I’ve run into volatile thieves for years – from opportunistic phone snatchers to people ripping computers off desks and biofuel bandits trying to steal vats of used cooking oil – and every time I file an incident report, I try to make a recommendation for preventive measures. It’s safer to try to avoid a situation where things get physical with a suspected criminal. I don’t want to let my employers down, but I also don’t want anyone to have to go to hospital – myself included.
Greggs seems to be following a similar train of thought: earlier this year the chain phased out self-service cabinets in areas where shoplifting is rife and has installed safe pod “robocops” with 120-decibel sirens in some stores. But snatch thefts seem to be on the rise everywhere, from “steaming” (large groups overwhelming a store) in city centres to machinery being swiped from rural farm shops. The cost of this crime – in terms of lost merchandise and measures to tackle it – further erodes margins at a time when retailers are battling higher employment costs and increases to business rates.
Customers, ever squeezed by rising energy bills, are becoming doubly impatient: those who are not tempted by grabbable goods are rightly affronted by measures such as sliding shields that seem to imply that everyone is a criminal. But is it possible to make a store thief proof and welcoming to law-abiding clientele? Discreet high technology is a happy medium.
PTZ cameras (pan/tilt/zoom, which can be adjusted to track and focus on a single suspect) are one of the most-effective choices. They’re more efficient than fixed-camera CCTV, less controversial than AI surveillance and a serious upgrade on the convex mirror mounted at the end of the aisle in your local corner shop. PTZ camera manoeuvrability means high-quality facial images, a must-have when trying to build evidence.
Freeze-frames can also be used to generate stills that some premises owners choose to turn into warning posters, or share on a chat group with other local businesses. My advice here is to be wary of GDPR regulations and remember that an incorrect time signature can render recordings inadmissible. As useful as movable cameras are, they still require a human operator.
Hiring guards can feel like a tax on businesses – but one that goes unpaid at considerable risk. Ask anyone who lives in a village whether they’d prefer a CCTV camera or a “bobby on the beat” and the answer would be probably unanimously the latter. The sight of a uniformed officer can be a strong deterrent.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
