July 2010 – Page 7 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Wal-Mart Receipt Checkers Come ThisClose to Crossing the Line

If you read Consumerist, you know that Wal-Mart’s receipt checkers are known for getting a little out-of-control to the point of harassing shoppers. Fortunately, that had never been the case for me – at least until today.

Now, before anyone accuses me of getting my Wal-Mart hate on too early, I’m a big fan of the retail giant. I love their low prices and their decent selection. I have family members who have worked for them for decades, so I’m in no way opposed to their business model. At least until it crosses the line of chasing shoppers inappropriately.

I noticed the employee at the door as soon as I walked in. He wasn’t facing me, but he stood out because he’s not the type you normally see handling receipt duties at Wal-Mart. Normally it’s nice older folks who will accept my “no thanks” response when I turn down their request to check my receipt. This guy was older – probably early 50s – but he was reasonably built and even had a tattoo showing on his arm. He was not the usual face of Wal-Mart by any stretch.

When I was leaving, I know I had done nothing suspicious, and he knew it, too. I know he knew since I noticed him watching me as I put my receipt in my wallet before fully departing the register nearest him and the door. I had no purse, just my oversized wallet and a cart with a few cases of soda in it. If I had not been alert, I would have been freaked out when he popped up right beside me demanding my receipt.

In response to his demands, I did my polite smile with the “no, thanks” response. This guy apparently likes to get his way because he kept walking behind me. So, I stopped and turned saying, “Look, I am a member of Sam’s Club where I agree to wait in line to have my receipt checked. I’m not doing that here.” He started in with a rant along the lines of “I don’t care where you’re a member, I want to see your receipt.” But I didn’t let him finish because I told him that unless he planned to get the police involved and could provide hard evidence of suspicious behavior, I was leaving without showing him my receipt that I already put away. That made him back off of the argument, but not the attempt to intimidate. He tried following me, but he decided not to go past the doors.

I called his boss from the parking lot. I stayed out there an extra 10 minutes while they went to find her. She agreed that his behavior of following a 20-something woman in an attempt to intimidate was beyond over the line, especially for a couple of cases of soda. To her credit, she pledged to go have a chat with him immediately. But damn if it doesn’t make me want to avoid Wal-Mart for a while. I haven’t been chased around Target by their staff barking orders at me, and I find I prefer to shop that way.

But upon telling Sebastian the story, he pointed that a better carry form of pepper spray would probably be good for situations like that. If he had tried to grab me or come after me in the parking lot, it would have been a reasonable response. Without the police, they cannot detain you. Even with the police, they are going to have to show some kind of evidence that they believe you committed a crime. Their policy of checking receipts is completely unenforceable. Hopefully the next staffer at the door will accept the polite “no thanks” instead of trying intimidate & harass shoppers, leaving them to wonder if they need to pull out pepper spray.

Kagan Passes Out of Judiciary

Graham gave her the one vote she needed to get out of committee. The rest of the GOP Senators voted no, and she needs at least one vote from the minority to get past the committee. Now the vote goes to the Senate floor, but it’s going to be impossible to stop her there with Graham’s defection. Other GOP votes are sure to defect as well, following Graham’s lead.

Voting against her were Sessions (R-AL), Hatch (R-UT), Grassley (R-IA), Kyl (R-AZ), Cornyn (R-TX), and Coburn (R-OK). They all deserves our thanks for their vote. Graham is showing himself to be an increasingly unreliable conservative vote, and given the state he’s from, I think we ought to expect better.

Judiciary Dems are mostly anti-gun and poorly rated. The only votes up for possible influence by NRA were Leahy and Feingold, and to a lesser degree Specter. But even with those votes, she still would have gotten out. The GOP needed to hold it together, and they failed us because of Graham.

Palm Pistol Prototype

Ed Friedman of NRA’s Shooting Illustrated magazine has the scoop on the prototype Palm Pistol. It’s all black, so clearly it’s evil and must be banned immediately. And it’ll have rail? Seriously?

Health Care Constitutionality

The Obama Administration seems to be intent on arguing the health care mandate is a legitimate exercise of Congress’ taxing powers. But noted over at Volokh:

The tax is not an excise tax, and it could not be a constitutional excise tax because it is not uniform. The tax is not an income tax, and it could not be a constitutional income tax, because it is not a tax on derived income. Accordingly, the tax must be a capitation or direct tax. Article I, section 9 provides: â€œNo capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.â€ The tax is not apportioned, and therefore is contrary to Article I, section 9.

I think the strongest argument is that the mandate is necessary and proper in order to carry out Congress’ national regulatory scheme of health insurance under its commerce powers. That’s not to say I think that argument is correct, but it seems to me that the tax argument is an easy loser, while there is at least a plausible argument for the necessary and proper clause supporting Congress’ commerce powers.

But hey, I’m not going to complain about the Administration hanging its hat on the wrong argument.

P.S. – Congratulations to Dave Kopel for his Emmy.

NRA Anti-Kagan Print Ad

They seem to be pulling out all the stops on Kagan (PDF). If I were a guy like, say, Lindsey Graham, who had an endorsement in 2008 and an A-rating, I’d be nervous about the level of opposition coming out of NRA. Especially when the Democrat ~~running~~Â that last ran against him also hadÂ an A-rating.

We’re Not Nearly as Organized

Sadly, I don’t think the right will ever be able to truly beat the left at the political organization game. We’re people who tend to like being left alone. I someone tries to tell us what to do, there are a good number of us who will do the opposite just to spite them. The rest would simply ignore them. And because the left is much better at getting on board with group efforts, the members of Journolist honestly believed they could organize to control the media narrative in an effort to help Barack Obama during the presidential campaign.

Read the link if you want to be horrified at the number of outlets getting in on the effort to bury stories that could hurt Obama and an effort to publicly call any critic of Obama’s a racist.

But, here’s another notable comment from the list by Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent:

Itâ€™s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wrightâ€™s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwingerâ€™s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

I thought political violence was only a tool of the right. (Obviously I mean this rhetorically.)

Progress in Nordyke

The panel the case has been remanded to has asked for supplemental briefs speaking to the standard of review that ought to be used. Eugene Volokh also speaks of standards of reviews, addressing the SNBI crowd:

The trouble is that â€œshall not be infringedâ€ doesnâ€™t resolve much until we figure out what it means to â€œinfringeâ€ a right. […]

And I think as a general matter this is probably the right interpretation of the constitutional provisions. But in any event, it seems unlikely that courts will take an absolutist view towards the right to bear arms, to the point that any regulation of any possession of any arms in any place will be seen as an â€œinfringement.â€

Now this having been said, Iâ€™m happy to argue against restrictions that really are infringements; I discuss some inÂ this article. But itâ€™s not enough just to say â€œshall not be infringed,â€ especially when weâ€™re in an area â€” such as government control over government property â€” where some degree of government restrictions have long been accepted in manyÂ areas.

The trick is to get the Courts to carve out a broad right. While I have some minor and specific disagreements with Professor Volokh in his paper Implementing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, it provides the best context I’ve seen to date for thinking about the issue. It’ll be very interesting to see what the 9th Circuit has to say about this.

Month: July 2010