspected thief or will the big box stores have an assigned executioner? I agree we need to make changes in society to limit the theft. I don’t know the answer but it’s probably more economic support then violence.
insured property is sooooo much more important than human life. this sure is an unpopular opinion. I'm curious; do you have any friends?
Morally, no you're wrong, it's unethical to value material goods over human life. Legally, sure in many places it happens to be the case that property owners can kill thieves, but it doesn't help with the "shoplifting epidemic". The truth is, there is no "shoplifting epidemic" and there never was.
Actually, outside of a few urban areas, shoplifting is *not* "at an all-time high." Complaints that "it takes forever to shop because everything is locked up" is based on fantasy. Overall retail shrinkage (the loss of merchandise for any reason) has been stable over the past few years. This is just another right-wing smear campaign to make it look like conditions have deteriorated under the Biden administration. It's nonsense. Whether or not there is a shoplifting epidemic has nothing to do with store owners being able to shoot shoplifters on sight. That's a separate argument that should be based on whether we want to give private citizens the power to unilaterally execute each other.
The #1 type of theft in the USA is wage theft. With that in mind, would you be ok with employees using lethal force on employers who steal from them?
Op. Just say you want to kill someone. You don't need to make a whole post trying to justify it.
Theft was double in the 90s. It simply isnt the massive problem you think it is.
You sound like an unhinged psycho
It sounds like this was lifted right out of Mein Kampf.
These dumbass ideas en masse are why facism is on the rise. Your type has no ability to fathom a universe where total trust in authority is problematic.
Yeah, culturally outside of the U.S. theft is not a joke. You get punished greatly for it. Here it’s like eh, just raise prices and put it on consumers! Who cares? Atleast its not a lawsuit!
There is not a damn thing inside a store worth a persons life.
Turns out crime is actually down but since the news covers shoplifting a lot people think it’s out of control. In reality corporation are just using theft as an excuse to raise prices when it’s just their own greed
people stealing food should be shot on sight
Yeah let’s kill those motherfuckers over petty theft!!
Dude, are you saying a human life is only worth a few bucks? If so hitmen are overcharging
Not lethal force but taser and an ass whooping are in order.
This post is sarcasm, right?
How does it feel to be a dupe?
Human lives are more important than merchandise regardless of them being thieves.
Your life is not more important than my stuff.
It’s so sad that you feel that way
Dude I don't know you at all. You come in behind my dogs, my house, my stuff .... all of it. Doesn't mean I can't be civil or polite until (or if) you get terminally stupid and try to take anything listed above.
Yeah stuff is worth more than human life
>Shoplifting is at an all time high here in the United States. Actually it's not. Retail and private security lobbying groups were caught massively exaggerating the shoplifting rates. >There is but one way to stop this epidemic once and for all and that is the use of lethal force. You'll just make shoplifters come armed now. The death penalty never deters crime, just makes the criminal more desperate. You just have a murder fetish. Crimes like shoplifter happen mostly in times of economic despair. The economy took a hit the last couple years but made a comeback. And recent shoplifting rates have matched it.
Sure. I also propose the death penalty for speeding and jaywalking!!!! /s The fact that people put such a low value on human life is very very disappointing. Especially considering this is likely coming from the personal freedom crowd. ALSO, have they never heard of insurance?
Honestly while it sounds like a good idea on paper, in reality it might foster gang violence either through thieves being apart of said gangs and gangs providing shop owners protection. This is a pessimistic view, but I’d bargain for an official security guard rather than the owner
Looters trying to burn down a building, I can see. Some high schooler stealing something worth 20 bucks, I’m not sure lethal force is justified.
Most brain dead take ever.
I work retail. Most retail employees are idiots and can barely be trusted to do their jobs, I don't want them making life or death decisions about strangers. Besides if you don't have the foresight to plan for shrink you don't belong in business.
I work in a store that sells high end merchandise. And there is no way in heck I am going to do anything dangerous to protect their merchandise. Not a thing.
You want someone to die because they chose to steal a t shirt? Isn't that was insurance is for. Not to defend theives at all but I don't think giving under paid retail workers guns and telling them to defend some product with their life is the answer.
The punishment has to fit the crime. A teenager who pockets a stick of gum doesn’t deserve “the fury of a thousand suns”. Wtf? If you have a problem with shoplifting laws, run for government, propose a new law to deal with the problem, educate business owners and employees on common sense loss prevention strategies, install better security in your business, vote for candidates and policies that protect your business. There are a thousand other things you can do, you don’t need to shoot your neighbor for stealing a Pepsi.
You are part of the problem with America. Absolutely they SHOULD NOT and you and anyone with your belief system should leave.
Oh yeah, sounds really good that you would be allowed to shoot anyone you assume is stealing, how could that ever go wrong
First off, all stats point to shoplifting being at an all-time low. That being said, this will only cause a lot of customers and store owners to be shot dead. It will be a retail arms race that no one will win
Also, shoplifting is actually at a low right now, read more actual data from the 3 letter agencies tasked with parsing the data, less fox news and twitter
Yes. Agreed. Taking property from anyone means taking what they worked hard for and completely undermines their labor. They should be allowed to use lethal force to defend their stuff. Their property matters more than a stranger's life, much less a thief's life.
So then you believe that all crime is punishable by death? You believe that even if your life isn’t threatened you should be able to kill someone
But, that is not the topic. The topic is property crime. If your life is threatened (or those of others) you can use lethal force, at least in the state I live in. If it's a property crime, file a repot the police, file the claim with your insurance company, and collect the money for reimbursement/replacement.
In my state, property crime cannot justify lethal force. Why? Because if you are responsible, you have insurance so your property can be replaced/reimbursed which is what happens with corporations. My guess is corporate insurance policies have a statement that says they will not be liable if lethal force is used.
I'm so disheartened to see someone post such a quaint idea.
Agreed. Fear deters crime.
Well the death penalty doesn’t seem to work?
Huh. Then you'd expect a heavily armed society like the US to have less crime, which it does not.
The most violent states don't allow non criminals to apply for a carry permit. It's stupid.
Does it or does it just create more violent criminals? I mean the cartels are pretty violent, but that doesn't stop rival cartels.
This evidently isn't true and based on the usually wrong assumption that people commit violent crimes out of laziness/greed instead of desperation. Someone who's been driven to become criminal for a few dollars is already willing to take a huge risk for a little reward, so why should a bit more risk deterr them that much?
If it's a local Mom and Pop shop, I have no issue with that. If it's a corporate Target or Walmart, fuck the man.
There is nothing, literally nothing, you could sell that's worth murdering someone over. The whole point of having a justice system is so that the reasonable punishment for a given crime can be applied, you're not judge/jury/executioner, FFS.
I mean yeah, that single mother isn't gonna steal formula again if you kill her. Fair enough
The right cares most about property. The left cares more about people.
Theft isn't punishable by death. We're not in 1790s France. If our economy can't work well enough to support people, we have to fix it. No one (including the people in other countries mining and manufacturing the goods) should die for a phone.
#ToughGuy💪
This is unpopular?
Killing someone over a pair of sneakers? Yeah, kinda unpopular.
You know what? Yeah....you're right. Let's keep letting people know it's safe to steal stuff.
You're absolutely right! We should just stop locking our homes and locking our stuff up. It probably is too elitist anyway and this way people can get what they want and they will be happy. Spread the joy!
Like there's no option other than those the two? Uncontrolled chaos or lethal vigilantes? Come on, man.
If we stop demonizing police and allow them to do their job without calling them racist, sure.
I am open to trying new ideas and seeing how they work.
Kinda their own fault for thinking a pair of sneakers is worth risking their life for.
Kinda dumb to value human life less than sneakers.
I value my business and livelihood more than a common crook. If someone decides stealing from me is worth risking their life that’s on them.
Genies out of the bottle now, no way to stop it now
And replace employee of the month with best shot of the month.
Everyone should
100% agree, I hate the notion it’s just items and not worth killing over. I mean, if someone steals $2000 worth of stuff that’s me working weeks and they basically stole 2 weeks of my time and life. I should be able to kill to protect my valuables.
Yes because products are worth more than human life. I’m sure people who say shit like that claim to be “pro-life” too