Parris to retailers: Prosecute shoplifters… or else!

LANCASTER – The city of Lancaster will be publicizing the names of businesses that choose not to prosecute shoplifters, Mayor R. Rex Parris announced in a press release Tuesday.

“We will be aggressively going after retailers which are not prosecuting criminals shoplifting goods from their establishments on a daily basis,” said Parris in the news release. “Unfortunately, these retailers have concluded that the total cost of apprehending and prosecuting these criminals currently outweighs the ever-increasing losses they are experiencing. Well, we’re going to change that equation for them rather quickly with this plan.”

Parris spoke about the issue at the last city council meeting on Dec. 11.

He directed the city’s Criminal Justice Commission to determine which city retailers are not prosecuting shoplifters, and return its findings to the city council within 90 days.

“I want to put their names right out there. I want to publicize the fact that they’re actually allowing these crimes to occur,” added Parris.

The 90-day period is intended to give retailers ample time to modify, as necessary, their policies regarding prosecution of shoplifters, Parris said.

“We know that crime is contagious, and the only sure way to stop it is ‘certainty of apprehension’. Right now, these retailers are providing these criminals with a ‘certainty of not being apprehended,’” Parris said. “That’s why I’ve introducing this plan. I want these retailers to fully understand that they can be part of the solution, rather than the problem.”

  87 comments for “Parris to retailers: Prosecute shoplifters… or else!

  1. Mary
    December 23, 2012 at 8:36 pm

    Does this mean the council is turning themselves all in?

    • Michael Rives
      December 24, 2012 at 9:02 am

      Rex has already contradicted himself on this. First, it was all merchants and now it is only the ‘big box’ stores. He has a history of contradicting himself lately. First, he is Mr. Law and Order and then he is Mr. Conciliator (re: Section 8, Arizona resolution, Ron Smith as Vice Mayor, etc). It will be only matter of time and he will change his position. Maybe he will suggest (like he does now) that we invite a shoplifter or someone different into our homes. Yea, sure, Rex. This is Compton North, you know.

      • December 24, 2012 at 9:21 am

        @ Michael Rives… Norm Pattis, a friend of Rex Parris for 15 years described him best in his blog; Sep 09, 2012 “The Mayor’s Two Hats: Hysteria In Lancaster?”

        The general counsel of Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyers College has some explaining to do. As general counsel and board member of the college, R. Rex Parris professes a dedication to the college’s mission statement. That statement pledges a commitment to seeking justice for “the poor, the injured, the forgotten, the voiceless, the defenseless and the damned.”

        It is hard to find a class of people who better fit that classification than the 700,000-plus souls on the nation’s sex offender registries. While some registrants are no doubt dangerous, the overwhelming majority are not. You can land on a sex offender registry for such offenses as urinating in a public place, teenage sex, sending sexually explicit text messages, or a host of other activities that suggest the world will not be truly safe until virtually everyone is registered.

        Politicians make great sport of folks on the registry. You score points among constituents promising to keep your community’s streets safe for children. Who can possibly oppose protecting the innocence of children? But sex offender hysteria is a hoax.

        In addition to his roles as general counsel to the Trial Lawyers College, Parris, an exceptionally successful personal injury lawyer, is also mayor of the town of Lancaster in Southern California. It’s hard to say whether he has broader political ambitions. But he does understand how to cater to fear. He’s proposed a municipal ordinance that would prohibit anyone on the sex offender registry from using the city’s parks, swimming pools, libraries, museums and movie theaters. The ordinance also prohibits registrants from decorating their homes for Halloween. Violate this ordinance and face up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

        This is the sort of mindless, “one-size-fits-all” sort of thinking that makes victims of innocent people, the sort of people the Trial Lawyers College exists to represent. Politicians and hysterics conclude that all people on a sex offender registry are “child molesters.” The facts speak otherwise. Even law enforcement officers recognize that the nation’s sex offender registries are over-inclusive, containing so many names that it is impossible to monitor those who might pose a threat to harm a child.

        One would think a lawyer committed to justice would be asking hard questions about a law designed to make an internal exile of a man or woman. Want to meet a person voiceless, defenseless and damned? Look no further than internal exiles on the sex offender registry.

        I’ve known Rex for almost 15 years. I know that success did not come easily to him. He overcame personal obstacles and set high goals he worked tirelessly to achieve. He’s now wealthy, powerful and a leader in his profession. I look at him and I realize that dreams can come true. His certainly have.

        But is the price of fulfilling these dreams forgetting his roots, his commitments to the downtrodden and to ordinary people in extraordinary trouble?

        I’ve a question for Mayor Parris: Can you really wear two hats this week during Lancaster’s consideration of the new sex offender ordinance? Can you serve as general counsel to a national organization seeking to provide justice for individuals while at the same time seeking an ordinance that stigmatizes and isolates people based on little more than hysteria and misinformation? Justice requires individualized assessments of risk; it is not administered with a meat cleaver.

        Rex, table the proposal for these new ordinances. Study the data about how individuals find themselves on a registry and why. Understand that recidivism rates for those convicted of sex offenses are among the lowest of any class of offenders. Do justice. Listen to those who try to meet with you to drive away misconceptions and fear. Justice requires it — the very justice you counsel the Trial Lawyers College to pursue.

        I am sure when you listen, you will withdraw support for these new ordinances. They smell of the sort of fear than led Salem to kill accused witches centuries ago. You are better than that. I recall walks with you in the buttes of DuBois, Wyoming where I saw something kinder, gentler and wiser than the mayor who seeks support by manipulating fear

  2. December 23, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    If the Antelope Valley Chamber of Commerce endorses Mayor Parris’ behind this ridiculous idea, they are putting themselves at risk of losing members. According to the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, employers are TWICE as likely to suffer a loss as a result of EMPLOYEE THEFT as they are by a CUSTOMER. Statistics are; 30% of small business failure is caused by EMPLOYEE THEFT; INTERNAL EMPLOYEE related thefts occur 15 times more than EXTERNAL theft; Embezzlement losses exceed $4 billion every year.

    I wonder which person of the Criminal Justice Commision is going to be the “fall guy” on this one when it results in a lawsuit against the City of Lancaster, just like the Sex Offender Ordinance did on December 18th and Commissioner Jim Gaupels’ employment was severed from the Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation on September 14th. I’m curious as to which of the LASD Commander’s approved of this in order for LASD Lancaster Station to participate in such a scheme.

    • December 23, 2012 at 8:27 pm

      Not to mention, with thousands of shoplifting incidents occurring every year, merchants must be able to pursue legitimate efforts to detain and prosecute shoplifters, but they must also have policies and procedures in place to ensure that their efforts will not result in lawsuits for false arrest that could ultimately cost the company much more than the theft.

      Is Mayor Parris going to provide “pro bono” (free) legal representation to the businesses to defend “false arrest” lawsuits when the alleged shoplifter is given a DA (District Attorney) reject for lack of evidence and/or acquitted and turns around and sues the business?

      Stop having the various Commissions doing your “dirty work”… Step up and be a leader for the people. The “people” voted you in and the “people” can petition for your recall as well.

  3. William
    December 22, 2012 at 1:30 pm

    Raise your hand if you thought that the BLVD was going to be a rip-roaring success when Parris first belched out his grandiose ideas?

    When is the last time you heard him use the word ‘ramblas’?

    My dreams where I’m flying are more real than Parris’s big plans.

    • sikntired
      December 22, 2012 at 1:58 pm

      I almost like you when you’re funny Will.Good one.”Ramblas”, LOL.

      • William
        December 22, 2012 at 4:17 pm

        @sikntired. I’m only almost funny between the hours of 1:00 and 2:00PM.

        The rest of the time, my hair is on fire.

  4. Joel
    December 21, 2012 at 4:13 pm

    Simple and brilliant! If any business wants to save $$$ instead of stand up for what is right, they should be listed so that these thieves know where to shop.
    Criminals have it soft and easy in the A.V.

    If a business is going to bend over for crime they deserve to get screwed!

    December 20, 2012 at 7:50 am

    wow like this is going to work what ever happen to leaps

    • MG
      December 20, 2012 at 12:12 pm

      yeah, where is that $90,000.00 a MONTH, USED PLANE? A MONTH!!!

    • Turd Ferguson
      December 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm

      What happened to LEAPS?What happened to LEAPS?It is still there.It is still there.$90,000.00 a month.And it is still there.And so is crime.Crime is still there.And going up.Up and up and up.Crime is going up.We were told LEAPS is a crime fighting tool.We were told LEAPS was a crime fighting tool.It looks like LEAPS is a failure.$90,000.00 a month for what?We need more sherriffs.We have great sherriffs.We need more sherriffs.We do not need a $90,000.00 a month plane that does nothing.It can tell you when a man leaves his alarm on in his store.It can find your kitty cat in a tree.It can tell you that a bad guy is in his apartment.What good is that?What good is that?A heliocopter can do that.When we need a heliocopter.We do not need a heliocopter 10 hours a day.We do not need LEAPS 10 hours a day.We do not need LEAPS period.No to LEAPS.No to LEAPS.Yes to boots on the ground.Yes to boots on the ground.We tried to sell LEAPS and no one wants it.No one wants LEAPS.Except Rex.And Frank Visco.Because they make money on LEAPS.Our tax money.They make money on LEAPS.While crime goes up.If anyone wants to buy LEAPS.Sell them ours.Then spend $90,000.00 on more sherriffs.On boots on the ground.We need more sherriffs.We need more boots on the ground.No to LEAPS!No to LEAPS!Yes to sherriffs.Yes to boots on the ground.

  6. Wake Up Lancaster
    December 19, 2012 at 10:14 pm

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! What are we doing? Here’s the latest in a long list of totally loonie propositions from our mayor. Now he wants to shame stores by listing which ones don’t prosecute shoplifters. Really? Don’t you think the stores have figured out what policies work best for them since, DUH, they’re running the business? More government intrusion from the mayor. WAKE UP LANCASTER! We’ve got a nut job running the city.

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! First it was a fence around a poor woman’s hotel to keep the big bad Monguls away. Then it was proclaiming that we were building a Christian community, with total disregard for those of other faiths, or no faith at all. Then it was condoning hateful remarks from Sherry Marquez about Muslims. Then it was the hostile take over and dumping of the Cedar Street Theater group. Then it was the unceremonial dumping of Jonathan Ervin for daring to vote against putting a Walmart in Quartz Hill. The list goes on.

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! This is the guy who told us birdie sounds on the Boulevard would lower crime. Well, wrongomundo again! Bird sounds don’t lower crime. Then he gave us the Eye in the Sky for a cool $1.2 million bones a year. How’s that working for ya, mayor? Well, maybe it is working for you and your business partners, but for those of us who have to live here, well, not so much. Maybe if it could look through walls into our homes like the mayor wanted it would have better success, right?

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! Wasn’t our mayor adamant about crushing Section 8 in our city? He tears the County and Palmdale a new one when they settled, and then, lo and behold, he settles! Only he doesn’t call it a settlement. Yeah, right. If it walks like a duck…

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! Our mayor goes to China more than Obama goes to Camp David. He says he wants to bring business to Lancaster. Great idea. Only one problem. Has anyone told the mayor the the Communist Chinese are really, really, really interested in stealing our technology and national security secrets. Really, really interested. So, what the hey. Let’s invite them to set up shop right next to America’s most sensitive and important national defense operations. Way to go, mayor.

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! This is the mayor who can’t seem to handle a couple of detractors in a city council meeting, so he has to turn the filming off until they go away. Did they hurt the mayor’s feeling by their not so nice remarks? Maybe. Tough turds. You’re the mayor, dammit. Get a tough skin for goodness sake. You can’t even deal with David Abber in a gym. How the heck are you going to deal with a real crisis if it hits?

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! It looks like our mayor is the poster child for paranoia. How many scapegoats can one mayor have? If it’s not pit bulls, it is his previous city council. Or it is rival mayor in Palmdale. Or it is the Mongols. Or it is the County. Or the State. Or it is his political enemies. Or it is Section 8 people. For goodness sake, MAN UP!

    WAKE UP LANCASTER! Our mayor has major anger issues, and obviously severe emotional and relationship issues. He lies as easy as most people breath. Someone blogged here earlier that he or she thought the mayor was losing it. You think?


    • :(
      December 19, 2012 at 10:58 pm

      Paranoia is a sign of drug abuse!

      • Noneya
        December 22, 2012 at 6:41 am

        That isn’t a surprise to some of us that know a bit about his past. I can’t speculate on his current condition. But many years ago he did trip and fall face first into a pile of cocaine numerous times on accident. So i wouldn’t put it past him. How else is the guy supposed to deal with the stress from being such a failure in the community. Goes to show that just because you have an education and own your own successful law firm, doesnt mean your #$#% don’t stink. Someone needs to pop that idiots ego one time real good to teach that old dog a lesson.

        • Gladys
          December 22, 2012 at 11:53 am

          Be careful, you’ll be accused of threating the Mayor like Michelle Egberts did. I understand from the jury verdict that the charges were not much more than what you just said.

          • MG
            December 23, 2012 at 4:22 am

            what happend to her?

          • December 23, 2012 at 11:49 am

            @ MG… In less than an hour two separate juries found me “Not Guilty” on charges; Felon in Possession of Weapons and Threatening City Officials (Mayor Parris and Public Safety Manager Lee D’Errico)that were predicated on crimes that NEVER happened in order to silence me from my advocacy of criminal justice/prisoner reentry initiatives and exposed to 9 years in prison.

            They abused their authority by manipulating the local law enforcement/district attorneys office into prosecuting me, and faced a very malicious Deputy District Attorney, John Evans to try and convict me… even offering me a “plea bargain” of “time served” w/ probation after serving 316 days in custody fighting for my freedom and innocence, only to tell Judge Naranjo, absolutely not.

            I have resumed my advocacy for prisoner reentry as Founder/Executive Director of AV-East Kern Second Chance, Inc. having a 25-year California Department of Correction & Rehabilitation (Ret) Lieutenant, Investigative Services Officer and Parole Agent Richard Macias as my Director. A unique partnership of a former offender and peace officer demonstrating that opposites of the law can merge together to combat the 70% recidivism rate, turning tax burdens into tax payers.

            I also believe in civil rights of former offenders who have paid their debt to society and do not need a Mayor (Parris) adopting Ordinances that violate those rights, especially when local, state and federal law is already in place. Such as the City of Lancaster’s adoption of the Sex Offender Ordinance. I am the individual who is responsible for the lawsuit that was just filed this past Tuesday because Mayor Parris feels he is above the law and no one will stand up to him on this issue. I will always be indebted to Janice Bellucci, Esq. and the California Reform Sex Offender Laws organization for coming to the aide of our clients and the other sex offenders in our community who did not have child related crimes.

            From the front page article in the Antelope Valley Press yesterday covering this lawsuit, I hope the Mayor sincerely considers repealing the Ordinace as “collateral consequences” already occurred with Criminal Justice Commisssioner, also an AV Parole Agent was forced into retirement (essentially was fired)for championing this Ordinance on false statisics and fear mongoring on behalf of the Mayor and now Vice Mayor Marvin Crist against CDCR Policy and Procedure. It’s obvious our Mayor and City Council did not take into consideration that they put Jim Gaupels career in jeopardy.

          • MG
            December 23, 2012 at 12:35 pm

            I am glad to hear she is OK, I hear horrible stories of others who dare challenge the powers to be.

    • Quigley
      December 20, 2012 at 7:22 am

      @Wake up Lancaster….can you say Attorney??? Legally over paid scam artists who think they are above the law. Rexipoo will always be an attorney so nothing will ever change…sorry!

    • Notagain!!!!
      December 20, 2012 at 7:23 am


      • MerryChristmas
        December 20, 2012 at 9:07 am

        Too bad for you Notagain, it was well worth the read.
        Quigley, you said once an attorney, always an attorney (in so many words). I say not necessarily, if his activities are investigated and come up dirty, as he tried (and failed)to do to the 3 AVTA people, he may get disbarred.
        Can we all sing? “Oh happy day, oh happy day”.

    • William
      December 21, 2012 at 3:54 pm

      @WAKE UP LANCASTER. Excellent summary of the Parris legacy.

      I feel for the residents of Lancaster that are too busy commuting several hours a day to pay close attention to what the ‘good ol’ boys town’ is up to. It’s costing them in lower home values and quality of life. I don’t care how many parades or go-kart races you have, it’s the old ‘lipstick on pig’ that Parris keeps doing.

    • Frank Rizzo
      December 23, 2012 at 4:07 pm

      Perris and anyone associated with him needs to go. Why does this city keeps voting these weirdos into office? I couldnt have said it better than wake up lancaster did.

      • SNT
        December 23, 2012 at 6:35 pm

        There are few things they are doing to make sure to be elected, first, they change the date of elections to sometime in April so no one shows up to vote, second, they have the big church on 40th st east voting for them, and third they have a special person count the votes and now Parris change elections for Mayor to be every 4 years. Parris was elected with a little over 5000 votes.

  7. Good thinking!
    December 19, 2012 at 9:49 pm

    Good thinking Rex. If the the slip and fall business gets slow. You can rev up for criminal defense end of the business.

  8. sikntired
    December 19, 2012 at 6:41 pm

    Just heard him on the 5 pm channel 7 news;small business owners will be exempt, guess that will take care of his buddies on th Blvd.

    • Forward
      December 19, 2012 at 8:18 pm

      Saw the clip on 7 – so lame. Grandstanding. Ziltch info except great photo ops of a trimmed beard and Cabo tan.

      Why are Cons so skitzo? One minute they’re approving more Walmarts, next minute they’re threatening to expose them for “court evasion”….

  9. Les
    December 19, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    I can’t imagine that most of these major retailers will not fight this. How much will the potential lawsuits from these retailers cost the City of Lancaster?
    I’d also like to hear something from the sheriffs department on how they plan to effectively respond to all of these additional calls for low $ shoplift cases. Will Lancaster be paying for additional deputies to handle these calls or just expect the retailer to detain the shoplifters for an indefinite period of time?

  10. Ya Thank?
    December 19, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    Maybe we should publish the names of all organizations that refuse to prosecute people who try to bring guns onto airplanes. Maybe we should publicly out people who carry concealed weapons without a permit. Oh, sorry. It doesn’t apply if you’re politically connected…..

    • Forward
      December 19, 2012 at 8:19 pm


  11. William
    December 19, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    That’s it. Prosecute shoplifters and where will our future politicians come from, I ask you?

  12. MG
    December 19, 2012 at 10:08 am

    $90,000.00 a month $1.2 mil a year used plane??? who is the thief here?

    • fed up!
      December 19, 2012 at 11:20 am

      His next proposal will be to hang a beach banner on the back of the plane and advertise his law firm!

      • William
        December 19, 2012 at 5:20 pm

        Dear God, that was the best comment in a long time. I can just picture it. [Like]

  13. Notagain!!!!
    December 19, 2012 at 9:58 am


  14. December 19, 2012 at 9:52 am

    Read the full article in the LA Daily News today. Raised my eyebrows more than once while reading it, especially when Mr Parris admits he receives “pushbacks”.

      • Insane
        December 19, 2012 at 10:15 am

        From the article:

        Parris envisions teams of “undercover thieves” going into stores to see which ones call police. As he put it: “We’ll steal a bunch of stuff and then take it back.”

        Ummmm….and what happens when I call the police and demand the “undercover thieves” be prosecuted?

    • Citizen of AV
      December 19, 2012 at 10:00 am

      Raised my eyebrows, too. Humm…Isn’t what he proposing called “Criminal conspiracy?”

      • Diva
        December 19, 2012 at 12:50 pm

        Maybe he is seeing himself as Geraldo Rivera or someone doing a “what would you do” reality show.

  15. EnoughAV
    December 19, 2012 at 9:43 am

    Having worked for major retail store for a # of years,shoplifting is very costly. The cost gets pasted onto the consumers. We would catch a thief,call the sheriff,and hours later someone would show up. Many times, depending on the amount stolen we would see tickets issued and thief released. Seeing a basket of groceries wheeled out of the store and then seeing the above happen is so infuriating. Come on REX do your homework before making such reckless decisions. Yes something has to be done,but it’s not always the store fault.Get off your throne and go out into the community and really open your eyes!

    • Eris
      December 19, 2012 at 10:27 am

      I’ve worked retail in this valley too and had an incident of Bait & Switch where first they paid cash, then changed their mind and wanted to open a credit account. Long story, but the store mgr. didn’t stand up for me, and let the perp take twice the cash back + mdse on most likely false info w/the credit card app. No surprise the store went out of business.

      It’s not always the store’s fault, but most retail clerks aren’t paid nor trained to sniff out the thieves.

  16. Lynn
    December 19, 2012 at 9:31 am

    Really, Rex? How about publishing the names of the multiples of supposedly ‘under age’ punks wreaking havoc throughout our valley? If they do the crime, they need to be publicly called out on it. I’m so sick of what you all have allowed to move into this valley I could spit.

    • Nancy P
      December 19, 2012 at 12:53 pm

      The “who got arrested in Lanc or Palmdale” says they don’t publish names under 16. I have never seem a name of someone under 18. What’s up with that?

  17. Citizen of AV
    December 19, 2012 at 8:35 am

    You got to be kidding me!

    When I first read the headlines, I thought the AV Times was trying to sensationalize the story. After reading the story, it is apparent they were not.

    I tend to be in the minority here. Normally, I read stories here and support Rex’s position. However his comments and actions in recent months have started to make me wonder if he has completely lost it.

    If we are going to publish shop owners who refuse to press charges against criminals, why not publish a list of the names of each officer who lets a speeder go without a ticket? Or publish a list of officers who refuse to pull over a speeder for doing 1 mile over the speed limit?

    As QHR said below, “Stealing is stealing. Does not matter if it’s a big screen or candy bar. So if it’s ok to steal a candy bar as a child, you are telling the child it’s ok to steal a big screen as they get older.”

    So taking the same logic, speeding is speeding. Does not matter if it’s one mile over the limit or 100. So if it’s ok to speed one mile over the limit, you are telling Marvin Hicks it’s ok to do 100.

    Maybe we should, instead, take this to the next step. Why not pass an ordinance criminalizing shop owners who refuse to press charges. This way we can let people like Marvin Hicks out of prison to make room for the real criminals and menaces of society – the shop owners.


  18. dumbandblind
    December 19, 2012 at 7:43 am

    Post the picture and name of the thieves all over Lancaster instead of the stores who don’t prosecute them. Simple.

    • dumbandblind
      December 19, 2012 at 7:44 am

      I’m sorry, all over Antelope Valley.

  19. The Anti-REX
    December 19, 2012 at 7:06 am

    Who does this guy think he is?
    I can imagine its expensive to prosecute someone for shoplifting and one could even get sued if its not done properly.
    If we are going this far lets publish a list of cases that his law office has turned down. I think that would be fair.

    • fed up!
      December 19, 2012 at 11:48 am

      Yes I heard if there’s no money to be made ( Big money!) he won’t take the case.

  20. CF
    December 18, 2012 at 10:56 pm

    I think what this is about is the fact that the retailers call the sheriff’s dept and they use the resources to find and apprehend shoplifters, take them to jail, book them, and then the retailers won’;t prosecute them,
    thus wasting the sheriffs time and thousands of taxpayers dollars.

    • Wayne Luke
      December 19, 2012 at 6:41 am

      Often times it is more costly to prosecute these petty crimes than the potential loss. Since they are often misdemeanors, much of the cost of prosecution falls to the retailer with little relief in the actual crime. Could cost thousands of dollars to prosecute a $5.00 item.

      I am not condoning crime or theft but this is very painful for small businesses. What will happen is that small business will either leave the city or they’ll stop calling the sheriff’s about the incidents altogether.

      • really
        December 19, 2012 at 7:23 am

        Wayne, your a little off here. A victim of a crime is never charged with prosecution. The stores are the victim when theft occurs and never have to pay for prosecution. As stated above I bet that this is being done because tons of law enforcement time goes into handling shoplifting crimes. When stores dont prosecute then all that time was wasted. That being said the Mayor shouldnt have handled it this way. He should have first privately contacted these business’s and explained the cost to the city through wasted LASD resources. Or he could have had stats for wasted man hours and the cost to the city.

        • Eris
          December 19, 2012 at 8:41 am

          Now that word is out that the stores aren’t prosecuting shoplifters, are we going to see an increase in crime?

          TRex has gone about all this backwards, as usual. Threatening the hand that feeds you is like beating a dog – eventually it’ll bite back.

          • Chris
            December 19, 2012 at 9:48 am

            The criminals already know what stores are easy targets!

        • Ruth
          December 19, 2012 at 10:42 am

          It does cost the victim (the store) money because the employee who witnessed the crime or apprehended the criminal has to sit in court all day (usally for multiple days) in order to testify at a trial. The employee has to take time off from work to be there. Most employers will pay the employee for this time and hire someone else to cover that employee’s shift while they are gone at court.

  21. Kettle black?
    December 18, 2012 at 9:52 pm

    After the thieves? Interesting way of calling kettle black. Who’s after you mayor?

  22. Wylda Rose
    December 18, 2012 at 9:23 pm

    Buy locally and handmade from schools, craft fairs and individual sellers on Etsy and not only will you NOT be supporting big box stores (where theft is rampant) but you’ll be thwarting countless thieves. AND you’ll make some small, one man/women store very happy.

    • Sabrina
      December 18, 2012 at 9:48 pm

      Or Ebay

      • Wylda Rose
        December 18, 2012 at 10:28 pm

        Ebay=Chinese re sellers. If you’re going to shop on Ebay just go to Wal-mart.

        • Mr. Mister
          December 19, 2012 at 10:54 am

          Not necessarily. A lot of knock off products come striaght from China as well as other goods, but you can see where the seller is located. just got my son his Christmas gift from someone in Pasadena, prior to that, a single mom from New Jersey. Just look at your seller’s info and you can see where the product is coming from. That being said, a lot of product in the USA is imported from China, whether it be big box stores or local business.

  23. Turnabout Raymond?
    December 18, 2012 at 8:25 pm

    How about the politicians who steal or is that not fair?

  24. Tom Halkins
    December 18, 2012 at 7:00 pm

    What a waste of resources and not to mention skin! You are basically green lighting dbags to go rip off someone, simply because its not worth the money to prosecute? Idiot, i hope that if someone is killed during one of these incidents gone wrong, you arw brought up on charges as an accessory or conspiracy! Good luck City of KLANCASTER!!

  25. FUNNY
    December 18, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    You people are a joke if we let all the thugs go and not do nothing then you bitch ,when we want to Prosecute you bitch.i say we cut there hands off ,GREAT JOB REX KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK GET ALL THE THUGS OUT OF ARE TOWN

  26. ijs
    December 18, 2012 at 5:16 pm

    So basically, since parris lost the battle of Section 8, he want’s to try a different approach. He is a bully.. for some of these business owners it’s gonna cost them upwards of $500.00 to prosecute someone who stole a $1.49 soda. This is the business’ CHOICE… not the mayor… what other city does this..

  27. Mr. Mister
    December 18, 2012 at 5:12 pm

    I wonder how much in tax dollars this will cost to publicize these said names. I guess it’s no different than publicizing delinquent real estate tax payers. It’s just publication, but then again if people feel more inclined to shoplift at that store and get killed (Bases Cards and Comics), then his plan worked? I used to work for Lowe’s and it is their corporate policy to not pursue a thief. They must call the police. So if someone walks out with a couple of chainsaws or a riding lawn mower, no associate except the loss prevention associate, who happens to be a middle-aged woman, can actively pursue the thief. So my guess is there will be exemptions for corporations or Hex will be prosecuting. Can’t wait to find out.

    • Mr. Mister
      December 18, 2012 at 5:12 pm

      I do not condone stealing, but this seems like a lost cause.

  28. richie
    December 18, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    what happens when someone bounces a check ,swat team at their house ?

  29. Great ploy Raymond!
    December 18, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    The great bearded one is outlining what are popular edicts to overcome his failures, between loser Ron, his Blvd. and a vast numbers of other plunders. Keep you eye on the BALL. Talking tough is what frieghtened people do. This one might work for Raymond. There is no lacking of sheep in Lancaster willing to duped.

  30. Les
    December 18, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Who does this guy think he is dictating to retailers how they will run their business? Does he not think they’ve made decisions on how to handle shoplifters based on what’s best for their individual companies? Is he going to pay the lawyer fees and medical bills when an apprehension goes bad?
    Has he thought about the negative impact it will have on current and potential businesses?

    • Tim B.
      December 18, 2012 at 4:08 pm

      If you don’t prosecute and send a message to the thug/tweeker/shoplifter element in this community, then its going to keep getting worse and worse until the Corporate honchos say, “hey, we’re losing money at Store #334, let’s close it down”.

      Then when that happens, we lose jobs, we lose revenue, we lose retail choices. It’s an all around bad scenario for the community.

      Parris is correct in that it is better to nip this in the ass right away before letting it get to that point.

      • Les
        December 18, 2012 at 4:25 pm

        You did not address the liability and safety concerns. Who will be responsible? If the City is willing to take on the liability for the business then maybe they can have input in how they handle loss prevention.
        This is probably just one step of many in Rex’s attempt at full control of everyone and everything in Lancaster.

      • Mr. Mister
        December 18, 2012 at 5:27 pm

        I disagree. No matter how many are prosectuted, people who steal will continue to, even if a business has that fancy “Free Bracelets with Every Theft” sign. Making a local ordinance that says we will publish your name if you don’t prosecute thieves of all dollar value will not discourage thievery. Maybe it deserves a gentle nod for effort but I can see this going nowhere. Now if he introduced legislation to allow the local businesses to create a punishment and/or procure a restraining order and/or publish the thieve’s names and faces, that may be a step in the right direction.

  31. TS
    December 18, 2012 at 3:49 pm

    So, a business owner dosn’t have the right to deal with these matters them self’s, Rex has found a way to close business’s for not following he’S rules,, this is not about the shoplitfter, lets get that business owner for letting it happen,,,, HAVE I FREAKING MISSED SOMETHING!!!!!

  32. Citizen X
    December 18, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    Go ahead and post the names of the stores. At least now everyone will know where they can go steal from. Great call.

    • sikntired
      December 18, 2012 at 5:11 pm

      LOL-High 5 on that.

  33. Chris
    December 18, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    Great Job Rex!

  34. Michelle
    December 18, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    Seriously? OK I can understand if it’s things like a big screen TV, but what if it’s as small as a candy bar? I mean what child hasn’t stolen one? And now it’s possible they might get sent to jail? King Rex is definitely ruling Lancaster with an Iron fist!

    • QHR
      December 18, 2012 at 3:23 pm

      Stealing is stealing. Does not matter if it’s a big screen or candy bar. So if it’s ok to steal a candy bar as a child, you are telling the child it’s ok to steal a big screen as they get older.

      • Michelle
        December 18, 2012 at 3:33 pm

        No. Stealing isn’t OK. I just think that the parents could handle the punishment instead of the juvenile system. I remember when my mom found some bracelets I stole at a mall, I got in big trouble for that!

        Then again, I’ve seen Beyond Scared Straight and I suppose it would teach the children a lesson.

        But I still don’t like this new rule.

        • Thomas
          December 18, 2012 at 4:24 pm

          Some parents are single parents that are more interested in texting their next prospect rather than raising their children. Believe it of not there are parents that don’t know where their 11 year old is at 10 pm on a school night.

          • ijs
            December 18, 2012 at 5:19 pm

            & some children come from two parent homes, with very successful parents who just don’t have time for their kids, so they are raising themselves…MONEY OVER EVERYTHING PARENTS…

          • cedarblok
            December 19, 2012 at 5:27 am

            Those kids are probably hanging in revitalized downtown Lancaster. Boredom ensues.

  35. QHR
    December 18, 2012 at 3:11 pm

    Great job, Mayor! Let them thugs go elsewhere!

    • CF
      December 18, 2012 at 10:52 pm

      I think what this is about is the fact that the retailers call the sheriff’s dept and they use the resources to find and apprehend shoplifters, take them to jail, book them, and then the retailers won’;t prosecute them,
      thus wasting the sheriffs time and thousands of taxpayers dollars.

Comments are closed.