Yesterday I went to Home Depot to return an empty 5gallon water bottle. Crystal springs now lets you return them there. Here is the transaction at the customer service desk: c: May I help You me: Yes, I would like to deposit this bottle and receive my $7.00 c: Do you have a receipt? me: no c: well then I will need your state drivers license and another form of id me: for what... its a $7 return c: policy states all returns without receipts require dl and other id me: sorry I do not drive, I take the bus c: welp then we cant help you me: please call the manager c: manager will tell you the same thing me: ok let him tell me that then c: manager to the front please me: hi, i am trying to return this bottle manager: we need the id me: sorry i dont drive manager: oh sorry then me: just make up a number manager: cant do that it checks me: it checks the DMV? You have a way to do that? manager: fine i will just put in my dl # so he put in his dl and other id, when I received the gift card and receipt, his entire dl #, state and other id # was on the receipt there is NO reason that a store NEEDS a dl to do returns. I worked in retail long enough both as a cashier and up the bookkeeping chain to know that is not necessary. Bottom line is today, I am ok with asking why... too many people dont, that is why we are the way we are.
Because someday soon, the government will get a list..... "Here's everybody that has purchased fertilizer AND rented a Ryder truck." We've been through this before, with J.Edgar Hoover, and also with Joe McCarthy's communist witch hunt. That's where the "if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" statement was made famous. There, and the Salem witch trials. There is no reason to get DL numbers to make a return, except to create a database. So far, the only thing this amassing-of -records has done is enable identity theft to blossom. Busted another ring up in the midwest this week. I haven't heard of anything GOOD resulting from it. Try going to radio shack. You cannot buy anything, even with cash, unless you give your phone number and address. I tell them my name is "Mr. Cash". and I live at the bank. If they want specifics, I will shop elsewhere. They hate it. Whenever there is information gathered, there is abuse. It's not a good road to travel, erosion of liberty and annonymity. I'd dump some tea in the harbor, but they probably have a database somewhere, that says I bought tea, AND rented a boat. Radi8
Nawwwwwwwwww radi8, TIA includes biometrics, human ID from a distance, including gait recognition. They'll watch you on your way to the harbor! Sassy EDIT: WAIT, it includes pre-emption as well, they'll have the invitations addressed before you decide which harbor
So, now if I ever get in trouble, I'm suing the government. "You knew it was coming, and you didn't stop me." Therefore, they are negligent! Spooky, when I can go on the internet, and see satellite photos of my own back yard. Radi8
LOL they did just that to Poindexter to show what he was doing -- and that was just with the PUBLIC online information. House picture with mapquest, address and names of wife and neighbors, all phone numbers, since disconnected! Not to be outdone by his criminal record, also public and online. LOL, I love rebels! Sassy
QQ <---------- big eyes! http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?sid=9&aid=8845 EU agrees personal data exchange with US EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - EU justice ministers agreed on Thursday to an exchange of personal data with the United States. In a major overhaul of the 1995 Convention governing the European Police Office (Europol), there will be a huge increase in the exchange of personal data across the Atlantic. The agreement, which will be signed by the EU and the US in Copenhagen on Friday, foresees more co-operation between the EU member states and the US in "preventing, detecting, suppressing, and investigating criminal offences within the respective jurisdiction of the Parties, in particular by facilitating the reciprocal exchange of information, including personal data." Data protection Danish minister for justice, Lene Espersen, denied that data protection laws could be violated with the agreement. "Data protection is not something for discussion," said Ms Espersen. While arguing that the agreement will "respect" relevant rules on data protection, she was unable to say which or how many US bodies the personal data could be passed on to. Colin Powell, US secretary of state, acknowledged the role that the September 11 terrorist attacks played in pushing the agreement forward. "Counter-terrorism has been firmly on the US-EU agenda since 9/11" said Mr Powell who added that the agreement "will authorise the full exchange of information between Europol and US law enforcement agencies." The agreement will go into force directly after it has been signed. Europol's mandate extended EU justice ministers also agreed to extend the mandate of Europol and increase its operational powers. The agreed protocol states that it should be involved in "preventing and combating serious international crime" that has an "organised criminal structure" and involves two or more member states. It also involves national police more and allows for greater parliamentary scrutiny at the national level. There had been much criticism that the organisation was too opaque. Although member states have agreed the protocol, there is some way still to go. Justice and home affairs commissioner, Antonio Vitorino acknowledged this. While being "happy" that the protocol was adopted, he was "concerned" it would have to be ratified by all 15 national parliaments. He added that "pressure on the member states" would have to be kept up so that it would soon be adopted. Controversial death penalty No agreement was reached on the controversial issue of extradition and exchange of information between the EU and the US on suspected terrorists if there is a threat of the death penalty. The Danish presidency presented a compromise proposal to member states on Wednesday. "Colleagues need to go back and study the draft agreements in detail," said the Danish justice minister but she said the proposals would mean there would be no "extradition in cases where the death penalty will apply."
""If you refuse to let them search the vehicle, they will radio for either a canine, or to obtain a warrant."" I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, now you have just given them "probable cause" by refusing to voluntaryingly, if thats a word, lol, let him search your vehicle. Now he or they will remove you from your vehicle and search it anyway w/o a search warrant. I am in no way defending the cops, because I can't stand the way it is set up now, that they can pretty much do whatever he hell they want to based on some EXTREMELY vague words like "probable cause". Just stating facts. Plus the fact that they are counting on you not having the funds to sue for "illegal seizure". Those two things alone count for about 85% of what they get away with today, and its getting worse. ""Maybe I am paranoid, but I believe we as a people are far to willing to provide government and business the means necessary to continue to whittle away at our freedom and privacy."" You are absolutely NOT paranoid, but again 100% accurate in the above statement, which is pretty much the reason for MY statement to you in the above paragraph and why today they keep getting away with it more and more every day. Oh, and even if you are an OUTSTANDING citizen with no violations of any kind, no arrests, no massive debts amounted, no nothing, but the cleanest American out there, it is your word against a cop. But since you smoked pot and got caught back in 1912 when you were 4 years old, you lose. (Exaggerating, obviously, but I think you get my point, right?) Oh, and BTW if they pass this "eye in the sky" B.S. LOOKOUT!!!!!! EVERYBODY!!!!!! Just my .25 cents. Wil ---------------------------------------------------- May no one person or entity ever snuff out your fire!!!
Wil, Asserting a right doesn't give police probable cause! You have to consent to a search or they have to get a search warrant, unless something is in plain view. That's the 4th amendment, you didn't already give that away did you? The "eye in the sky" isn't something being considered, it IS already, a division of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act. Sassy
"It is better to cherish virtue and humanity, by leaving much to free will, even with some loss of the object , than to attempt to make men mere machines and instruments of political benevolence. The world on the whole will gain by a liberty, without which virtue cannot exist." -Edmund Burke "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thench Coxe "Liberty can no more exist without virtue and independence than the body can live and move without a soul." -John Adams "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God" -Thomas Jefferson
I like the "leave a stool/urine sample" idea I'd rat them out to the CC company. That stinks. Also, I'm sure the store has a video camera recording what is going on in the store. You can almost bet that you were caught on tape when you came in to look and when you came in to purchase the jewlery. If there is a problem down the line, the store should go back to their video tapes. Then the have your photograph, which should be very helpfull. Better yet! If they really want fingerprints, they should offer you a glass of champage, then archive your glass until after payment has cleared. It will have your fingerprints all over it and you would not be any wiser as to what happened. I bought my girlfriend a necklace for Xmas this weekend. As soon as I did the deal the manager brough out a flute of champage for me. I was driving, so I declined (the police are running breath test roadblocks everywhere this time of year. I'd be fine with a small glass, but I don't trust the machines nor a cop who might smell champange on my breath and convinces her/him self that they got them a live one). She kept pushing it and pushing it. I finally concontected a story that I'm an ex-alcohalic who can't drink just to get her off my case. So she switched to juice, water, anything else. I wasn't going to get to leave without handling a glass. Anyhow, when I left, I was thinking to myself about why they wanted me to have drink so bad, and that is what my paranoid little brain came up with. Merry Xmas.
I don't see what good it does them to have your fingerprints. The average person does not have prints on file anywhere. I do, because of my insurance license, but most people don't.
Breez, they have to start somewhere obtaining a fingerprint database, why not start at the retail level where everyone eventually has to shop,, unless your priviliged enough to hire someone to do all your shopping.
I was in a Radio Shack this afternoon. There was a sign posted at the register: "For your Privacy, WE WILL NO LONGER ASK YOU FOR NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER. If you want our catalogs, please inform a salesperson." Wonder what changed their common practice?
Actually there is a real reason for it. Theft. It hapens thousands of times a day across the country that someone will shoplift an item and then bring it back later for a refund. Requiring an ID stops it from happening as much. As a former security manager for a department store in the 80s, I can tell you that the shoplifting dropped considerably when we started asking for ID on all returns without a receipt. You can blame that small group of criminals for making everyone else suffer for their actions. Ron
again i state... there is NO reason that ID is required on a return i cannot understand why a person who shoplifted an item would care? they can just go to another store i think they do it so people will save their receipts target has now gone to a NO returns without receipt deal. I am OK with that because they can look up my purchases.
The person who shoplifted wants to return the item for cash. This is usually a much higher amount than they can sell it for. That is why they care. The store fights back by requiring a valid ID which is recorded. Once you have too many items coming back then they start watching. If you have returned say items five or more times in the last 60 days, you can bet that a manger or asset protection will be watching you before you leave the store that day and they will be on the lookout from then on. It also helps to identify those who are constantly buying and returning products just as a free rental. This happens far more frequently than most people are aware of. Trust me I don't like it anymore than you do when I have to give an ID for a return. However, as someone who was on the other side, I understand why. Ron Ron
