"This store retains the right to search all bags and persons entering the premises"

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Awhile back I went to a Thrift Shop to search out some good deals. I had already been shopping and had a small carry bag with me.

The store had a sign not unlike this one:



I found a couple of things and, upon checking out, was told they would have to search my bag before I left to make sure I wasn't trying to steal anything.

I asked the cashier what reason they had to believe I had stolen (or was trying to steal) something. She said they didn't need a reason, it was policy to search bags that came in to the store.

I asked to speak to the manager. When the manager came, I told him their policy was unenforceable. I also said I had not stolen something, would not consent to any search and if they had any problems with that they could get the police involved and I would deal with them directly.

I also said I would never be stepping foot in the store again, which I know is kind of SC-esque but in this case was the truth. I do not want to shop at a store that treats its customers this way.

I've seen these signs at a number of different establishments and although I believe I was right when I said the policy was unenforceable, I'm not 100% sure that's the case.

I know in terms of U.S. law, the Constitution prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, but I believe that specifically relates to what the government can and cannot do and not so much a private entity.

That aside, I still feel a private entity has no right to search my person or belongings without strong evidence or a reasonable suspicion to do so.

In my case, the simple fact I was in the store and had a bag with me was NOT reasonable suspicion.

[DrFaroohk]

The law might agree it's not legal, but I have to wonder what the problem is. You see said store, with said clearly visible (Right?) sign, so it's like...you don't have to get searched. You have 100% control over whether or not you are searched. All you have to do is...not go in.

Why is that such a bad thing? It's a private establishment, what would be so bad if they were allowed to do that? It's not forcing anyone to do anything they don't want to do.

[Aethian]

I think with the law stating unreasonable it is within the law for the store to search. They can site high theft of items with them being taken by people with bags/purses/ect ect ect... With that being behind them it's no longer unreasonable for them to search bags to make sure their items aren't walking away. Besides, they have a posted sign... don't want to be searched don't go in. Simple.

[jackfaire]

They can site the well posted sign actually. You are stepping onto private property and in doing so agreeing to the clearly posted notice that they have the right to search your bag. By entering the store you are agreeing they can do so.

Hence the notice. There isn't anything to stop you from just walking out but then they can just ban you from the store if they feel it is a big enough issue.

If theft is that big of an issue for a store though usually they will just make a policy that bags from other places including your backpack are not allowed inside of the store.

[HYHYBT]

I don't know about the law, but it's not even a *remotely* reasonable policy, especially for a thrift store. They're selling used stuff, probably no two items alike. Unless either there's a particularly distinctive item obviously missing and that's what they find, or they actually see you put something in there, there's nothing to say that what (if anything) they find in your bag was ever theirs. So what's the point, other than to harass customers?

[bainsidhe]

I'm usually willing to cut a store some slack, but I'm with the OP on this one. Check my bags (store bags with items I just bought, NOT my purse) against the receipt? Fine. But ask to check my personal items or dig through my pockets? Not a chance buddy.

I've seen similar signs at college stores, where they have a lot of student traffic carrying backpacks. Even so, the only time I've heard of it enforced is when they strongly suspect someone of theft. And if that's true, they should be calling the police anyway, not asking me to hand over my purse as part of the shopping experience.

And in the OP's defense, on the rare occasions I've seen a similar sign, I've always interpreted it as a deterrent only. You know, post a sign saying they may search you and would-be thieves may be less ballsy. Besides, the sign says they may search anyone "entering" the premises, not when they're ready to exit.

[jackfaire]

Besides, the sign says they may search anyone "entering" the premises, not when they're ready to exit.

*Face palm* the language used in this way means that by entering the premises you have given them permission to search your bags. It doesn't need to specify exiting too because in this case the word Entering doesn't mean "If we don't catch you the moment you enter the store then your free to go" It means anyone entering the store is now subject to search from the moment they come in.

See similar signs, "anyone entering the pool area agrees to following rules" doesn't mean once your inside you can start running.

[bara]

Many valid points. But Im going to have to agree with those who say not to go in.

Could have been nothing more than a random check.

[Andara Bledin]

You feel that a private entity has no right to search your bags, and the private entity feels that you have no right to privacy once you enter their property. Don't go in - problem solved.

How being an SC to the manager - who as like as not had no say in the policy to begin with - is going to do anything other than make them think that those who object to violations of their privacy are jerks, I don't know. A simple, "I was considering shopping here, but due to your policy, I will not be patronizing your establishment" would have sufficed.

^-.-^

[Amanita]

I've turned around and left stores that demanded I check my bag "behind the counter". I'm sorry, there's no secure storage back there, what's to stop somebody from grabbing it the moment the clerk turns their back? And good luck getting the store to reimburse you for your property if it's stolen or damaged.

So let me get this straight- I'm required to hand over my personal effects as a condition of shopping there, but the store is not responsible for said belongings if anything happens. I don't think so!
Don't bring a bag with me then? That's not always an option. Sometimes I have things on me that I need for the day. Or I've been shopping elsewhere, and have a bag from someplace else.
Leave it in the car? What car? I'm a non-driver, I walk or use public transit.

So pretty much that. I don't like shopping at places that treat me like a thief. And wanting to search my pockets and purse is just way the hell and gone over the line.

[Rageaholic]

I wouldn't go back there myself. Nor would I ever enter the store in the first place.

It doesn't sound illegal so I imagine the store would be in the right. However, I wouldn't lose any sleep over calling them out on their assholery and not submitting to their search. It wasn't like you deliberatly entered the store just to fight their rule. It sounds like your fighting with your wallet which is usually the best way to combat stupid rules.

[Amanita]

^That's one reason why a friend of mine refuses to go to outdoor concerts any more. Too many stupid rules. Too many restrictions on what can be brought in, and a lot of them are pure greed and gouging, trying to force people to buy overpriced shitty food and water.
My sister's a diabetic, she has to have something sugary with her at all times, in case her blood sugar bottoms out. So she and her friends went to a concert, and she had a few sweets with her. Security made noise about taking them, and my sister showed her medic alert bracelet and insulin. She explained what the sweets were for, and said that if the guard wanted to take a chance on anything happening to her, go ahead and take her stuff. He backed down and let her pass.

[Mytical]

Any business does have the right to searches, especially if the policy is posted in plain sight. Reasonable suspicion is 'you have a bag', because the policy is clearly stated. Now, as a private citizen, you can refuse..that is your right ALSO. Of course if you work there, doing so can be grounds for dismissal, but that is beside the point. They can refuse to sell to you, throw you out, etc..but they CAN NOT search you if you say no. They can detain you and wait for the cops, who could search you, because it would be deemed suspicious that you did not want to be searched (so reasonable suspicion right there)..but other then that. I mean think about an airport. The horror stories of searches there.

Now I would not be fond of having my person searched either, but within reason I would not object (ie strip searches, or if the searches became to 'friendly'). Then again I am one of those that think "I have nothing to hide" so I am a bit more easy going then a lot of people.

[blas87]

I just wouldn't shop there. It'd be a bummer if it was a store that I frequented on a well....ok I will just be honest, weekly basis *cough Old Navy*, but if I felt it invaded my "privacy", I just wouldn't bother.

[bunnyboy]

You know what really stood out to me wasn't the searching of bags, but the automobiles in the parking lot part.

At least in my part of the States doing that even as a clerk is very risky business, not from a crazed customer shooting you, but from the fact that, unless it's in plain view they have to enter your private property to do so.