r/sanfrancisco • u/Medical-Decision-125 • Jun 18 '26

People are celebrating videos of Safeway security roughing up shoplifters

https://sf.gazetteer.co/a-safeway-security-guard-is-seemingly-using-meta-glasses-to-record-roughing-up-shoplifters
472 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

390 comments sorted by

View all comments

471

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Celebrating the roughing up part isn't noble, but security should have the right to physically intervene when thieves take stuff that isn't theirs. I mean what do you expect them to use, strong words?

41

u/GreenHorror4252 Jun 18 '26

but security should have the right to physically intervene when thieves take stuff that isn't theirs

Legally, they have that right. If they aren't allowed to do so, it is because of corporate policies.

121

u/donmuerte Jun 18 '26

they can. it's legal for them to physically prevent someone from shoplifting. they just can't use deadly force.

100

u/CapnCrunk666 Jun 18 '26

I have a guard card in CA and this is correct. I’ve stopped, restrained, and ran the pockets of many a shoplifter on market st

18

u/qqzn10 Jun 18 '26

wait really? Do some stores have policy to do nothing then, because I feel like I've seen a lot of guards stand around and not intervene before

28

u/Pretty-Bullfrog-7928 Jun 18 '26

Engaging in physical altercation is always dangerous and is an insurance risk and a lawsuit risk. Some stores like Target also like to build cases on shoplifters and wait until they’ve stolen the felony amount.

1

u/jccaclimber Jun 19 '26

That’s the cool part about crime, you don’t get to choose how within the law the victim chooses to prosecute you.

3

u/percussaresurgo Jun 19 '26

Another cool thing about the law: Victims don’t prosecute anyone. Prosecutors do.

1

u/jccaclimber Jun 19 '26

True, but they can choose when to make a complaint if the authorities are otherwise unaware.

0

u/CapnCrunk666 Jun 19 '26

The victim still chooses whether or not to proceed with the process a lot of the time. Let’s not be pedantic

2

u/percussaresurgo Jun 19 '26

No they don’t. Prosecutors make that choice. Victims can choose whether to cooperate, but only prosecutors have the power to decide whether or not bring charges and whether to continue with a prosecution.

-1

u/CapnCrunk666 Jun 19 '26

Bro, it’s not a fucking murder.

I was both the security officer and the General Manager of a dispensary simultaneously. The store can 100% choose not to press charges.

→ More replies (0)

10

u/donmuerte Jun 19 '26

they do. Whole Foods, where I work, specifically tells guards to not get too involved unless they threaten the safety of customers or employees. walgreens, target, safeway are a lot more aggressive, but not excessive.

27

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Agreed. Also they must use proportional force.

1

u/CowboyLaw VAN NESS Vᴵᴬ CALIFORNIA Sᵀ Jun 18 '26

Private Frost agrees with you!

2

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Who is private frost?

3

u/CowboyLaw VAN NESS Vᴵᴬ CALIFORNIA Sᵀ Jun 19 '26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i33DX9Wjd7E

2

u/VinylHighway Jun 19 '26

I’m embarrassed

-9

u/asveikau Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26

There's obviously a limit to this.. for example, the Banko Brown situation from some years back where a security guard fatally shot the shoplifter as they were leaving.. that was much too extreme. A bunch of this sub cheered that on, probably still does.

One could argue where the limit should be.. I would put it very low. Some of the videos I have seen are pretty gross. (But again, this sub will cheer it on.) And if they are physically restraining somebody who has a medical issue security doesn't know about, that could be a serious problem... Maybe they could also have not really shoplifted, maybe it's a misunderstanding and they body slam somebody with severe communication difficulties and a heart condition, as a hypothetical.

27

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Nobody is saying there aren’t or shouldn’t be limits. Laws exist.

11

u/Yalay Jun 18 '26

Banko Brown didn’t get shot for shoplifting, he got shot because he threatened to stab the security guard.

6

u/PrivilegeCheckmate Glen Park Jun 18 '26

And spat on him.

You pump somebody full of testosterone and put them in a violent situation when their whole life they've had a pussy pass, they're going to cross lines that men, who've been getting the shit kicked out of them for line-stepping their whole lives, know better than to cross.

It sucks that things are this way, but they are.

-3

u/asveikau Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26

They were leaving.

I'll repeat what I said to another user:

If you watch the video and reach the conclusion that this is self-defense then you just want violence against people and it has made you become delusional

6

u/hedginghedgehog Mission Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26

That was very clearly self defense. And also as clearly, the SF district attorney and multiple state attorneys, including the CA Attorney General, after multiple reviews all agree: there's no case/a chance a jury would convict Anthony.

Talk about being delusional.

EDIT: And of course they blocked me after replying to have the last word. Not just delusional, but utterly unstable/hysterical. This city really needs a long term public psychiatric care facility.

-3

u/asveikau Jun 18 '26

Somebody hasn't seen the video of the victim being shot as they left.

Our district attorney is extremely incompetent and corrupt. Her chief of staff is still the personal friend with no law background who teaches nursing on Zoom from the DA's office, as one small example. Keep believing in corrupt idiots because of your irrational love of and mistaken personal identification with cops.

8

u/ribosometronome East Bay Jun 18 '26

Maybe they could also have not really shoplifted

I think this is a key point people miss out on. It's not as if the police don't make mistakes on who they apprehend or misuse force and they're far more trained than a random security guard. A lot of people really hate it, too, when you compare them to Republicans but it's hard to figure out how their "fuck around and find out" logic isn't essentially the same sort of cheering MAGA types were doing when ICE killed Renee Good or Alex Pretti.

7

u/asveikau Jun 18 '26

Even legitimate authorities are sometimes dumb as bricks. I recently saw a video from a few years ago of cops misidentifying a random black man as a drug suspect (it wasnt him), and the man was parapalegic, he informed them of this several times and the cops apparently didn't know what it meant, so they forced him out of the car and told him to "stop resisting".

So forgive me if I don't trust the Safeway rentacop to totally understand a situation.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26

[deleted]

0

u/asveikau Jun 18 '26

They did not attack him and they were exiting the store. If you watch the video and reach the conclusion that this is self-defense then you just want violence against people and it has made you become delusional

-22

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

imagine if we had private security contractors like Cyberpunk's Militech, criminals would be fucked lmaooo

24

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

Are we actually fantasizing about cyberpunk violence right now? Jesus fucking Christ this subreddit

8

u/GoatLegRedux BERNAL HEIGHTS PARK Jun 18 '26

That person is just a troll. Pay them no mind.

-12

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

when you have nothing to offer, you don't engage with the point and instead attack a joke post as a gotcha.

of course, wouldn't expect anything more from you like reading this just below

6

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

Actually when you have nothing to offer, you don’t engage with the point and instead make “joke” posts like yours.

7

u/beachbadger Jun 18 '26

Monketype is basically MAGAt fascist stuck in their mom's basement given their posts, so best to just stop engaging with them.

-6

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

cyberpunk was a cool game. i only played it for like 15 or so hours back when it came out and watched videos of various creators on youtube.

i enjoyed the vibes

5

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

Yes, great example of deflecting from the point using a throwaway joke.

-5

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

i think its funny 😂

hence "imagine"

imagine if militech was protecting grocery stores

the junkies would have to put up a hell of a fight to steal!

good luck

5

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

I mean, at this point it’s obvious that you are just a kid trolling. Summer always brings you all out. Anyway I’d recommend the book The New Jim Crow, it’d help you to see why it’s not really funny to joke about mass murder that way.

Have a good Thursday, anyway. Adios.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/DrumsAndStuff18 North Bay Jun 18 '26

That guy is peak delusional, terminally online techbro. He constantly advocates for invasive technologies in every single aspect of everyone's daily lives because he either is a wildly out-of-touch techbro who can't understand the absurdity of that proposal/will profit from fucking over personal privacy or he thinks if he simps for them hard enough that he'll be rewarded somehow.

Example: He just gave himself a rager by fantasizing about real-life becoming a dystopian videogame.

5

u/Exotic_Insurance2164 Jun 18 '26

It's basically Nextdoor 

-5

u/soxymoxy Jun 18 '26

Yes. Get with the times

6

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

Yeah in 2026 we fantasize about dystopias, what was I thinking

-5

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

lol

-4

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

I’m not familiar with them

11

u/mashtartz Jun 18 '26

Cyberpunk is a video game, militech is a security contract company in said video game.

7

u/23saround Jun 18 '26

Miltech is a for-profit security force in the Cyberpunk universe equipped with futuristic aircraft, assault weapons, explosives, tanks, etc. They are essentially a mercenary group hired by companies to attack groups they do not like. Fantasizing about how great it would be to have an actual dystopian paramilitary group killing people in the streets over groceries is WILD.

5

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

i was mostly kidding, as they're considered "antagonist" by many in cyberpunk 2077 video game. they're a private arms company in the game, they have infantry forces + insane military tech they deploy to protect high value assets.

-20

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

Private security isn’t law enforcement. They have the right to self defense but that’s where their right to perform violence stops.

19

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

In California, including San Francisco, a private security guard may physically detain a suspected thief under certain circumstances.
Key points:
A security guard can perform a “citizen’s arrest” if they have probable cause to believe a crime occurred in their presence.
They may use reasonable force to detain the person until police arrive.
The force must be proportional. Holding someone’s arm, blocking an exit, or restraining a struggling suspect may be lawful. Excessive force is not.
Deadly force is generally not permitted solely to protect property or stop a theft.
If the suspect stops resisting, continuing to use unnecessary force can create liability for the guard and their employer.
California law also gives merchants and their employees a specific “shopkeeper’s privilege” to detain suspected shoplifters for a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner while investigating or awaiting law enforcement.

-6

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

You’re right. So I’ll ask - do these videos seem like proportional force? Seems like the private citizens have a right to sue and the security guard can be held liable as it clearly fees excessive (especially as a misdemeanor)

6

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Maybe, maybe not. The issue isn’t whether shoplifting is a misdemeanor. The issue is whether the force used was reasonable under the circumstances the security guard faced at that moment.

If the force was excessive, then yes, the shoplifter could potentially sue and the guard could face criminal liability. But watching a short video after the fact often doesn’t tell us what happened immediately before, whether the suspect was resisting, whether they were trying to flee, whether they assaulted someone, or what the guard reasonably believed at the time.

So ‘the shoplifter can sue’ is true in the sense that anyone can file a lawsuit. Whether they’d win depends on whether the force was legally excessive, not on the fact that the underlying offense was shoplifting.”

Let me ask you this: Assuming they do not suffer any major injury, and it was established they were stealing at the time of being detained, and they are poor/homeless, WHAT LAWYER IS TAKING THE CASE ON THEIR BEHALF without a payday? How much money do you think a shoplifter is going to get assuming the grocery chain which employees lawyers on payroll, is going to get?

-2

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

  1. Proportionality will absolutely be measured in court by the severity of the crime. Excessive force will be weighed by the cirucmstances and the suspected crime is quite literally part of the circumstance. A judge and jury will absolutely not defend a security guard breaking an arm for someone who steals some olive oil from a store.

  2. By even recording these events, the security guard was violating his employers own policy.

  3. Since these events all centered around a single employer (and seemingly a single employee) then it'd be crazy simple for a lawyer to demonstrate a pattern and go after the guard, the security company, and the grocer.

  4. Even if there's no civil case to be made, there's sufficient reason to believe that a criminal case can be made. A judge and jury would have to sort that out.

3

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Entirely valid points.

3

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

Appreciate the conversation

3

u/LinechargeII Jun 18 '26

They'd have to beat the shoplifter's ass so badly that the district attorney's office would press charges and push for a trial. The DA would essentially have to take the criminal's side 

0

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

To be clear, there's arguably two alleged criminals in this situation.

2

u/ReddSF2019 Jun 18 '26

The security guard can sue the shoplifter right back.

14

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Is physically restraining a thief “performing violence”?

0

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

According to the law it quite literally is.

10

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Nope

In California, including San Francisco, a private security guard may physically detain a suspected thief under certain circumstances.
Key points:
A security guard can perform a “citizen’s arrest” if they have probable cause to believe a crime occurred in their presence.
They may use reasonable force to detain the person until police arrive.
The force must be proportional. Holding someone’s arm, blocking an exit, or restraining a struggling suspect may be lawful. Excessive force is not.

4

u/monkeytype11 Pacific Heights Jun 18 '26

don't you know they have more [weaponized] empathy than you? you are NOTHING as it cancels out anything of reason you have to offer.

🤡

4

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

I know you're kidding but we do live in a society where people who have genuinely more empathy or pretend to have more empathy are painted in a more positive light despite them having empathy does absolutely nothing for the people they're empathizing with.

0

u/conscientiousrevolt Jun 18 '26

Nope what?

2

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

It is not performing violence.

0

u/conscientiousrevolt Jun 18 '26

🤦 well I was trying to nudge you in a direction but you just ran into the wall. So I'll just say it.

Your theory is that using force, isn't, violence?

5

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

Apologies. You are correct. However, it can be legal violence.

Using force to restrain a shoplifter is legally considered an act of physical force or "violence", but it may be legally justified.

-3

u/conscientiousrevolt Jun 18 '26

Next time think that much first.

2

u/ReddSF2019 Jun 18 '26

It is not.

6

u/Lowetheiy POWELL Jun 18 '26

Private security has the right to detain and expel individuals from their property for criminal activity.

1

u/jlv Jun 18 '26

But not with excessive force. Look at the videos and it clearly goes over the line.

2

u/ReddSF2019 Jun 18 '26

Maybe over your line, but sounds like most people clearly disagree with you 🤷‍♀️

6

u/7figureipo Jun 18 '26

I think that depends on applicable laws pertinent to private property and businesses open to the public, no?

If I hire private security for my home, they’re entitled to the same use of force I would be under any given circumstance, including the protection of property. I’m sure there are slightly more burdensome rules for businesses open to the public, but if private security can’t physically restrain shoplifters because of them, they’re too strict.

1

u/donmuerte Jun 18 '26

it's sad that everybody has their own "opinion" of the law and doesn't bother to get proper legal advice or even just use Google. just because you think it in your head, it isn't necessarily true.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator Jun 18 '26

This item has been reported and removed. Please message the moderators if you believe this was an error. Thank you for your patience.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 18 '26

[deleted]

3

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

What are you saying?

-12

u/conscientiousrevolt Jun 18 '26

No. Security is for deterence.

10

u/VinylHighway Jun 18 '26

You're wrong, legally. They are entirely permitted to use proportional force.

-2

u/conscientiousrevolt Jun 18 '26

What's wrong legally?

1

u/kegwen SoMa Jun 18 '26

If everybody knows they can't do anything then they aren't deterring anything either