Do you object to BAG INSPECTIONS at stores

[nero_bolt]

?

Do you object to BAG INSPECTIONS at stores?

Do you object to staff asking to inspect your bag? (they are only doing their job) 

Will you shop at a  store that asks to inspect your bag or will you go elsewhere? 

Do bag inspections and security checks help to stop shop lifting and keep prices down?

If you object WHY?

Do you think that objecting to a bag inspection makes a person look guilty or they are guilty? 

Rememer that its a condition of entry at just about every major /medium/small store in Australia 

[purple_haize]

My daughter has just dropped my granddaugher off, I asked her about looking in bags as she goes everywhere shopping........Big W, KMart, Target Myer............all have people on the door, but they never ask anyone to show their bags......never.........

[cherry*135]

secondly the bit most are missing is its only a store policy and not a legal requirement to comply

Says who?

Most if not all here who don't object, realise it is store policy and we agree to comply. Why anyone else would have a problem with that I don't know.

No store door staff  are holding us down against our free will, grabbing our bags and fossicking through them.

[*ibis]

get back to her gestapo-tactics
prove our honesty to officious shop assisants
only obeying orders
thoroughly cowed and intimidated shoppers on this thread
tolerating opression as a matter of course
acceptance of oppression
normalises oppression for others in society

geez

[mugssy65]

Then they are not doing their job, do you honestly think these stores employ people to stand at the door like shags on rocks?

[mugssy65]

I'll up your gees to a holy snapping duck s**t!!!

[cherry*135]

purple.. I think in recent years (last 1 or 2) major stores have installed security cameras, rather than relying on door bag checks.

I mentioned before our Kmart  always had a person on the door that wanted to look in everyones bags, since they moved to a brand new store they don't even have a person on the door now. Being a new store security cameras were installed?

We have a new Myer too.. you hear over the loud speaker  'security to small appliances' there so cameras are being used.

Other stores you hear 'security to aisle xx'.

As mentioned by others there are security scanners at exits as well.

[**meep**]

---

@the_hawk* wrote:

---

@**meep** wrote:

---

@the_hawk* wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

Take a 'special' type of person to go to those lengths.

I think meep asked above  - has anyone in Australia ever done that or is it just a  fantasy some people have?

---

Oh dear me why not do some research rather than write stuff you think is right.

Legal risks
It is important to understand that private security personnel possess no
greater powers than those of the owner, occupier, director or manager of
premises. Like any citizen, owners or their agents have the right to make a
"citizen's arrest" in circumstances where they perceive that a crime (such as
larceny in a shopping centre, for example) has been committed. The only
limitation is that owners and citizens have to be right about their suspicions
or face a civil suit (for false imprisonment or assault) if they are wrong or
unable to prove their case. By contrast, the public police's actions are
usually authorised by special legislation which provides a defence against
any such action, the defence of reasonable suspicion..

ref http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/business/sarre.pdf

and http://defamationwatch.com.au/?p=374

lots more if you look

---

The cases were either dismissed or lost on appeal

http://www.timebase.com.au/news/2011/AT535-article.html

Arrest -- Powers of citizen -- Detention of customer by store detective pending arrival of police -- (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 s 352(1) Arrest -- Wrongful arrest -- Standard of proof where crime alleged.

The appellant was arrested by a store detective and detained until a police constable arrived. After spending about half an hour making inquiries and taking a statement the constable arrested the appellant on a charge of larceny. He was acquitted of this charge. An action by the appellant for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment against the store and two of its employees, including the person who had arrested him, was dismissed.

In the circumstances, the court was satisfied, that the store detective had been able to show that she had had reasonable and proper cause to suspect, on the balance of probabilities, and that offence had been committed, and thus the arrest and subsequently undue detention had been neither unlawful nor unreasonable.

@the_hawk* wrote:

they have no special powers, they could make a citizens arrest but that would get the company sued for unlawful detention (false imprisonment ) and a number of other things for many tens of thounsands of $$ when they found nothing.

"false imprisonment" (when found nothing)  does not automatically guarantee an entitlement to compensation.

---

its no wonder you don't understand when you don't read to whole outcome, only part was dismissed and still cost several thousand $$

I really wonder if people actually believe what they think is correct if they repeat it many times or do they believe others will believe it if they a bombarded with mis truths

---

That is a very good question.  

@the_hawk* wrote:

they have no special powers, they could make a citizens arrest but that would get the company sued for unlawful detention (false imprisonment ) and a number of other things for many tens of thounsands of $$ when they found nothing.

Not exactly true, is it?

[purple_haize]

And according to the police, the shop can not force you to show your bags & if they keep you there while they call the cops..........and it turns out you have nothing to hide, you can take the shop to court.................those words straight from a policeman who my daughter knows.

Even the shop security guy has no authority to hold a customer unless they have proof that the customer took something.......

[acacia_pycnantha]

Like I said, that so many people accept bag checks as a normal part of shopping and willingly submit and comply, (despite there being no legal basis to enforce it) is rather depressing and a little bit scary.

[cherry*135]

There is nothing 'sheepie' in being compliant.

I had no idea whether people do or don't object to store bag policy before this thread. I make my own decisions.

Funny how it is the males that are so obstreperous on this bag check policy.  I bet they don't go shopping as much as the people who aren't fazed by bag check policies.