Target has a fearsome reputation on the internet regarding how far it goes to stop shoplifting. As is commonly told, it is supposed to track repeat small time shoplifters until they have one last theft that puts them over $1000 (or whatever the magic felony amount is) and only then does Target drop the net and get the shoplifter convicted on a felony for the total amount that has been stolen over weeks or months as one charge.
As the story is told, it smells strange to me and creates many, many followup questions in my mind. I think those questions would be answered by reading through a court case. As famous as Target is, I feel like more dedicated online crime news followers would know of the case and how it played out. Can anyone point me at it?
Edit: The tale told here.
What meds have you just tossed back with a bourbon chaser? You are the one going off the deep end, fella. I merely stated my opinion about something from a purely legal-reasoning perspective and this person got all in a huff and ranted at me - not comprehending what I had said. And now you’re doubling down on that person’s incredulity and outrage. And the sad part is that evidently neither of you have grasped my one very distinct point, and instead have inferred some huge argument in which I never partook.
Really folks, please stay off the really heavy substances when conversing online. You’re both acting like screaming petulant children. I suspect I’m older than you both combined, no surprise there.
Please just let this die. Nobody is making the effort to read thoroughly and ASK to understand what I had been saying, instead you continue with your incorrect assumptions and attack those assumptions. That’s called a straw man argument, and you both could fill a scarecrow field.