BCM, dont forget to add disabled, refugees and any other group to that. Add a couple of kittens whilst you are at it.
So your robust rebuttal to my question is an attempt at mockery.
So, I will ask you again, what should Sainsbury's do (given we have already established that security and CCTV are present in the store)?
I think Sainsbury's should invest more in security and proactively work with schools to bring those found to be shoplifting to account. High definition CCTV cameras that give full coverage to a store are not expensive, the cost of storing the collected data is also not expensive - certainly not for a corporation of Sainbury's scale. If kids found shoplifting from Sainbury's were carted in front of their respective school's head master each time and sanctioned, they'd soon think twice about it.
It's possible to sympathise Sainsburys' position AND feel bad for the decent kids who are disadvantaged by these bans. Expressing sympathy for one side does not imply condemning the other.
Totally agree with this - I do sympathise with Sainsbury's, but surely there are other, more helpful roads to take rather than a blanket ban? By banning teenagers surely Sainsbury's is merely making the problem someone else's without such a policy in place. Thieves are going to thieve. Or should we ban all teenagers from all stores just in case? Is that the way we want to go as a society?
Search
Help
| 
