Security Video Tracks Man Molesting Child at California Book Store

[Are_grits_groceries]

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=241323&widget=1

http://www.breitbart.com/detail.php?ch=BNREUTERSODD&catnum=9

I worked in bookstores, and parents used to let their kids roam free while they were in the cafe or whatever. We would tell people to be careful because this was a public place, and there was no telling who would be in the store. We tried as best we could to keep an eye out especially for males without kids in the children's department. I followed more than one person who was acting odd until they left. Parents seemed to think we were babysitters. Salespeople do what they can, but people don't listen.

This store in particular knows they have a problem. I don't know if they have more security undercover there or not. They should as well as a guard in uniform.

It's a sad thing, but a kid isn't even safe to sit on the steps in a kid's area and look through "A Cat In the Hat."

[summer borealis]

1. person was "acting odd"?

Oh, there's grounds for arrest. And the video shows nothing.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[summer borealis]

3. I hate cats.

[MadHound]

4. Great, so as a male elementary school teacher,

Who regularly goes into the children's section at bookstores, now I should expect increased scrutiny, or in all actuality probably have been under increased security all this time. Great, just great, I think that I'll rely more on Scholastic mail order, which is generally cheaper and I earn points towards free books with each order. Oh, and I don't get followed around the store or have cameras zooming in on me.

Hey, you idiots know that women molest children also, don't you? What is this, some perverse reworking of driving while black, now book shopping while male? Oh, and dude, if I'm in your store, and you start following me, be prepared for a nasty confrontation with a 6'5", 260 nonfat pounds of pissed off, middle age teacher. I didn't take kindly to trailing employees years ago when I had long hair, and I won't take kindly to trailing employees now that I'm . . .male:wtf:

[Are_grits_groceries]

5. *Sigh*

If it's a choice between getting beaten up by someone because I'm keeping an eye on them or
trying to keep kid's remotely safe, guess what I'll choose. It's more than just being male.
That may warrant a first look, but scoping out the kids with no interest in books is another
clue. So take your umbrage and and talk to parents who have had kids molested or taken.

[MadHound]

6. Yeah, yeah, I heard this sort of shit before

Don't act suspicious, don't look around, etc. etc. Yet I was still treated like a thief when I walked into many places with long hair. Now I've got to watch myself simply because I'm a guy. I mean really now "It's more than just being male. That may warrant a first look" Thank you for proving my point, I, nor any other guy should be getting a "first look", that's known as profiling, or stereotyping, get it? Gee, so if I need to serripticiously adjust the undies, or stealthily scratch the pubes, I can expect to get the full cop treatment? Yipp fucking eee.:eyes:

Oh, and I've talked to parents who've had their children molested, molested by women. But it's only guys in your store that you're going to profile.

Idiots, fucking idiots. Don't you get it? Hasn't your store security, after years of getting ripped off by nice looking, well dressed white folks, learned their lesson? The minute that you start profiling, the minute that you start assuming that one and only one group is the culprit, all that you're doing is opening yourself to get set up time and again by somebody who doesn't fit your profile.

Idiots

[REP]

7. "Surreptitiously" is probably what you meant

[closeupready]

8. I am offended by the idea that men without kids are automatically suspicious.

I think that is horrible, and I agree with others here that this is similar to driving while black.