Quote:
Originally Posted by driveway
I know, I know. It's a largely empty platitude which is in no way backed up by our legal system.
But a company with insurance up the wazoo who returned 12.8 billion to its shareholders last fiscal year could maybe take a look at it's policies vis-a-vis in store security accosting shoplifters.
That said, after the guy pulled a knife, I have no problems with the actions of the security guys.
|
So what you're saying is because wal-mart has the means or whatever to absorb loss, they should therefore just accept it? It doesn't matter how much profit they turned, its still not your property to take! What a weird ass robin hood theory you're suggesting.
I can't tell if its entitlement, or just hate for successful companies in a free market condition (hey, its cool to hate on the man right?), but ANY company that owns property in the form of merchandise does not owe that to anyone because they make money, and have every right to protect that "liquid asset" because its theirs. I guess you'd be OK if I just took stuff from you, property or money, because I'm sure you have extra to spare...