People rely way too much on police and courts. The security guard should’ve just guided them back to the checkout when he confronted them and/or they volunteered to pay for the sandwiches. Or, the guard should’ve gotten the manager who should’ve walked them to a cash register.

That’s it. No need for police or charges or child protective bureauweenies.

Would it be ok to be punished with, say, a year in prison? Cuz part of what people are debating here is whether the government response was excessive. “You have to be ready to pay the price” is an argument that it was not, in this case or in any case so long as the person is dumb enough to steal.

JOR, motives are relevant under the law. Motives by themselves are not punishable. Criminal culpability requires intent and an act. This has been true under the law for several hundred years.

No, I’m saying if youre dumb enough to steal from someone and get caught, then you deserve to be punished.

Bob: OK, I get it now. My point is that the police usually have the discretion to issue a citation for minor stuff like this, and this is precisely the time to use that discretion unless there is some countervailing reason not to (priors, no ID).

Exactly! And since carrying an ID can’t be made illegal, the discretion to cite rather than arrest erodes away.

If I steal sandwiches, and a cop has the option to arrest or cite, that frees me to use the “Violating my civil liberties” defense if the cop decides to arrest because I wasn’t carrying ID.

My S.O. does this while shopping all the time. We do remember to pay. I find it kind of embarrassing that she can’t wait to eat till we are done, but meh. Though now I’d hate to see what would happen if she forgets when I’m not there.

I read about a similar incident at a hardware store in Chicago. A contractor marked off some lengths of lumber and put the carpenter’s pencil behind his ear, then paid for the lumber. Security called the police for stealing the pencil. He said he just forgot.

But unlike this story, the police did not arrest him and let him go. Of course, there could be a racial component to that, white middle class guy said “it was a mistake” and they believe him, not so well off brown skinned person says the same and is not believed.

“Remembering to pay” is easy. Just don’t ditch the evidence.

If the middle class white guy stuck the pencil in his shorts, that would have been different. But behind the ear? Easy mistake.

Eating food in the Supermarket and then ditching the evidence? Theft. Bringing the wrapper to checkout to pay? Obvious evidence of self control issues, but not theft.

I don’t see why this is so hard to figure out.

And one reason people would eat before paying: if they pay for it then walk around eating, when they get back in line someone will try to arrest them for stealing anyway. I lose receipts all the time, I generally throw them right out. Better to pay at the end before walking out, then it’s on the big receipt with everything else.

My point was that theft isn’t a citation only offense BECAUSE you don’t have to carry ID. The example of making it citation only was to support my point.

Radley’s point was “Gosh! These people shouldn’t have been arrested over 10 bucks worth of sandwiches because of teh children”

i merely pointed out that that really wasn’t much of an option in a society where you don’t have to positively identify yourself.

It’s like swearing to tell the truth in court… Does that mean you cannot lie, or does that mean others have to believe you?

I read about a similar incident at a hardware store in Chicago. A contractor marked off some lengths of lumber and put the carpenter’s pencil behind his ear, then paid for the lumber. Security called the police for stealing the pencil. He said he just forgot.

But unlike this story, the police did not arrest him and let him go. Of course, there could be a racial component to that, white middle class guy said “it was a mistake” and they believe him, not so well off brown skinned person says the same and is not believed.

So yeah. Show your ID and get cited for theft, or don’t show it and get arrested for theft. Not particularly tricky.

Issuing citations only work on either the honest or those forced to show ID (Like while operating a motor vehicle.)

If you’ve committed a crime, the cops have every right to demand you show your ID so that they can issue the citation to the proper person. If you can’t or won’t, they probably will choose arrest over citation, so they can at least get a set of fingerprints.

Which ID? The one you don’t have to carry because you live in a free country? That ID?

See how circular this is?

Let’s go back and complete the loop!

Honest people will pull out their ID so they can avoid arrest.

However, honest people don’t steal sandwiches from Safeway.

But wait! Won’t dishonest people want to avoid arrest?

Arrest for what? Not producing an ID?

No, arrested for stealing!

But I thought it was a citation offense.

You can’t arrest someone for not having an ID. You have no probably cause that they’re lying about not having one. And you can’t search them without probable cause. Since you can’t arrest someone for a citation only offense, you have to take their word for it when they tell you their name is Joe Blow.

Unless… you make stealing an arrestable offense,

At which point arrest becomes SOP.

That’s simply not accurate as a “point of legal fact.” Theft requires intent. If your intention is to pay for it in the immediate future you have not committed theft. Similarly, if you walk out of an airport with someone else’s bag fully belieiving it to be yours, or if you drive off in a car you have “purchased” from a seller based on your genuine promise to put a check in the mail the next day, you have not committed the crime of theft *in that moment* even if you later do not return the bag or mail the check.

Bill Roberts, your reasoning is pretty ridiculous. You seem to be saying that if you do something stupid then the authorities are justified in punishing you any way they choose because you should have known better. This is the basic reasoning of all tyrants: As long as the rules are clear, the penalty is justified. It also seems to be the battle-cry of police abuse, “well, yelling at a cop has consequences, so don’t be surprised when they pepper spray you, and throw you in jail, dumbass!”

People’s choices can never be so dumb that they absolve others of responsibility for their own actions in response. The child in this case was almost certainly traumatized and harmed by being taken away, and responsibility for THAT choice falls on CPS.

If you’ve committed a crime, the cops have every right to demand you show your ID so that they can issue the citation to the proper person. If you can’t or won’t, they probably will choose arrest over citation, so they can at least get a set of fingerprints.

Basically, they went to the store and stole sandwiches, then were shocked when they were caught. They could have gotten lucky and not had the police called, but for whatever reason the manager brought in the cops, probably because he thought they were lying to his face.

The moral of the story? Pay for your food before you eat it. Duh. And if you can’t control your wild eating urges then don’t be a douchebag and try to get away with it by tossing the evidence.

That said… what SHOULD be the proper response by the store manager and the police?

On one hand, the most cost effective way for the store to handle it is call the cops and have the perps hauled off. It’s draconian, but it’s on someone else’s dime. Why should Safeway bear the cost? They have no incentive to help thieves be more socially responsible. Steering them to another store to be THEIR problem makes more sense.

On the other hand, arresting people for piddly shit like this is draconian. Is there a better way to deal with these people? The knee jerk reaction is yes. Check for priors, and if it’s a first offense, or a sufficiently piddly offense, write them a citation.

That seems reasonable, doesn’t it? Sure, until you realize that you’re giving a lot of tickets to “Joe Blow” and other made up names. The officer trying to decide whether to give you a citation or arrest you has no way to determine your identity unless you are honest about it. And let’s face it… you’ve already shown that card by stealing sandwiches.

Issuing citations only work on either the honest or those forced to show ID (Like while operating a motor vehicle.) And so, we’re back to square one.

Your ex was a fool. Nothing sexier than a woman with a firm grasp of property rights. :-)

You’re right, you are a dick.