Wrongfully Detained at Wal Mart

[Trip20]

And I find it interesting that people are so against "thread ressurrection"...

 

[USP45usp]

It is "interesting" that the first post is to resurrect a 4 year old post.

But, just to keep it going. Anyone remember when wal-mart actually had handguns on display (was in a case behind the counter on the wall)? I remember it as a child.

My dad was looking at a .357 magnam if I remember right. I think they had a couple of 1911's in there come to think of it (only remember what dad was saying when he was handling them).

He didn't buy anything but still, anyone older then a kid remember?

Wayne

 

[progunner1957]

An employee of Wally World - with NO police powers - detained you and threatened you with an edged weapon?

I would let my legal counsel do the talking from this point on out. Wal-Mart deserves to be hit with a lawsuit for this crap!

So nowadays, We The People are supposed to submit, conform and obey the will of a minimum-wage Wal Mart rent-a-cop with NO police powers?????

I don't "effing" think so!

 

[Mike Irwin]

"And I find it interesting that people are so against "thread ressurrection"..."

Against thread resurrection?

Not at all.

IF there's anything even remotely resembling a real purpose for it.

Say for example, in September 2000 a poster asks for opinions on a particular model gun, and several weeks later actually purchases said gun.

Then in June 2005 a new member comes in and resurrects the old post with "I really think you should get this gun it's kewl you'll really love it I have 5 and I can shoot .005 inch groups at 50 miles with it you'll love it it's really kewl," or some such.

Given that the original poster already bought his gun, and didn't need any more information, not much of a purpose to resurrect the thread, right? But that's happening.

Threads should be resurrected ONLY after: the modern era poster has read the entire thread and has ascertained that he/she actually has something to add to the conversation.

Otherwise, chances are it's just a waste of bandwidth.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to post in the thread by George Washington asking for advice on whether or not he should cross the Delaware and attack the Hessians at Trenton.

 

[Heist]

When they arrived I informed the officer that I was carrying a concealed weapon, and of what had happened and informed him I wanted the individual arrested for assualt and and for detaining me against my will. The employee was arrested

Is there precedent for this in all states?

So I told him what I had seen and pointed the guy out to him. He told me he couldn't do anything about it, because policy was, that an employee had to see him stash the goods and keep visual contact with him the entire time he was in the store. I asked if he wanted me to do something when he left the store and he said no, Wal-Mart didn't want any liability if he dumped the stuff before he got out of the store.

How common is this? Does this apply to all Wal-Mart locations?

1. After school, young-uns go in there in waves to shoplift, overwhelming store security (such as it is) and getting away with a lot of loot. Since the punishment for a caught juvenile shoplifter is "banishment" from the store and a slap on the wrist, it's pretty good odds for the rest of them. The store knows when the punks are there (the cameras), and their version of a "lockdown" was probably in progress.

What would be the best way to encounter this situation? I have never ever had my bags checked at walmart.. and I remember when you could get Hamsters and Handguns there. Don't shop there much at all, send my business to K-mart instead now that there's a Wallyworld supercenter here (that I hate).

 

[Trip20]

Against thread resurrection?

Not at all.

IF there's anything even remotely resembling a real purpose for it.

And, who may I ask is the person in charge of identifying one's "real purpose" versus an ulterior purpose?

And what does "real" mean in "real purpose"?

Personally, I find more "real purpose" in resurrecting this thread, than I do in some newbie who's first post is:

Hey, which is better?? 9mm, 40, or 45??

 

[ATW525]

Hey, which is better?? 9mm, 40, or 45??

Well, now that you bring that up, which is better? Does a .45 really send an obnoxious Wallyworld bag checker flying back 10 feet if hit them in them in the pinky? Is the capacity of a 9mm better? After all, there's alot of employees at Wal Mart and you might have to fight your way out the door. So, how does the .40 fit in? Is it really a good compromise between knock across the room power and capacity?

 

[Mike Irwin]

"And, who may I ask is the person in charge of identifying one's "real purpose" versus an ulterior purpose?"

I think I covered that nicely with this statement: Threads should be resurrected ONLY after: the modern era poster has read the entire thread and has ascertained that he/she actually has something to add to the conversation.


"And what does "real" mean in "real purpose"?"

Again, I think that's been covered in this part of the above statement: has ascertained that he/she actually has something to add to the conversation. Hopefully a prudent person (endangered species) would be able to comprehend whether or not a comment is additive after reading the entire thread.


"Personally, I find more "real purpose" in resurrecting this thread, than I do in some newbie who's first post is:"

Look closely, you'll see (hopefully) that I never addressed the merits of this thread being resurrected. Far from it.

"Which is better, 9mm, .40, or .45"

A new poster's inability to use the search key to find answers is another matter entirely.

 

[BerettaCougar]

.45acp is so powerfull that you need a special permit to buy ammo for it!



I was buying ammo and she (Moniqua at walmart) I.D'ed me for every box of ammo I bought!! she would ID me and ring me up for one box, then Id me again and ring me up for another box, it was a JOKE!! she said it was the LAW!... Well she said 'Its da law". the only .45 defense loads they had was FEDERAL and she asked me for a permit. she I.D'ed me for the 9mm and 12 gauge but asked for a permit for the .45acp.. I think becuase it said FEDERAL, i'm not sure.

I ended up getting my money back on the 9mm and 12gauge and going to bass pro.

 

[Trip20]

I think I covered that nicely with this statement: Threads should be resurrected ONLY after: the modern era poster has read the entire thread and has ascertained that he/she actually has something to add to the conversation.

Whether or not a post is additive in nature is in the eye of the beholder. More often peoples posts are more corroboratory in nature, not offering any additional information - but rather giving confirmation to what has already been said. There's nothing wrong with this is there?

I mean you may find it redunant and not helpful - but then don't read it, move on. You've caused yourself more irritation by actually posting on the thread that is so irritatingly resurrected, and that has offended your superior sense of forum etiquette. Talk about self-destructive behavior! I think deep down you like the irritation C'mon admit it!

No wonder people lurk for such a long time before joining (or never join). They get this type of reaction for nothing more than a superficial infraction of forum etiquette (not a rule).

99% of this post is tongue in cheek, but I also heard that 97% of kidding is actually the truth. And someone else posted recently that 86% of most statistics are made up on the spot.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Go back to my posted example.

Tell me, what is additive about someone telling someone that they should buy a gun FIVE YEARS AFTER THEY BOUGHT IT?

Is that additive?

I can answer that one. No it's not.


"You've caused yourself more irritation by actually posting on the thread that is so irritatingly resurrected, and that has offended your superior sense of forum etiquette."

Hummmm....

You're still, for some reason, laboring under the impression that I don't think this thread should have come back to life.

Please go back through my recent (this year) post and tell me where I've said that this thread should not have come back to life. (You can't). Please show where I've evinced irritation that this thread has come back to life. (I haven't).


"Whether or not a post is additive in nature is in the eye of the beholder."

You say that, and then you carp about another 9mm/.40/.45 thread? After all, eye of the beholder, right?

 

[Trip20]

You say that, and then you carp about another 9mm/.40/.45 thread? After all, eye of the beholder, right?

I'll have to borrow this from you, it's very true. I'm guilty of giving a bad example.

A new poster's inability to use the search key to find answers is another matter entirely.

You're still, for some reason, laboring under the impression that I don't think this thread should have come back to life.

No. I'm laboring on the topic of thread resurrection in general. I think we agree for the most part other than when we get to this point:

Against thread resurrection?

Not at all.

IF there's anything even remotely resembling a real purpose for it.

... where I say:

And, who may I ask is the person in charge of identifying one's "real purpose" versus an ulterior purpose?

Well we know who is in charge, and I suspect there would be a rule addressing the situation if it were of grave concern.​

... to which you reply:

I think I covered that nicely with this statement: Threads should be resurrected ONLY after: the modern era poster has read the entire thread and has ascertained that he/she actually has something to add to the conversation.

Well, no, you didn't. You gave me Mike Irwin's definition of "real purpose". Which is a criteria you use to determine whether or not your against a certain thread's resurrection. This is where I disagree with you.

Regardless............. My only point, other than a verbal jousting match which I will eventually lose, is to point out the following and hope senior members with vast knowledge such as yourself (no tongue in cheek here) can be more understanding for the following reasons:

I've been able to get some good info in threads brought back to life - and yes even when resurrector did not ascertaine that they actually had something to add to the conversation. I suspect there are others who have been able to as well.

Sometimes when threads are brought back I read through something I would not have normally either searched for, or had an initial interest in - but gain some knowledge nonetheless. <--- this I really appreciate.

 

[Kaboom]

Since this thread started several things have happened. Two small Wal-Marts that were 25 and 50 miles from me have been rebuilt to supercenters. Their former buildings are now occupied by enlarged Orchelin Farm and Home. I now have five Supercenters within an easy drive. I have never been checked in any of them. I also never find the winchester white box deals described. All the expantion required more people since they are open 24-7. The larger Orchelins required more also. There are still some mom amd pop shops that do ok not that there were that many anyway. Maybe checking customers has more to do with local and habits than anything. Oh guess what, the local Sav-A-Lot grocery still beats Wal-mart on prices on several things.

 

[Rich Lucibella]

Trip and Mike.....
Please don't make me come in there.
Way off topic, guys.
Rich

 

[ATW525]

I can only recall getting stopped once for a bag check in recent times, and that's because somebody forgot to deactivate the inventory control tag on one of the items I bought.

I do sometimes wonder, though, if somebody's going to see a bulge under my shirt from my CCW, mistake it for concealed merchandise, and accuse me of shoplifting. Probably just being paranoid

 

[Trip20]

Rich -

By the unwritten law of those "With Out Papers" - you must take my side.

My last name is DeLucia!


ha ha


Mike, no hard feelings here.
I'll be in Maryland starting next Friday. Take me out shooting! (not read take me out and shoot me).

 

[Rich Lucibella]

Paesano or no, Irwin and I have a long history of moonlight strolls together.
Rich

 

[Trip20]

... and I know heritage is not thicker than Hoppe's.

I bow out.

 

[veronica]

TO ATW525

"I find it interesting that ressurrecting this thread is apparantly the first and only post of the poster. I wonder if she knows what TFL is about, or if she only skimmed over the one thread that came up when she was Googling for Wal-Mart haters to support her cause..."

First of all, its not my cause. Second of all, if you had no interest in this thread then what are you still doing, reading it to know what I am posting. I find it interesting that you are concerned enough about how I feel about Wal-Mart that you would search to find if that was my first or second post.

I was not googling for wal-mart haters, but for information to see if others in other cities had the same experiences and same feelings of being mistreated.
If can see that the firing line is about guns, apparently, but the topic of the post was "wrongfully detained at wal-mart" which is what I was researching.

Do you own stock in Wal-Mart? Do you find it offensive that I would pass along information to others on this board that they may not be aware of it they are being stopped and checked? Although each state is different, it could be illegal and helpful for someone to know.

I would think that a gun forum site would be made up of people who are interested in constitutional rights, thus I saw no harm in passing it along. However, my mama always told me that if you have nothing nice to say, you should say nothing at all. So if you didn't like my post, why did you comment and help resurrect it?

 

[ATW525]

First of all, its not my cause. Second of all, if you had no interest in this thread then what are you still doing, reading it to know what I am posting.

I stand corrected on the first point. As for the second, I never said I had no interest in the thread, in fact it's so old that this was the first time I've seen it.

I find it interesting that you are concerned enough about how I feel about Wal-Mart that you would search to find if that was my first or second post.

No searching involved. Your post count is displayed under your name, and up until you posted this reply it read 1.

I was not googling for wal-mart haters, but for information to see if others in other cities had the same experiences and same feelings of being mistreated.

Forgive me for assuming people who had feelings of being mistreated by Wal-Mart would be Wal-Mart haters. I'm really not sure where I drew that outrageous conclusion from.

If can see that the firing line is about guns, apparently, but the topic of the post was "wrongfully detained at wal-mart" which is what I was researching.

May I inquire as to why you're researching it? Do you have personal experiance with being wrongfully detained at Wal-Mart? Why not share your story with us, rather than giving a link to somebody else's story? No, I'm not being wise or sarcastic... posting first hand personal experience typically carries more weight.

Do you own stock in Wal-Mart?

Nope. Just buy ammo there. I can care less about the company.

Do you find it offensive that I would pass along information to others on this board that they may not be aware of it they are being stopped and checked? Although each state is different, it could be illegal and helpful for someone to know.

Offensive? Nope, not at all. I find it interesting that you'd come here just to post about Wal-Mart, but I imagine you're more than welcome to do so.

I would think that a gun forum site would be made up of people who are interested in constitutional rights, thus I saw no harm in passing it along. However, my mama always told me that if you have nothing nice to say, you should say nothing at all. So if you didn't like my post, why did you comment and help resurrect it?

No problem with your post. I merely thought it was interesting that your first post was to a thread that ended years ago and doesn't involve firearms, and that you linked to site that prominently displays a link to moveon.org. There's nothing wrong with your post, it's just out of the ordinary.... hence I find it interesting.

While you're here, however, feel free to kick back, stay awhile and read through some of our other threads, too. Do you own a firearm? If not, have you considered it? There's a wealth of information on this board concerning exercising one's 2nd amendment rights, and it would be a shame not to utilize that resource