4 ms·

Maybe if the CVS/Wallgreens/etc took a different tactic. Don't let people inside. Take orders online or line outside, deliver or pick up at the door. Distrib

by mycall 5y ago

Maybe if the CVS/Wallgreens/etc took a different tactic. Don't let people inside. Take orders online or line outside, deliver or pick up at the door. Distribute more intelligently.

josephcsible 5y ago
Everywhere else, stores can let people inside without crime being rampant, so obviously this isn't the problem.
michaelmrose 5y ago
What about only letting in people in who have phones attesting to a unique id. Don't let in people without a device and ban people who are caught stealing once. If they force the doors and come in call the cops and prosecute for felony burglary even if they were only originally banned for stealing socks originally. Share bad lists and stealing socks means that you are suddenly banned from every store in 100 miles. Make exceptions for curbside pickup and pre scheduled trips to the grocery store/pharmacy where you will pay for the security that will walk around with you. Expire people off the list after 5 years of one theft or never after a string of thefts. For the normal customer nothing happens your phone silently attests from your pocket that you aren't on the list by pinging a service and retrieving a token not sharing your info with the store. Losers here an alarm sound and a voice telling them to buzz off on penalty of jail.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > Losers here an alarm sound and a voice telling them to buzz off on penalty of jail. If they're not going to jail for openly shoplifting, why do you think they'd go to jail for this?
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Forcing your way into a place to commit a crime is automatically a felony in almost all states. This is true even if the planned crime would be a misdemeanor.
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      Why does it matter whether it's a misdemeanor or a felony, if Chesa is going to drop the charge either way?
      - michaelmrose 5y ago
        At some point the government actually has to enforce the law. There is no system that can be imagined that obviates that.
        josephcsible 5y ago
        That's exactly my point. But once we have a prosecutor who actually prosecutes criminals, then the crime levels will reduce without needing the phone ID system.
        _lazlo 5y ago
        You’re making a mistake in thinking something has to happen. It may not, and things may just continue to go downhill.
voldacar 5y ago
This should not be necessary in a first-world country. Public institutions should actually do their jobs, or we should stop having to pay for them
- vkou 5y ago
  > Public institutions should actually do their jobs, or we should stop having to pay for them There's been a rather noteworthy series of protests over the past summer on the subject of whether or not it's worth it to pay for some of these institutions.

by mycall 5y ago

Maybe if the CVS/Wallgreens/etc took a different tactic. Don't let people inside. Take orders online or line outside, deliver or pick up at the door. Distribute more intelligently.

josephcsible 5y ago

Everywhere else, stores can let people inside without crime being rampant, so obviously this isn't the problem.

michaelmrose 5y ago

What about only letting in people in who have phones attesting to a unique id. Don't let in people without a device and ban people who are caught stealing once. If they force the doors and come in call the cops and prosecute for felony burglary even if they were only originally banned for stealing socks originally. Share bad lists and stealing socks means that you are suddenly banned from every store in 100 miles. Make exceptions for curbside pickup and pre scheduled trips to the grocery store/pharmacy where you will pay for the security that will walk around with you. Expire people off the list after 5 years of one theft or never after a string of thefts. For the normal customer nothing happens your phone silently attests from your pocket that you aren't on the list by pinging a service and retrieving a token not sharing your info with the store. Losers here an alarm sound and a voice telling them to buzz off on penalty of jail.

josephcsible 5y ago
> Losers here an alarm sound and a voice telling them to buzz off on penalty of jail. If they're not going to jail for openly shoplifting, why do you think they'd go to jail for this?
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Forcing your way into a place to commit a crime is automatically a felony in almost all states. This is true even if the planned crime would be a misdemeanor.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    Why does it matter whether it's a misdemeanor or a felony, if Chesa is going to drop the charge either way?
    - michaelmrose 5y ago
      At some point the government actually has to enforce the law. There is no system that can be imagined that obviates that.
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        That's exactly my point. But once we have a prosecutor who actually prosecutes criminals, then the crime levels will reduce without needing the phone ID system.
      - _lazlo 5y ago
        You’re making a mistake in thinking something has to happen. It may not, and things may just continue to go downhill.

voldacar 5y ago

This should not be necessary in a first-world country. Public institutions should actually do their jobs, or we should stop having to pay for them

vkou 5y ago
> Public institutions should actually do their jobs, or we should stop having to pay for them There's been a rather noteworthy series of protests over the past summer on the subject of whether or not it's worth it to pay for some of these institutions.