heyzeus at FunnyJunk

heyzeus

Rank #4304 on Comments

Level 239 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz

Offline

Send mail to heyzeus Block heyzeus Invite heyzeus to be your friend

Last status update:	-

Date Signed Up:	12/06/2010
Last Login:	4/21/2018
Stats
Comment Ranking:	#4304
Highest Content Rank:	#3835
Highest Comment Rank:	#2117
Content Thumbs:	111 total, 156 , 45
Comment Thumbs:	4036 total, 4610 , 574
Content Level Progress:	80% (4/5) Level 7 Content: New Here → Level 8 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress:	68.99% (69/100) Level 239 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 240 Comments: Doinitrite
Subscribers:	1
Content Views:	7842
Times Content Favorited:	10 times
Total Comments Made:	877
FJ Points:	3441
Past names:

What people say about heyzeus

Text Posts

Views: 1129
15 4 Total: +11
Comments: 7
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 03/27/17

Just wanted to share
Views: 770
4 3 Total: +1
Comments: 20
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 01/13/18

My roommate is a Left Extremist,...

Pictures

Views: 1625
22 2 Total: +20
Comments: 7
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 09/24/14

what is this from?
Views: 803
11 9 Total: +2
Comments: 3
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 12/28/10

idk what to do for a title
Views: 757
9 10 Total: -1
Comments: 7
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 12/28/10

what?

YouTube

Views: 1813
10 0 Total: +10
Comments: 1
Favorites: 1
Uploaded: 08/19/17

The Media on Trump
Views: 839
4 0 Total: +4
Comments: 1
Favorites: 0
Uploaded: 05/17/11

Fireball soccer

user favorites

First 2 3 4 5 6 Last Next

[ 187 Total ]

latest user's comments

#37 - actually busses are more safe than cars. i believe it is becau… 7h ago on DEEERRR HURRR -spazzes like... +1

#3 - honestly i think if NK gets basically completely taken over by… [+] (2 replies) 7h ago on teeny useful ambiguous... +2

#27 - anon (2h ago) [-]

Just like US economy is booming because Chinese buy out all property?.

#8 - anon (6h ago) [-]

Pretty much. It's the same thing that happened in the former GDR when Germany reunified.

#188 - The owner kidnapped two African American women, all the court … [+] (1 reply) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -2

#192 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All the owners have to say is they had reason to believe they were trying to leave with items in court. They have the right to protect their items.

#183 - the owner locked doors with patrons inside without proof of th… [+] (3 replies) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -1

#186 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft, all they needed. Your trying to defend two black thots. try harder

#188 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

The owner kidnapped two African American women, all the court needs. You're trying to assume criminal action without seeing it. also i dont see how their race has anything to do with this. If it was 2 white dudes id still hold this argument. Try at all.

#192 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All the owners have to say is they had reason to believe they were trying to leave with items in court. They have the right to protect their items.

#180 - then show me the proof that this woman left the store with the… [+] (5 replies) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -1

#182 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft doors were locked. Context unto itself. Try harder

#183 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

the owner locked doors with patrons inside without proof of theft of them walking outside with items that were not purchased. Context is assumed. Try Harder

#186 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft, all they needed. Your trying to defend two black thots. try harder

#188 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

#192 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All the owners have to say is they had reason to believe they were trying to leave with items in court. They have the right to protect their items.

#178 - not according to US law, it is not considered intent. if you b… [+] (1 reply) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -3

#193 - justyns (13h ago) [-]

www(dot)crimedoctor(dot)com/shopliftingPC(dot)htm Yes. It is probable cause to stop and detain them. It's unlikely for them to be convicted of shoplifting because they never left the store and can claim they still intended to pay (reasonable doubt). But yes, there's more than enough for any reasonable person to make the claim that they were attempting to steal store property, which is enough for them to be put under arrest.

Now, these two women are definitely going to prison because they assaulted a cop, so the likely difficult to prove in court charge of shoplifting is the least of their concerns.

#176 - omg you stupid *************. I AGREE WITH YOU. jesus. What i … 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -2

#171 - imagine if you went into a store, started shopping, and someon… [+] (7 replies) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -3

#173 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

Your doin this thing called ignoring context. And again the woman had taken items. If i took items and got detained i would expect to be arrested or stopped in some way shape or form. A business owner has the right to protect their property from theft even if its potential.

#180 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

then show me the proof that this woman left the store with the items in the context of the video. even then the context of what we are speaking of is anon that started this thread not the video. so youre argument is a counter to itself.

#182 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft doors were locked. Context unto itself. Try harder

#183 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

the owner locked doors with patrons inside without proof of theft of them walking outside with items that were not purchased. Context is assumed. Try Harder

#186 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft, all they needed. Your trying to defend two black thots. try harder

#188 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

#192 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All the owners have to say is they had reason to believe they were trying to leave with items in court. They have the right to protect their items.

#168 - yea, if you catch shoplifters they failed to shoplift and they… [+] (9 replies) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -5

#189 - darrenrulzu (13h ago) [-]

Now just for reference I'm from Canada so this may not be the same in the states. However I am a loss prevention operator at wal mart. Many stores have a LPOS (last point of sale). If I have witnessed either first hand or VIA CCTV you conceal a product. And have kept reasonable continuity once you pass the final point of sale I have every right to arrest and detain you. Now in Canada Walmart Corp has pussed out and no long lets us forcefully detain due to fights that has resulted in people getting stabbed and shot. The same can not be said in the states for Walmart or this store however, this video displayed is a very small tid bit of information. We should take what happened in it with a grain of salt.

#228 - ravertoby (11h ago) [-]

I used to work for Wal-Mart in America, We never let them get to the door if we had suspicion on them. Our walkers would keep check on them until police arrived, they usually will get other employees to talk to the suspect to keep them around a little longer if need be. Then managers with the cops block them from leaving and arrest them at the door. If they get away the walker will write down what was seen shoplifted, check it with the point of sale the shoplifter went to, with another member of loss protection giving info about the suspect and where/how they left

Our loss protection can also detain people as well if they set off the gates to search them, but that's usually rare and fixed with receipts. None of loss protection holds a box cutter, or anything else sharp on them so it cannot be used against them in any way. only know this because I was temp loss protection for a few months because one of them went on vacation

#240 - darrenrulzu (11h ago) [-]

yeah I wish we could do that here sadly the RCMP won't do anything till we detain them or they've gone out the door and if the product was dropped you might get an officer to come in a half hour to look around for someone who'd be long gone. The station is only about 8 minutes away from our store.

#241 - ravertoby (11h ago) [-]

That sucks, we'd get cops almost instantly there when needed. I'm pretty sure one just hangs out in the parking lot all day. I've seen them during the night shift.

#243 - darrenrulzu (10h ago) [-]

honestly if we've ever attempted to arrest the person we just hand a banning paper their next visit since we can't force them to come with us and the police seem to be run ragged

#245 - ravertoby (10h ago) [-]

I've not seen many people banned, only once or twice. And most were far worse than shoplifting.

#172 - justyns (13h ago) [-]

Stop with the philosophizing. " if you catch shoplifters they failed to shoplift and they technically didnt shoplift." You still caught them ATTEMPTING TO STEAL SOMETHING. The success or failure of that attempt is irrelevant. The attempt is in-and-of-itself illegal.

#185 - Jewssassin (13h ago) [-]

In reference to a store employee detaining someone success or failure is absolutely 100% necessary. They cannot legally do a thing unless they see them hide an item, then actually walk out of the store.

#176 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

omg you stupid motherfuckers. I AGREE WITH YOU. jesus. What i am trying to say is that until they ATTEMPT to steal, you cant stop them legally and what the USA defines as ATTEMPTING to steal, is leaving the store with items without paying. without proof of this, jewssassin is right in that they could argue in court that this was unlawful detainment by a citizen.

#166 - yes, i agree. but what I am saying, in the context of this vid… [+] (12 replies) 13h ago on Female Shoplifters -5

#175 - justyns (13h ago) [-]

" if they stored their items in their purse or jacket or something" That's called "intent". Those people are displaying an intent to commit theft. The shopkeeper can act in defense of their property by refusing to allow the attempted thief to leave until their items are returned and the proper authorities have arrived.

#178 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

not according to US law, it is not considered intent. if you believe it does then youre just wrong and this argument is pointless because you dont understand the law and what someone can get away with or not.

#193 - justyns (13h ago) [-]

#167 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All she had to do is put the product on the floor. She refused and decided to try and get away with it. She did not and was tossed like a salad.

#171 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

imagine if you went into a store, started shopping, and someone LOCKS THE DOOR and refuses to let you leave. He has kidnapped you, and is holding you prisoner by law, are you really gonna respect his stuff and his place? My main thing I am trying to argue is that you dont see what goes on before this video and that the anon that started this thread, was warning people that doing this in every context isnt always a smart play. he is correct in saying that because if you see people just shopping and you lock the door you can get into serious trouble. did the people in the video PROBABLY try to steal? yea id bet money they were shoplifters but you gotta be careful to not assume they are and try to arrest them before you have reached a point beyond reasonable doubt. and seeing someone stick items in their purse, and not attempt to leave, is not beyond reasonable doubt.

#173 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

#180 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

#182 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft doors were locked. Context unto itself. Try harder

#183 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

the owner locked doors with patrons inside without proof of theft of them walking outside with items that were not purchased. Context is assumed. Try Harder

#186 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

The owner suspected theft, all they needed. Your trying to defend two black thots. try harder

#188 - heyzeus (13h ago) [-]

#192 - dollenoutpayn (13h ago) [-]

All the owners have to say is they had reason to believe they were trying to leave with items in court. They have the right to protect their items.

First 2 3 4 5 6 30 60 Last Next

[ 836 Total ]

user's friends

AustintheAtrain

herkermerhomolka

leonhardt

Show Comments (2)