Messages

In this case Val the storm may well be in a teacup for you, but it is also apt to reach out into other areas of everyday living where one must pass "tests" before obtaining goods and services one can afford.

If the "inspection/checking" policy is allowed to progress unchallenged so it becomes traditional law and taken for granted, it is indeed the beginning of the end for free living in a supposedly free and liberal country.

Obviously you are used to the policy and as a shopkeeper defend its benefits to your business, but from a visitor's point of view I would expect a little more trust from my elected government - and yes, even if this means people in the retail trade suffer slight losses from relying on good old fashioned CCTV & security tags.

Now the law is enforced in this way, there would of course be uproar from retailers should it be withdrawn.

There are always new ways to increase turnover and reduce losses in business, but at what cost ?

This is skirting around the point.

To surrender so much [i.e. the right NOT to be automatically accused of the crime of theft when one enters a shop to purchase items essential to one's existence] when going out for a loaf of bread creates a distrustful, cold atmosphere in the shop, the community and even the country from an outsider's point of view.

"Kids just doing their job" is fair enough, but employers should select those who at least have a spark of life in them instead of the grunting little dorks I've come across.

Minimum wage gets minimum effort!!

Shopping is an essential part of human existence in civilised societies - one must purchase food to survive [unless we grow it], and stores know this.

Without custom, stores are forced to close. Without food, humans starve.

So we both need each other.

Entering a shop - where the owner will receive cash in exchange for goods, and at a profit to himself - should not mean also entering an area of automatic suspicion and accusation like it does in Australia.

Theft occurs, and theft can be damaging to businesses - but this measure is too extreme.

As you point out Australians are used to this way of life - I visited as an English tourist, and know that non-Australians are not used to these procedures but will comply with perhaps some bemused reluctance at first. And remember Australia does very well out of the foreign tourist industry.

There is a difference between this policy and the terrorist/risk of death security measures you are fond of comparing them to.

And a geek is a geek, condescending or not - "if you want to make a fuss sir, I'll just have to call someone".

Good job you have the best environments in the world to visit - makes up for leaving my bag at home each time I shopped, because I will not ever comply with this again.

The policy oversteps the mark of... call it whatever you want, I would say something like "personal freedom". "Human rights" may also be appropriate.

That is to say there are lots of problems, crimes and injustices committed every waking second all over the world - but if we start passing policies and laws over everyone in an attempt to stop the minority then we risk offending the majority, as I have been when shopping in Australia.

A checkout geek said those very words ["if you have nothing to hide there really shouldn't be a problem"], and I still find them rather sinister.

One would still think the economy could cope with the "benefit of the doubt" approach instead of tarring everyone with the same brush!

The worst thing about Australia is a policy in shops where the customer must prove upon request that one has not stolen anything.

This means presenting your personal bags for "inspection" by a spotty little prick before you can leave with your purchases.

This "presumed guilty" way of shopping would not be tolerated in England.

Shhh.

I think he's dead.

If I may say, rather manly hands.

I feel sick.

Trial by fire, I say -

You were right to be scared, titch.

They're on their way round to you now.

Hide, boy.

I'm naked as I type.

Of course, sorry.

Depends on the body on show, doesn't it?

Fat veiny white folk should be banned from stripping off in public, top birds should be encouraged.

There is beach in brazil once tried to ban fat people.

I think they meant to say "it will be the SHITtest one so far".

Probably used some kind of retilian warp technology against Higgins so he wouldn't nut him on the way out.

Don't forget Icke was a fine snooker presenter on the telly once, in his pre-lizard king days.

Some people seem to forget that.

Sigh