Man Arrested For Not Showing His Circuit City Reciept, Driver’s License
First he refused to show his reciept and the Circuit City people blocked his car. Then when he called for the police and they asked for his driver's license, he refused and was arrested.
I'm going to try and follow this case because this guy says there's no law requiring that he show his reciept and also no law requiring that he present ID to the officer. If that's true, I hope he sues both Circuit City and the police station for all their worth. People who abuse consumers and citizens merely because of their ignorance of their rights is one of the main reasons I began this website.
Oh, and in case you don't see the problem, check out this nicely put comment from Slashdot.org:
That bag contained his private property that he had just purchased. He gave them money for it, it's his, not theirs.
Should he be able to inspect their cash registers after his purchase? After all, they contain money that was his just moments before.
Would you feel differently about the privacy implications if he were leaving Wal*Mart and had just filled his prescription for an STD, or to prevent his frequent diarrhea? Pharmacists are licensed professionals, trained on the privacy aspects of their profession. You're saying that I should have to expose my medical condition to any minimum-wage flunkie who gets curious?
Go Michael, go!
Update 9/5/2007
He'll continue to update his blog with information on the case. Today's entry included this quote:
You don’t have to stand in front of a tank or refuse to move to the back of the bus to make a difference in the world.Well said.
Update 9/20/2007
Share This
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
I have similar issues with Costco and BJ’s. I wanna just tell them all to F*** off. Here I am, spending my money in their store, purchasing their products. I go through their cashier and who obviously has to ring up all of the items. I pay. An again before I leave the store some flunkie needs to look at my receipt. With that, sometimes when I have such a big load I can not see how they even know what’s in their. If i were a cashier at that store I’d be offened and insulted as they pretty much do not trust the cashiers either. So for stores like that they don’t trust you, the paying customer nor their workers. What SCUM.
I’ve just been encouraged to push the envelop! Thanks
Ha ha! Glad to see you’re enthusiastic. Be careful though. This guy lives in Ohio and the laws might be different if you don’t too. You might be required to show a reciept in your states.
Costco is a bit different. You pay just for the “privelege” of shopping there and you enter into a contractual agreement with them when you do. Part of that agreement consists of you allowing them the right to check you’re receipt upon leaving. Generally they will have a large sign posted near the entrance or exit of the store stating this.
However, in the case of a more casual shopping experience (i.e. you don’t have to pay/sign a contract just to enter the store) while they can ask to see your receipt and the contents of your bags, there is nothing giving them the right to do so. If you refuse, they cannot legally force you to expose your purchase.
@Keegan,
Funny you mention that. The Consumerist has an article about that very thing today:
Receipt Check Policies For Costco, Sam’s Club, And BJ’s
The greatest threat to our freedom lies in private interests, in particular when citizens forget the public interest and put their own individual interest first. Our freedom depends on citizens caring about the public interest and putting that first. The laws are a declaration of what we the people as a whole will, and it is through obedience to those laws as subjects that we can hope to enjoy the rights the guarantee us as citizens. When we stop caring about our duties to the public interest as citizens then the state is as good as lost and our freedom dissolves, every bit as much as when a man who loses his will to live loses his natural freedom. Slavery is to be governed by our appetites. The maintenance of our freedom depends on the strength of the social bond through which we actively resist the inevitable tendency of the government to prefer its private interest as a body over our interest as a people. This clearly happens when executive authority breaks the law and thereby usurps the legislative authority which is the very condition of its existence and the will of the people.
We must fight for our freedom by refusing to live as slaves in the land of our birth, no matter how uncomfortable and difficult the fight. When we care only about what is easy and convenient, then we have lost everything and sold ourselves into slavery. I greatly admire Michael Righi’s refusal to put his private interest above his civic duty. This virtue alone is a how defend the authority of the people from the depredations of executive power.
@Stephen:
Hear hear! Nice comment Stephen.
All I got to say IS…
“YOU GO, MICHAEL”….
and, it has PO’ed me several times being held up leaving a store after a paid purchase…it needs to stop…if people did their jobs this wouldn’t be happening. I don’t like it, and next time they try it on me, I’ll do the same damn thing now.
Wanda
Fort Myers Florida
[JEREMY] – Note! This comment appears to be intended for Michael. I’ve left it here for diagnostic reasons, but have notified Michael so he will see it. Thanks.
Dear Michael,
We have been discussing your article on the webpage listed above. I, for one, am appalled at the behavior exhibited by the police and the Johnny-Rent-A-Cops at Circuit City. “It’s our policy” sounds too much like “we’re just following orders” for my comfort. Though many have been critical of your stand, I applaud your efforts. Not because I don’t respect authority, I do, but that respect must be earned, it is not a matter of right. I don’t like when people ‘try to stick it to the man’ just to be difficult, but your case is so much different from that. I wish you well in your fight and hope that this matter is resolved by a hopefully enlightened judge dismissing the charges. I think our civil liberties have taken a beating and it’s now time for folks to stand up and say “hey, wait a minute, why do I have to do (insert thing in here) again?” There’s nothing wrong with questioning authority. Theoretically, we live in a country whose government is ‘for the people, by the people.’ We, not the State, are the people. It’s high time we started acting like it. Don’t question authority blindly, but open your eyes. We are waiting for the big battle to reclaim our civil liberties, but that battle is being fought now, on every street, in everytown, USA. Be courteous, but be inquisitive. So, thank you Michael. I wish you well, and you have inspired me to open my eyes.
What he is not telling us is upon entering the Circuit City he passed a sign that said “Bags can be inspected upon exit”
“That bag contained his private property that he had just purchased. He gave them money for it, it’s his, not theirs.” Circuit City was asking for proof of this.
After I read this story i went to my local Circuit City in Buena Park, CA.I saw a sign that told me when i was walking in that my bag will be looked at when i walk out. I talked to the young lady at the front door and at first she didn’t want to tell me ways people stole but after i told her what i was doing she let me know. People come in and buy something and leave. Then they come back the next day with their old bag and respite planning on putting something they didn’t pay for in the bag and walking out. So she makes sure to look at the date and what they bought matches whats in the bag. She even inspect employee bags.
Good point Bill. I don’t disagree that some security precautions are necessary, but I still find merit in this story. There are less invasive ways to catch this kind of theivery and, more importantly, theft is far more of an inside job than not. Harming everyone’s freedom for the sake of a few is just bad logic.
Most importantly was the issue of being required to show id then getting arrested for not. That’s just not ok.
I feel the same way you do when it comes to the police Jeremy, but, I think him not letting them look in his bag was more of being difficult then standing up for his rights. Its not like they were asking to look in his personal back pack. I feel the store was justified in there actions. For all they knew he was a criminal because he wouldn’t prove to them he was not.
It seems to me that a store could hire a security team or loose prevention team, install security cameras in their store and have them watch them for theft, and train their other employees to watch of shop lifters, though all of this would not be very cost effective for a company. Especially when they could just use one of their normal clerks that only makes minimum wage to hold all their customers up and invade their rights, which I do belive is an invasion of a consumers rights to after you’ve come to this companies store and given them your money for their product for them to stop you at the door and inspect all that you are leaving with. If there is this much a concern for loss pervention, to make your customers waste their time and possibly feel or look like a criminal when all you’ve done is come to thier store to shop. When the consumer provides the company with its very existence (not the other way around). The bottom line is money. These companies pay their employess the lowest minimum wage they can get away with, rathier then at least paying these people enough so that they maybe care about their job enough to watch whats going on in the store. Stores like Wal-Mart are the worst about this, as they are even paying less people by removing thier cashers and replacing them with self-checkouts. That way they can just pay the 1 clerk to watch the 4 self check outs and the one clerk to stop you at the door to look over your newly gained property. I agree completly with the above comment put here from Slashdot.org:
“That bag contained his private property that he had just purchased. He gave them money for it, it’s his, not theirs.
Should he be able to inspect their cash registers after his purchase? After all, they contain money that was his just moments before.
Would you feel differently about the privacy implications if he were leaving Wal*Mart and had just filled his prescription for an STD, or to prevent his frequent diarrhea? Pharmacists are licensed professionals, trained on the privacy aspects of their profession. You’re saying that I should have to expose my medical condition to any minimum-wage flunkie who gets curious?”
Its not anyones business what one has purchased, once you’ve paid for it, its yours. You own it. The store doesn’t still own it and should not have to right to mill through your belongings, even if you just got them from that store. If the store is so worried about this then they should hire people to watch their customers in the store before they are going out the door.
Bravo to Michael and all you others willing to stand up for what is right, and not cowing down blindly. Glad to see him post whats happened to him, and what he did in response to it. Also to see you fellow enlightened minds that support his thinking.
Ok, I have to come clean. I worked in a Casino for 22 years from floor security, to cameras, to head of security. We can hear dirty thoughts your girlfriends whispers in your ear if we want. You wanna talk about an invasion of privacy lets talk. A DVD in a bag is a joke! If you don’t want it happing then don’t shop at places that do it. Maybe they will get the picture and stop doing it. Put everything behind lock and key and then have you complain about not being able to look at the product. Or you can complain about the jacked up cost because the business has to make up for the money they lost. Over all this complaint seems absurd to me. If any of us owned our own store and constantly people are walking out the with thing didn’t pay for what are you going to do to stop it?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88727523@N00/?saved=1
@ Bill:
“If you don’t want it happing then don’t shop at places that do it.”
You say that like it’s so easy. If I had one complaint about your approach, it would be that you think that because there are worse problems, we shouldn’t complain about the “little” ones. You say that we should shop somewhere where they don’t do this. Where would that be exactly? When all stores have the same policies, then do you still have a reasonable choice?
As for the picture you posted, the question now is whether or not that notice is binding or not.
And because of Noah, now I wonder what would happen if you immediately put your merchandise in your backpack and walked out 🙂
I do feel there are a lot bigger problems then showing someone proof of perches at a store….
@ Bill:
As we all do though I still think little battles, like when Comcast screws up the billing YET AGAIN, still need to be fought. The unanswered question (which it would be nice if Michael would give us another update sometime), is whether or not he was right that he doesn’t have to show his merchandise. Granted, even if he IS right, the store can refuse to serve him in the future (I think).
The problem here is they are not in violation of your 4th admendment rights. They are allowd to check your bags upon entering and leaving the store since they aren’t acting as the government. If you don’t like them searching you, don’t shop there. I am on your side for the obstruction of justice part. What if you didn’t have a license to begin with? They can’t demand to see a license if you aren’t driving.
First the easy part: Yes, stores have a right to inspect your parcels, especially if it’s posted policy on the door. And yes, you have a right to decline and they better be sure if they detain you in an effort to exercise their right. The rights thing is the subject of a lot of comments on various blogs about this subject. But that’s not the real issue here.
What’s at stake is an erosion of rights and expectation of privacy as a result of a “go-with-the-flow” mentality. Millions of law-abiding citizens take off their shoes at the airport because of one alleged shoe bomber. We now have restrictions on liquids going through security at the airport because the Europeans thought they might have had a potential threat of this type. And we tolerate the “guilty-until-proven-innocent” treatment from retailers. These are all ineffectual or unwarranted intrusions we are subjected to in the name of increased safety and security.
Statistics show retail fraud accounts for only 1.86% of total revenue. Why punish the 98.34% of honest customers with a “trust-but-verify” mentality? I don’t advocate pushing the issue to the point of confrontation with the police, but I do think it’s time we stood our ground. That’s why I decline the Invasion of the Receipt Snatchers now.
its 1.86% with door checkers….if we take them away…it can and will go up….
Check the update above for the outcome of the case.
“If you don’t want it happing then don’t shop at places that do it. ?
I agree, but if the store doesn’t like when it “happs” to them then they should move to another country that doesn’t have laws protecting human rights.