To me shoplifiting is:
- Entering a shop with the intent to remove something without paying for it.
- Seeing something in a shop and intentionally making the decision to remove it without paying.
- Intentionally hiding something on your person whilst in a shop and walking out with it unpaid for.
To me shoplifiting isn't:
- A child in a push chair innocently removing something from a shelf and their Parent(s) leaving the shop and not noticing until they've gone.
- When an item gets attached to a person in some way, without them noticing, and they are unaware it's their until it is too late and they have left the shop.
- Somebody forgetting they have an item on them, which they intended to buy, but genuinely forgot about and exited the shop.
Exceptions
- If someone is stealing food or other necessities because they genuinely cannot afford it.
In my opinion, bar the exception above, if it's intentional and the shoplifter is well aware of their actions, then it's theft, it's a crime, it's shoplifitng and personally I believe it should stop.
I have always had the opinion that shoplifiting is wrong, but recently I have heard more and more cases of what has been coined "the shoplifiting disease" and this behaviour has made my opinions against shoplifiting grow stronger.
Basically, it has recently come to light that the stereotype of shoplifters being unruly teenagers is untrue and in fact it's middle classes adults who can quite easily pay for the goods that are now taking advantage. This article I found from The Times is a perfect example: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article2923540.ece
The writer of the article claims herself to be among many who are "perfectly well-off, [but] still feel compelled to take things we could easily afford and don’t particularly want from high-street shops without paying for them." But despite what she says, it's still a crime and surely she's aware of that? At first I didn't understand why? Especially after she'd made it so clear that she could afford such.
But then further down the article I realised... shoplifting becomes an addiction. She says, "truth is that I have been shoplifting sporadically for most of my adult life and I doubt that I will get through Christmas without pilfering something along the way." and after and detailed description of her least theft goes on to lists other items she has managed to get away with. She keeps doing it, as if she couldn't stop, like an addict of any kind.
"According to a report published this week, Britain is the shoplifting capital of Europe. I am, apparently, contributing to £26 million worth of goods that go missing every day." That is quite a figure, because of this "bad habit" shops are loosing millions a day and other law abiding citizens are being cheated as a result. It isn't fair on anyone. But I did find some consolation in the fact that even what appeared to be the over confident pilferer in this article, "my heart rate barely increased", did feel guilt after the deed, "I do feel bad about it."
What I found hardest to believe about this is that the writer did not claim this behaviour to be a habit but a "recurrence" despite all the evidence she gave earlier to show this to be more of an addiction. Although, I stand by my belief that most addicts are in denial. Her reasoning of "because I can" blew me away and even angered me a little. I think my main reason for this is I just don't think it's fair, why should somebody walk away with something for nothing just because they're willing to break the law and the good citzens walk away so many pounds lighter in their purse. It doesn't make sense. I meanly surely it should be the other way around?
To shoplifter virgins, such as myself, cases such as this one do make the act of shoplifting more appealing. In the article the writer explains their other reasoning for part-taking in this immoral behaviour, "tit-for-tat against the large retailers who rip me off. I don’t go into shops intending to steal, but I do get taken over by fits of righteous indignation." By shoplifting she is saying "then we’ll be even" and it is this point I can agree with. Why should we pay a big stores overpriced prices for things that were "made for sixpence in China or India"?
So although I am persuaded and do believe this does go in favour of this act of bad behaviour, I still I think I'll stick to my fair trade coffee and paying the right price for everything.
- Entering a shop with the intent to remove something without paying for it.
- Seeing something in a shop and intentionally making the decision to remove it without paying.
- Intentionally hiding something on your person whilst in a shop and walking out with it unpaid for.
To me shoplifiting isn't:
- A child in a push chair innocently removing something from a shelf and their Parent(s) leaving the shop and not noticing until they've gone.
- When an item gets attached to a person in some way, without them noticing, and they are unaware it's their until it is too late and they have left the shop.
- Somebody forgetting they have an item on them, which they intended to buy, but genuinely forgot about and exited the shop.
Exceptions
- If someone is stealing food or other necessities because they genuinely cannot afford it.
In my opinion, bar the exception above, if it's intentional and the shoplifter is well aware of their actions, then it's theft, it's a crime, it's shoplifitng and personally I believe it should stop.
I have always had the opinion that shoplifiting is wrong, but recently I have heard more and more cases of what has been coined "the shoplifiting disease" and this behaviour has made my opinions against shoplifiting grow stronger.
Basically, it has recently come to light that the stereotype of shoplifters being unruly teenagers is untrue and in fact it's middle classes adults who can quite easily pay for the goods that are now taking advantage. This article I found from The Times is a perfect example: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article2923540.ece
The writer of the article claims herself to be among many who are "perfectly well-off, [but] still feel compelled to take things we could easily afford and don’t particularly want from high-street shops without paying for them." But despite what she says, it's still a crime and surely she's aware of that? At first I didn't understand why? Especially after she'd made it so clear that she could afford such.
But then further down the article I realised... shoplifting becomes an addiction. She says, "truth is that I have been shoplifting sporadically for most of my adult life and I doubt that I will get through Christmas without pilfering something along the way." and after and detailed description of her least theft goes on to lists other items she has managed to get away with. She keeps doing it, as if she couldn't stop, like an addict of any kind.
"According to a report published this week, Britain is the shoplifting capital of Europe. I am, apparently, contributing to £26 million worth of goods that go missing every day." That is quite a figure, because of this "bad habit" shops are loosing millions a day and other law abiding citizens are being cheated as a result. It isn't fair on anyone. But I did find some consolation in the fact that even what appeared to be the over confident pilferer in this article, "my heart rate barely increased", did feel guilt after the deed, "I do feel bad about it."
What I found hardest to believe about this is that the writer did not claim this behaviour to be a habit but a "recurrence" despite all the evidence she gave earlier to show this to be more of an addiction. Although, I stand by my belief that most addicts are in denial. Her reasoning of "because I can" blew me away and even angered me a little. I think my main reason for this is I just don't think it's fair, why should somebody walk away with something for nothing just because they're willing to break the law and the good citzens walk away so many pounds lighter in their purse. It doesn't make sense. I meanly surely it should be the other way around?
To shoplifter virgins, such as myself, cases such as this one do make the act of shoplifting more appealing. In the article the writer explains their other reasoning for part-taking in this immoral behaviour, "tit-for-tat against the large retailers who rip me off. I don’t go into shops intending to steal, but I do get taken over by fits of righteous indignation." By shoplifting she is saying "then we’ll be even" and it is this point I can agree with. Why should we pay a big stores overpriced prices for things that were "made for sixpence in China or India"?
So although I am persuaded and do believe this does go in favour of this act of bad behaviour, I still I think I'll stick to my fair trade coffee and paying the right price for everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment