A MODERN PERSPECTIVE
Shoplifting (Photo – imcomkorea)
As a high school senior working part-time in retail, I’ve seen firsthand the toll this takes on businesses and communities.
By Shashank Tongaonkar
Smash-and-grab incidents, skyrocketing prices, and half of Walmart’s merchandise being behind a cage are our new everyday realities. The store I work at loses $362 daily to shoplifters, adding up to over $132,000 a year! In fact, in 2022, retailers across California lost a whopping $8.72 billion to shoplifting and fraud, resulting in a $1.3 billion loss in tax revenue for the state.
Conglomerates need to make money; the stock market won’t accept too many people stealing as an excuse. That means this $132,000 needs to come from somewhere else, usually in the form of raising prices and keeping costs low. For example, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said in a CNBC interview that “If [shoplifting is] not corrected over time, prices will be higher, and/or stores will close.” Stealing is often perceived as a desperate act driven by necessity, yet petty theft frequently involves items that are far from essential. The most commonly stolen consumables—alcohol, candy and gum, and energy drinks—are luxuries rather than essentials. This kind of theft doesn’t just impact store owners; it hurts underserved and poorer communities as well. People who don’t steal out of necessity contribute to the loss of revenue, which then leads to higher prices, disproportionately affecting those who are already struggling financially. Moreover, these communities lose essential businesses. For example, in 2023, rampant retail theft forced Target to close stores in the Bay Area, including one in Oakland, depriving a poorer neighborhood of an affordable shopping location in a place where the cost of living is already astronomically high.
Prop 47
Proposition 47 has quickly become a popular scapegoat particularly by the right, blaming California’s leftist, “overly liberal” government. California’s Proposition 47, passed by the public in 2014, raised the theft threshold for felony charges from $400 to $950, reclassifying thefts below this amount as misdemeanors. Proposition 47 is now on the chopping block, set to be on the ballot to be overturned in November. While crime, particularly property crime, has seen a jump since its passing, it’s not the root of our retail problem. Eighty-three percent of shoplifting crimes involve under $400 of merchandise, so even if Californians overturned Proposition 47 in November, nothing would change for the majority of these crimes. California’s $950 threshold is also one of the lowest in the country, sitting $200 below the United States average of $1,150 and far below the Texas threshold for felony crime at $2,500.
Establish harsher punishments for repeat offenders
A significant gap in California’s legislation is the lack of policy addressing repeat offenders. This allows criminals to steal and get off lightly, usually walking away with probation or community service. Let’s be real: if someone gets caught and convicted for shoplifting twice, is 20 hours of community service really going to make them stop the third time? The solution is to establish harsher punishments for repeat offenders. This would punish serial offenders and deter others from shoplifting again. The tax revenue from the saved merchandise would help cover the costs of prison for repeat offenders. The decrease in crime would also provide a safer shopping environment for both employees and customers. It would still allow for rehabilitation and redemption by not mandating prison the first time, allowing people a second chance to make up for their lapse in judgment. The key to making this a success is showing society that shoplifters are convicted and that crime, no matter how small, is not tolerated in our communities.
We could make repeat shoplifting offenses felonies, ensuring jail time. While one may argue this would disproportionately hurt low-income people, I believe the loss in tax money for the state and the increase in prices would hurt underserved communities more. We have to figure out how to provide for those in need, but the solution can’t be to allow them to steal.
California’s retail theft problem requires us to do more than scapegoat Proposition 47. Addressing repeat offenders with harsher penalties and providing safer shopping environments are crucial steps. This approach balances the need for justice and rehabilitation, ensuring that no crime, no matter how small, is tolerated.
The Opinion section reflects the opinions of the responsible contributor(s)/writer(s) only, and do not reflect the viewpoint of ColoradoBoulevard.net. ColoradoBoulevard.net does not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of any posting. ColoradoBoulevard.net accepts no obligation to review every posting, but reserves the right (with no obligation) to delete comments and postings that may be considered offensive, illegal or inappropriate.
Before Prop 47, “Petty with a Prior” (3 petty theft convictions) could earn you 18-36 months in prison. Prop 47 changed that.
Boy oh boy, Shashank Prasad Tongaonkar, where do I even begin…
“The store I work at loses $362 daily to shoplifters, adding up to over $132,000 a year! In fact, in 2022, retailers across California lost a whopping $8.72 billion to shoplifting and fraud, resulting in a $1.3 billion loss in tax revenue for the state.”
So if that many people aren’t getting caught (8.72 Billion “lost”) how are tougher penalties going to help?
If they don’t get caught, additional charges would seem moot.
People don’t get caught because our legal system won’t prosecute them. Many people steal without fear of repercussions. It’s not that they don’t get caught, it’s that there is no point in catching them as nothing will come out of it because of our lax laws.