Theft at the Register?
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
To the editor: Jeff Prince once again brings us the surreal shenanigans of a big-box store, this time the monolithic Wal-Mart. His story (“Hands-On Customer Service,” Jan. 17, 2007) is a Rorschach test about companies that make a practice of getting “their way” with impunity.
Mark Ferguson, the victim du jour in December 2004, ought to have sued for false imprisonment, kidnapping, and other specific charges. The officer’s oppressive Nazi tactics should have served as catalyst for his firing, post-haste.
As for “theft” charges, the Wal-Mart stores at U.S. 121 and Beach Street and the one in North Richland Hills overcharge customers all the time. When you tell the checkers about an overcharge, they direct you to stand in line at the customer service department, where sometimes as many as 15 people are waiting for refunds for items purchased or refunds of overcharges. So rather than making unfounded accusations of theft against customers, Wal-Mart needs to look in the mirror and think about how they do the same things via their cash registers. I’ve had several experiences with their “theft by register” incidents, and the checkers treat it with a “so what” attitude.
Dee Taylor Fort Worth
To the editor: Fort Worth Weekly’s coverage was superlative, and of course Jeff Prince was the right choice to do the exposé on Wal-Mart and their repertoire of B.S. I think they have a patent on it.
Wal-Mart is in a league of their own when it comes to overcharging customers at the check-out stand. When you address the problem and question the practice and remind them to calibrate their registers to reflect the posted prices on goods, they slough it off and direct you to go stand in a long line at the refund center to get your “adjustment.” Of course, many folks won’t perform that time-consuming exercise, and Wal-Mart depends on that, hence they make the extra profit on many occasions. It’s the pot calling the kettle black when they accuse someone of theft but figure it’s all right to do it themselves.
To the editor: Hmm, let’s see; I’m reading this correctly, right? This poor lady has renal failure that requires the proper follow-up care, and she can’t pay, and she doesn’t get seen at John Peter Smith hospital (“Prescription for Care,” Jan. 10, 2007). That is horrible, isn’t it? If I went to Mexico, would I be expected to pay for services rendered? Or, another way to present my argument is by saying that I make $12,000 a year, and I am “JPS connected.” This is what they call it. I, too, have a kidney condition that has required follow-up care. I went through the proper procedures that are required at JPS, and now I pay — and I do pay it — a lump sum of $10 per month. This is what we Americans have to do, and I know I must sound harsh and bigoted for your liberal paper, but this is a rule set by this hospital, and it must be adhered to.
Also — one solution might be to ask the arrogant doctors, who come to work in the emergency rooms on their precious days off, not to charge so much.
God Says Hemp Is OK
To the editor: Another reason to re-legalize hemp (or cannabis or marijuana) that doesn’t get mentioned (“Groovy National Product,” Jan. 17, 2007) is that it is biblically correct. Christ God Our Father indicates He created all the seed-bearing plants, saying they are all good, on literally the very first page of the Bible (see Genesis 1:11-12 and 29-30). The only biblical restriction placed on hemp is that it be used with thankfulness. It’s time the government stopped prohibiting and persecuting humans for using what God says is good.
Burying Our Heads
in the Sand
To the editor: I’d be willing to bet that Barbara Ann Radnofsky, (“Risk Is Not a Game,” Jan. 24, 2007) swallowed Hillary Rodham Clinton’s phony, sandbagged “Let’s talk, let’s chat, let’s have a dialogue” video hook, line, and sinker. As a professional mediator, she can best perform her job when both parties at the table are reasonable and willing to make concessions. Well guess what, Barbara, Islamo-fascists who saw people’s heads off and would like nothing better than to see us dead probably don’t qualify. Another Vietnam War comparison? Please. It looks like you’ve forgotten 9/11. Comparing the president to a child? I’m no Bush apologist, but maybe if people like you weren’t constantly trying to undermine the current administration for your own partisan gain, it would make clearing out the terrorists easier — or we could just “claim” victory and bury our heads in the sand, to our nation’s peril.
Email this Article...