It would be difficult to actually find something worth stealing in Kmart.. if someone was going to go to the risk of shoplifting, they would probably go somewhere that had decent quality. It was also their stupid decision to put the checkouts at the back of the store..

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 13 points 3 months ago

I have never understood what the logic of that was. Put the checkouts in the middle of the store so you might see something you like on the way out and go back through the checkout again?

It'd need to be some amazing deal for me to do that. And if it's near the exit, that in theory means it's near the entrance and I have probably already seen this deal.

[–] ApeNo1@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is even more ridiculous than that. From the article it states “in an attempt to tackle refund fraud” which must represent a tiny amount of theft versus broader shoplifting.

[–] kowcop@aussie.zone 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Refund fraud comes from the theft of an item and then trying to return it without a receipt.

I only know this as they recently changed their policy where one could return anko items for credit/refund without one.. presumable because they were no longer able to have their sneaky cameras

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago

Lego.

Can you remember the drug bust in Cranbourne recently where they found thousands of dollars of Lego?

Drug dealers are trading their product for Lego; they are then selling it on Bricklink.

The Druggos walk into Big W or Target or Kmart, grab a trolley, fill it up with Lego and just walk out, ignoring Staff and Security.

This is who the facial recognition is supposed to target. They can prosecute an individual who is a multiple offender, but it isn’t worth the risk for a security guard to forcibly restrain an unpredictable single offender.