I think the problem is that we get into a debate about whether or not the theft exists, but the pushback against retailers' narratives is not, simply "duh, there isn't any theft". The problem with the press' and retailers narrative is the causality and and where the responsibility lies. The whole of the narrative is that there is organiz…
I think the problem is that we get into a debate about whether or not the theft exists, but the pushback against retailers' narratives is not, simply "duh, there isn't any theft". The problem with the press' and retailers narrative is the causality and and where the responsibility lies. The whole of the narrative is that there is organized theft and using social media as a way to fence the stolen goods, to the point that it's an existential problem for the retailers.
We spend an inordinately large amount of money on policing, broadly. Set aside a hypothetical debate between our current carceral justice system, the expensive system that imprisons more people than any other developed country, and a social approach that would, ideally, reduce the incidence of these crimes - why can't our expensive, expansive police force solve this problem?
I'm skeptical of the last two parts of this narrative - I'm skeptical that the majority of the theft is organized, and that some organized theft ring could move enough merchandise, fast enough, on Facebook marketplace to turn a profit for the hypothetical ringleaders. But if it's happening, to any extent, why is it so hard for the police to curb and deter this crime? Why are we throwing good money after bad?
Theft happens, and shrink happens - that's why these stores are insured. But if theft is theoretically happening like the press and retailers say it is, don't get mad at reporters, get mad at the cops. We paid, and paid, and paid for them to solve and deter crimes. And if our incredibly expensive cops can't collar people who *sell shit on Facebook*, it's a cop problem.
Here's something I was pointed to today on the actual crime numbers vs. Target's claim that the Yakuza, the Mafia, the Purple Gang, and the Cornbread Mafia are all stripping the stores clean:
Is this relevant to Pam's story? Hard to say as stores like hers would be different from discount department stores like Target, but there may be higher meaning nonetheless.
I don't think I've seen any real evidence of an organized shoplifting ring. The news stories I've heard on this are long on speculation about organized theft and fencing, but I haven't heard about anything like the cops raiding a warehouse where the store all the stolen goods, or tracking down the people putting up the ads.
This is definitely relevant is the sense that Pam could be be experiencing theft in the store they work in, but that doesn't mean there's big, organized shoplifting gangs. The burden of proof is on the people claiming these gangs are behind the theft.
I think the problem is that we get into a debate about whether or not the theft exists, but the pushback against retailers' narratives is not, simply "duh, there isn't any theft". The problem with the press' and retailers narrative is the causality and and where the responsibility lies. The whole of the narrative is that there is organized theft and using social media as a way to fence the stolen goods, to the point that it's an existential problem for the retailers.
We spend an inordinately large amount of money on policing, broadly. Set aside a hypothetical debate between our current carceral justice system, the expensive system that imprisons more people than any other developed country, and a social approach that would, ideally, reduce the incidence of these crimes - why can't our expensive, expansive police force solve this problem?
I'm skeptical of the last two parts of this narrative - I'm skeptical that the majority of the theft is organized, and that some organized theft ring could move enough merchandise, fast enough, on Facebook marketplace to turn a profit for the hypothetical ringleaders. But if it's happening, to any extent, why is it so hard for the police to curb and deter this crime? Why are we throwing good money after bad?
Theft happens, and shrink happens - that's why these stores are insured. But if theft is theoretically happening like the press and retailers say it is, don't get mad at reporters, get mad at the cops. We paid, and paid, and paid for them to solve and deter crimes. And if our incredibly expensive cops can't collar people who *sell shit on Facebook*, it's a cop problem.
Here's something I was pointed to today on the actual crime numbers vs. Target's claim that the Yakuza, the Mafia, the Purple Gang, and the Cornbread Mafia are all stripping the stores clean:
https://popular.info/p/target-says-its-closing-9-stores
Is this relevant to Pam's story? Hard to say as stores like hers would be different from discount department stores like Target, but there may be higher meaning nonetheless.
I don't think I've seen any real evidence of an organized shoplifting ring. The news stories I've heard on this are long on speculation about organized theft and fencing, but I haven't heard about anything like the cops raiding a warehouse where the store all the stolen goods, or tracking down the people putting up the ads.
This is definitely relevant is the sense that Pam could be be experiencing theft in the store they work in, but that doesn't mean there's big, organized shoplifting gangs. The burden of proof is on the people claiming these gangs are behind the theft.