Big Brother is Watching You at Wal-Mart

[lemansnsx]

Two women were arrested yesterday leaving a Wal-Mart store after purchasing several items all of which are perfectly legal. They had also shop-lifted another perfectly legal item but the store apparently did not know that when it called local police to have them waiting outside for the women. The items purchased? A couple of cans of starter fluid, some coffee filters, glass jars, tubing, and packages of sudafed. The shop-lifted item? Lithium batteries. All perfecly legal but all used in cooking methamphetamine.
Wal-Mart's computerized registers flagged the transaction alerting store management who then called police. Had they even tried to buy just the batteries they would have been prevented from purchasing more than 4 packages. Yep - Wal-Mart has a list of products used in the manufacture of illegal drugs and they are limiting sales of these items. Try to buy several of these items on one trip whether by design or pure coincidence and you are likely to find Johnny Law waiting for you outside the doors. No limit on purchases of fertilizer according to one reporter.


Women charged after shopping for meth supplies at Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart's Ignoble War on Drugs

 

[WillErickson]

I've worked for Wal-Mart for 11 years, this is nothing new, we've had the limits on various pharmaceuticals for 5 or 6 years now. We don't, however, have any type of system that tells us to alert the authorities when someone attempts to exceed those limits. Something else must have concerned the store in order for them to have felt it necessary to call the police.
I was not aware that batteries were used to make drugs, I've never dealt with an issue of a customer not being able to purchase large quantities of batteries.

Will

 

[satan_srv]

I've worked for Wal-Mart for 11 years, this is nothing new, we've had the limits on various pharmaceuticals for 5 or 6 years now. We don't, however, have any type of system that tells us to alert the authorities when someone attempts to exceed those limits. Something else must have concerned the store in order for them to have felt it necessary to call the police.
I was not aware that batteries were used to make drugs, I've never dealt with an issue of a customer not being able to purchase large quantities of batteries.

Will

How do you afford an NSX on a "Greeter"'s salary?

 

[Autophile]

Man, those are two butt-ugly women. Eeesh! But I guess mugshots are never pretty.

 

[svalleynsx]

I'm all for the government playing "Big Brother" on this one. Clandestine meth labs are a big problem here in Calif. as is the rest of the nation I assume. You read about them exploding, catching fire, and emitting noxious fumes all the time in the news. Sometimes even within shouting distance of schools and recreation areas. Any tool that law enforcement has at their disposal to shut them down should be used to the full extent.

The only problem is someday somebody WILL purchase these items together legally, get arrested, challenge the law that their civil rights were violated and open up a whole new "can of worms" in the process.

 

[MarkB]

...The only problem is someday somebody WILL purchase these items together legally, get arrested, challenge the law that their civil rights were violated and open up a whole new "can of worms" in the process.

Don't give them any ideas.

 

[LeftLane]

I have no problem with this either. Also, don't overlook the fact that these two thugs were indeed shoplifting...

Long ago, one of my college jobs working for a retail store was to follow around "suspicious" shoppers and make them feel very uncomfortable. We had a lot of small items, and were constantly dealing with shrinkage, so I tailed them around until they either checked out or left. Now, technology has replaced me for that job, and I think Wal-Mart should be commended and not condemned.

 

[nkb]

I'm all for the government playing "Big Brother" on this one.

Well, playing devil's advocate, that is the issue for some people. How do you regulate when the government (or a business) plays Big Brother? Who dictates whether it is acceptable in one situation, but not in another?

What if the government realizes that people have figured out what Wal-mart (and probably other stores also) is doing, and are now buying their supplies in separate trips, or at multiple stores? Is it OK to set up monitoring across multiple stores, and keep track of everyone's purchases?
Where does it end?

I think the majority of people will agree that we need some sort of reasonable system in place, but how much freedom is everyone willing to sacrifice?

 

[saxonsaxon]

This comes to mind

Just watch or better read "1984", you will change your opinion about allowing anybody filming or tracking you.
I think we should all have cops live in our homes. One per household. This way we could all enjoy our freedoms. There would be no crime and people would not do anything illegal. In the name of security I am willing to give up all my present freedoms - very American.

 

[lemansnsx]

Re: This comes to mind

Just watch or better read "1984", you will change your opinion about allowing anybody filming or tracking you.

Thanks for reminding me - I believe that good old small-town American family-values Wal-Mart was one of the first big retailers to look into the use of facial recognition technology in this country. Yeh, gives me that warm and fuzzy feeling to know my face is being scanned and compared against various databases whenever I shop in a store... NOT!

 

[SCS2k]

"Those who are willing to sacrifice freedom for security, deserve neither."

Benjamin Franklin

This may not be the exact quote

 

[Brian2by2]

I highly doubt that would hold up in court. There is nothing illegal about purchasing those items at a store. If they were shooting up in the parking lot or if they were carrying methamphetamines (spelling?) on them, thats one thing. It could simply be irony that they purchased these items together...although it doesn't seem to be the case here. I don't know...I just think this a crazy case and I'd be furious if I was harassed for this.

Oh, on a side note, I shoplifted a brass 3/4" x 2 1/2" fitting the other day COMPLETELY by accident from Home Depot. I felt so guilty, I drove back and paid for the $3.50 item.

 

[Spencer]

I would say the chances of buying a "collection" of starter fluid, coffee filters, glass jars, tubing, and multiple packages of sudafed and Lithium batteries all on one trip for legitimate purposes is pretty negligible.

How would those of you staying up at night worried about civil rights like to own rental property where one of these idiots has been cooking up meth? Would you like it declared an uninhabitable hazardous waste site? Would you like to pay to have it stripped down to the studs and rebuilt? That's exactly what happens.

I say more power to Wal-Mart. If they can spot a trend in purchases and possibly interdict something like this (on the million to one shot someone has purchased such a bizarre combination of merchandise) who gives a crap?

 

[Psycnosis]

Stuff like this does happen now. I wanted to buy 10 gallons of toline "I dono if it's spelled correctly" to run in my car instead of race gas, they could only sell me 5 gallons and said if they sold me more they have to report it to the FBI. I was fine with that and I think it's good that this stuff is going on. On the flip side I could not get 10 others to buy it for me?

 

[Spencer]

I was fine with that and I think it's good that this stuff is going on. On the flip side I could not get 10 others to buy it for me?

That's a good point, you can. But that illustrates my take on buying supplies to cook up meth...you can't do it with a package of sudafed (even Costco size) and two lithium batteries. When you buy the quantities of these otherwise common supplies that these clowns do...it's an excellent bet that it's for one purpose and one purpose only. So if you buy dozens and dozens of packages (at retail price) of this stuff at one location as some of them do, well then you shouldn't be surprised if someone in law enforcement wants to take a look. And if they were renting a house from me, I'd be glad that somebody watching out for MY rights.

 

[Psycnosis]

Also I don't think most of these people are too smart. And you are right about if they are living in one of your homes, they are protecting you.

That's a good point, you can. But that illustrates my take on buying supplies to cook up meth...you can't do it with a package of sudafed (even Costco size) and two lithium batteries. When you buy the quantities of these otherwise common supplies that these clowns do...it's an excellent bet that it's for one purpose and one purpose only. So if you buy dozens and dozens of packages (at retail price) of this stuff at one location as some of them do, well then you shouldn't be surprised if someone in law enforcement wants to take a look. And if they were renting a house from me, I'd be glad that somebody watching out for MY rights.

 

[svalleynsx]

I would say the chances of buying a "collection" of starter fluid, coffee filters, glass jars, tubing, and multiple packages of sudafed and Lithium batteries all on one trip for legitimate purposes is pretty negligible.

How would those of you staying up at night worried about civil rights like to own rental property where one of these idiots has been cooking up meth? Would you like it declared an uninhabitable hazardous waste site? Would you like to pay to have it stripped down to the studs and rebuilt? That's exactly what happens.

I say more power to Wal-Mart. If they can spot a trend in purchases and possibly interdict something like this (on the million to one shot someone has purchased such a bizarre combination of merchandise) who gives a crap?

In total agreement here. Sort of like the intense screening of passengers on international flights now. Sure it's inconvenient and nobody likes it, and it does strike of "Big Brother" and privacy violations, but everyone seems to be in agreement that's it's a totally necessary thing to do. Orwell might feel differently, but even he would have to agree that it's a totally different world we live in nowadays then the one he wrote of.

 

[nkb]

I say more power to Wal-Mart. If they can spot a trend in purchases and possibly interdict something like this (on the million to one shot someone has purchased such a bizarre combination of merchandise) who gives a crap?

Yes, you're right, nobody gives a crap about spying on dipshits who aren't smart enough to make their purchasing trips less obvious.
But, that comes back to, when is a company (or the government) going too far? Are companies allowed to spy on you for any reason? Who oversees the intrusion into your life? Where is the accountability?
What if Wal-mart decides, let's track anyone who buys any ONE of these ingredients in large quantities? What if you wanted to stock up on Sudafed, or you needed a large amount of lithium batteries? Is it OK for Walmart to spy on you?

How would those of you staying up at night worried about civil rights like to own rental property where one of these idiots has been cooking up meth? Would you like it declared an uninhabitable hazardous waste site? Would you like to pay to have it stripped down to the studs and rebuilt? That's exactly what happens.

So, do you want grocery or liquor stores keeping track of who buys a large amount of alcohol, because they might get hammered, and trash your rental place? How about spying on people who buy cartons of cigarettes, they could leave an apartment all smoky, and burn holes in the carpet?

Where should it stop?

 

[nkb]

That's a good point, you can. But that illustrates my take on buying supplies to cook up meth...you can't do it with a package of sudafed (even Costco size) and two lithium batteries. When you buy the quantities of these otherwise common supplies that these clowns do...it's an excellent bet that it's for one purpose and one purpose only. So if you buy dozens and dozens of packages (at retail price) of this stuff at one location as some of them do, well then you shouldn't be surprised if someone in law enforcement wants to take a look. And if they were renting a house from me, I'd be glad that somebody watching out for MY rights.

I'm no drug lab expert, but I find it hard to believe that these women were doing anything more than buying supplies to make some drugs for their own use. I would think meth labs have a better supply source (meaning, not retail), and are a lot less obvious about it.
Do you really think that Walmart is making a dent in the illegal drug trade? They may catch some shmoes doing illegal things, but they aren't going to affect the real drug business.

 

[Brian2by2]

well, next time someone buys lethal amounts of beer, or johnnie walker, or jack daniels, someone better notify authorities that that alcohol could be distributed to minors at a high school party, or even legals who consume too much and die of alcohol poisoning or drive home and kill many more people.

Also better check those cartons and cartons of cigarettes, as their second hand smoke effect can shorten longevity of surrounding people's lungs/lives.

Rolling papers anyone?? Pipes? Bongs? "Tobacco use only" my ass. Why doesn't Wal-Mart put "Use only to power electronics" on their batteries then?

What about teenagers buying long stretches of 1 1/4" tubing, funnels, and PVC shut-off valves? Should they be investigated by Lowes and Home Depot because they bought the parts that are used to make beer bongs, which greatly amplify the effects of alcohol?

I just think its too much of an infringement for Wal-Mart to decide whether or not to prosecute someone. ID them for it, take a name/number/drivers license #, thats fine. But to arrest someone for that? sorry...i don't buy it.

 

[LeftLane]

Wal-Mart is not prosecuting anyone for anything here, other than perhaps the shoplifting, which is illegal and Wal-Mart has a right to prosecute for that. It's a big jump from notifying the authorities to prosecuting.

If these women were buying these items legitimately and innocently, than they will have no problem explaining that and getting on with their day. If you have nothing to hide, this shouldn't bother you that much. However, if Wal-Mart gets enough publicity from this, resulting in all scumbag meth lab operators avoiding shopping there, that benefits everyone.

Some of you guys would have a conniption if you knew how much information is compiled on you every single day. Did you ever get a call from your credit card company, asking about a series of charges that seemed out of character for your account? That's because everything is monitored, and flagged if it seemes odd. Multiply that over and over, and it's probably pretty easy to determine what you are doing and with what motives, based on statistical models and probabilities that have been refined by technology over the years.

I'm not for a Big Brother/police state at all, but I have zero problems with Wal-Mart paying attention to what I buy, and if I coincidentally happen to buy all the sh** necessary to build a bomb, then they can notify the authorities and I'll deal with it. Wal-Mart should be applauded here, not condemned.

Imagine the flag on my purchase when I had to buy Clorox, Pepto-Bismol, toilet paper, and a plunger at the grocery store. Aside from the cashier just about gagging, I'm sure everyone else would get a good giggle out of that combo.

 

[Spencer]

There is a quantum difference between renting a house to someone who gets drunk/high and trashes the place vs. someone who uses a rental house to cook up meth. It is literally treated like a superfund site…with guys wearing moon suits…and to rehab it you need to strip away everything (similar to asbestos abatement).

And the sad truth is that sometimes these people are so addicted (and crazy enough) to march into a retail store and purchase huge quantities of lithium batteries, etc. To quote the following article: “…crank is so immensely addictive that many judges would prefer to deal with heroin addicts, who at least remember they are parents…”

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/methed7.shtml?searchpagefrom=1&searchdiff=1186

I’m guessing some of you who don’t quite “get it” perhaps because you don’t live near where this is occurring. For some odd reason it’s pretty prevalent up here in the Northwest (as described in the article).

And no, it’s not like buying a little too much Jack Daniel’s on a Saturday night.

And to the question of whether or not a kid “should be investigated by Lowes and Home Depot because they bought the parts that are used to make beer bongs…” Where do you draw the line? I don’t really know. But, for example, if I had a kid continually showing up at Home Depot with paint around his nostrils to buy more spray paint to huff (and potentially kill himself) well, yeah, I guess I’d be glad for a call from the manager every now and then.

Maybe, as a society we should just let people do overly suspicious (but legal) things without giving a damn…you know…like taking flight lesson without learning to land.

What’s the harm in that?

 

[nkb]

There is a quantum difference between renting a house to someone who gets drunk/high and trashes the place vs. someone who uses a rental house to cook up meth.

Guess what, that was exactly my point. Yes, there is a difference, but who makes the rules on when it's acceptable to report you. Where do you draw the line?

Try looking at the big picture, instead of how this situation benefits you (I'm assuming you own rental units).

Let me take this to an extreme example: Let's say the authorities decide to attempt to eradicate crime by arresting everyone, going from city block to city block, and searching everyone's home. If they find anything illegal, you get charged, if not, they release you.

Or, for white-collar crime, the police confiscates all your financial records and all your PCs, and goes through them for any traces of fraud, embezzlement, tax evasion, etc. If they don't find anything, you get your stuff back.

I don't think anyone will argue that a lot more criminals will be caught this way, but are you willing to allow this infringement on your freedom? If you don't agree, then your argument for using these methods to shut down meth labs just got shot down. The end does not justify the means.

Yes, this is much more extreme than what Walmart is doing, but it is infringing on my personal freedom, and who will decide when this stops?

 

[nkb]

Some of you guys would have a conniption if you knew how much information is compiled on you every single day.

I realize how much information is being gathered on me every day, and I don't like it. It also doesn't mean I have to accept it.

If everyone got a full body cavity search before boarding a plane in the name of security, I sure as hell wouldn't be happy about it either, and I would do what I could to change it.

 

[Spencer]

Guess what, that was exactly my point. Yes, there is a difference, but who makes the rules on when it's acceptable to report you. Where do you draw the line?

You draw the line when it becomes a crazy, idiotic risk. Like for example, when cooking up meth renders the entire neighborhood unsafe, and a house uninhabitable requiring people to enter it in moon suits and strip it down to the studs. That's when it morphs from a cutesy theoretical ACLU discussion of civil rights into a full blown pain in the ass.

And I suppose some might view buying 100 packages of Sudafed as an inalienable constitutional right. But as a measure of how bad it is, even the ever liberal Washington State legislature has moved to restrict the sale of the ephedrine and pseudoephedrine used to cook meth. And guess what? It's actually working:

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/news/2004news/2004-019.html

Last year we only had to clean up 1,480 sites at a cost TO TAXPAYERS of $2 million! Yipee!