Labour MP: Don't Charge Poor Shoplifters

Danny_SilverDanny_Silver Posts: 902
Forum Member
✭✭
Labour MP Michael Meacher has told LBC that poor people should not be charged for shoplifting because they have been “starved into it” by government cuts.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/dont-charge-poor-shoplifters-says-labour-mp-101329

He has a point?
«1

Comments

  • steveh31steveh31 Posts: 13,516
    Forum Member
    ✭✭

    No why should shops suffer because of thieves.

    I worked in a shop years ago that was losing £4000 of items a quarter, the police were not interested and refused to attend if you rang them and the thieves knew it.

    Don't assume because someone is poor they don't know what they are doing because most of them do.
  • phantom sneezephantom sneeze Posts: 1,064
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As a professorial shoplifter myself that is good.
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I haven't read the article but to me it's bleeding obvious that sometimes, shoplifters who are clearly shoplifting just because they are 'hungry & homeless' should be treated with great leniency.

    This shouldn't apply to people who go in there and nick cigarettes, razors and other high value items to sell on, but the obvious cases where people are just stealing a sandwich or something to eat.

    Prosecution rarely accomplishes anything anyway for destitute shoplifters. They get a caution, or charged and go to court, then do it all over again. Putting them in prison actually costs even more money than if they were free and seems like a grossly disproportionate punishment for just 'trying to survive'
  • JasonJason Posts: 76,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What he says is actually fairly reasonable IMO. I've read plenty of stories about people who've shoplifted basic food items or sandwiches just to get something to eat because they've been sanctioned and have no money.

    Obviously the problem would be that you'd potentially open up the floodgates to people claiming all sorts of things if they think they'd get away with it.

    Maybe the lower level stuff could be dealt with differently though ?. Rather than prosecuting someone who simply wants food to eat, maybe compel them to volunteer for a charity for a period of time to essentially work off the punishment ?

    As I understand it, motorists caught speeding can be given points on their licence or opt for a speed awareness course to avoid that, so maybe similar thinking can be applied here?
  • SpotSpot Posts: 25,118
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What's the betting most of them have mobile phones?
  • QT 3.14QT 3.14 Posts: 1,771
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As a professorial shoplifter myself that is good.

    You really are taking this internet fantasist persona to a different level.
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭

    I am not so sure if as the shop owner I think it would be ok for people to steal from me , so what if someone breaks into houses as they are poor will that be ok with him as well ?

    I would agree that each case should be looked at on a case by case basis , but not announce an across the board rule that will conjure up a whole new breed of "poor shoplifters" and the majority of shoplifters are not poor, in fact most people who are hard up would never dream of stealing from someone else.
  • SJ_MentalSJ_Mental Posts: 16,138
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Spot wrote: »
    What's the betting most of them have mobile phones?

    And trainers.
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    skp20040 wrote: »
    I am not so sure if as the shop owner I think it would be ok for people to steal from me , so what if someone breaks into houses as they are poor will that be ok with him as well ?

    I would agree that each case should be looked at on a case by case basis , but not announce an across the board rule that will conjure up a whole new breed of "poor shoplifters" and the majority of shoplifters are not poor, in fact most people who are hard up would never dream of stealing from someone else.

    What on earth do you base this on? :confused:

    I'm fairly 'middle-class' (I think?), but if I was homeless I don't think I'd think twice about nicking food from a shop. Why would I not?
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    steveh31 wrote: »
    I worked in a shop years ago that was losing £4000 of items a quarter
    90% out of the back door or before delivery
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Spot wrote: »
    What's the betting most of them have mobile phones?
    And??

    Are you going to suggest that they have clothes?
  • EastEast Posts: 926
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I have a feeling this will turn into a Benefit and Sky tv Thread:o
  • SpotSpot Posts: 25,118
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ethel_Fred wrote: »
    And??

    Are you going to suggest that they have clothes?

    No, I'm suggesting that it is an odd priority, as it is perfecly possible to exist without a mobile phone (I do) but clearly it is not possible to survive without food.
  • Alan1981Alan1981 Posts: 5,416
    Forum Member
    My girlfriend runs a shop in a deprived area, and the number one item to nick is alcohol, followed by any other high value easy to steal items, such as big blocks of cheese etc. Unfortunately it's not in some noble cause to feed the starving poor. It's to get drunk and to sell the other stuff on at the local footie club in order to buy drugs usually.
  • JB3JB3 Posts: 9,308
    Forum Member
    SJ_Mental wrote: »
    And trainers.
    42'' tv and a BMW parked around the corner.

    Bet they all smoke **** too...

    Have a dog and 13 children.
  • bluebladeblueblade Posts: 88,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭

    No, he doesn't.

    For a start he needs to define "poor".
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Alan1981 wrote: »
    My girlfriend runs a shop in a deprived area, and the number one item to nick is alcohol, followed by any other high value easy to steal items, such as big blocks of cheese etc. Unfortunately it's not in some noble cause to feed the starving poor. It's to get drunk and to sell the other stuff on at the local footie club in order to buy drugs usually.

    I don't think anybody is suggesting that 'career shoplifters' be let off the hook, but rather those who are stealing out of desperation - which I can assure you does happen, even if a majority are stealing for 'commercial' gain.
  • tanstaafltanstaafl Posts: 21,796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As a professorial shoplifter myself that is good.
    I know that some academics such as post docs consider themselves poorly paid but surely professors still get a reasonable salary?
  • skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,872
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    What on earth do you base this on? :confused:

    I'm fairly 'middle-class' (I think?), but if I was homeless I don't think I'd think twice about nicking food from a shop. Why would I not?

    The annual costs of shoplifting is in the region of £4 billion, the most shoplifted items are branded clothing, high end goods / games etc and alcohol ( food is one of the lowest) , on average 30% ( figures vary annually) of shoplifters who are caught are between 13 and 17, 33 to 35 % of shoplifters are suffering from some form of mental health problems . Which says to me the majority of shoplifters are not doing it because they are poor.
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    skp20040 wrote: »
    The annual costs of shoplifting is in the region of £4 billion, the most shoplifted items are branded clothing and alcohol ( food is one of the lowest) , on average 30% ( figures vary annually) of shoplifters who are caught are between 13 and 17, 33% of shoplifters are suffering from some form of mental health problems . Which says to me the majority of shoplifters are not doing it because they are poor.

    I think you are correct in that a majority aren't. Obviously there are many career shoplifters.

    There are still plenty of people - a 'sizeable minority' - who are stealing out of desperation/hunger though.

    I can't imagine why anybody in that position who wouldn't steal - I know I would.
  • BanglaRoadBanglaRoad Posts: 57,514
    Forum Member
    Sure I read somewhere that over 70% of theft from shops is carried out by staff so if that is true then the poster who said that £4000 was stolen then about £2800 of that would be down to the staff.
  • NilremNilrem Posts: 6,938
    Forum Member
    SJ_Mental wrote: »
    And trainers.

    And clothes...

    Given you can pick up a mobile these days for about £20, and a tenners credit can last months it's actually cheaper to have a mobile than a land line, and if you're looking for a job or even just on job seekers you do tend to need to have a phone number for contact.
  • gothergother Posts: 14,654
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    steveh31 wrote: »
    No why should shops suffer because of the Tories.

    I worked in a shop years ago that was losing £4000 of items a quarter, the police were not interested and refused to attend if you rang them and the thieves knew it.

    Don't assume because someone is poor they don't know what they are doing because most of them do.

    There corrected that for you.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BanglaRoad wrote: »
    Sure I read somewhere that over 70% of theft from shops is carried out by staff so if that is true then the poster who said that £4000 was stolen then about £2800 of that would be down to the staff.
    It's dropped then, when I was working in supermarkets it was about 90%. Guess better stock control systems make it more difficult to steal from your employer
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Spot wrote: »
    No, I'm suggesting that it is an odd priority, as it is perfecly possible to exist without a mobile phone (I do) but clearly it is not possible to survive without food.
    Mobiles can be cheaper than a landline.
Sign In or Register to comment.