Target on back

Leaving, and the leaving is permanent

Reports say that large crowds of mostly juveniles crashed through “multiple stores” in Philadelphia the other night, stealing what wasn’t bolted down. Bystanders pulled out their phones to document the chaos.

Videos from Portland, Ore., have shown people bursting through stores during working hours, grabbing what they can while employees look on helplessly.

Same in Oakland and San Francisco. This “organized retail crime,” as they call it, has finally been enough for one company. And it has decided to call it quits in several cities. Next month, Target will close three stores in Portland, three in the San Francisco Bay Area, two in Seattle and one in New York City’s East Harlem neighborhood.

The company has given up on these locations. The announcement said because of theft and concerns for safety, the retailer is pulling out of several urban areas. This after its theft-prevention efforts (like more guards, putting merch behind glass) didn’t do enough good.

“We cannot continue operating these stores because theft and organized retail crime are threatening the safety of our team and guests, and contributing to unsustainable business performance,” the company said. “We know that our stores serve an important role in their communities, but we can only be successful if the working and shopping environment is safe for all.”

The suits call it “inventory shrink,” which is business euphemism for old-fashioned thievery. If you’ve been on social media or traditional media websites in the last year, you’ve seen it: Mobs descending on a store in numbers so that employees can’t stop the crash-and-dash, and fast enough to escape any cop who might be called to the scene. Businesses might factor “shrink” into their yearly budgets—the smart ones do—but there comes a point when what’s being stolen overwhelms what’s being made in those ZIP codes. Target has apparently reached that point in parts of four states.

This is not a small deal. Target says the company’s bottom line will be reduced by $500 million this year alone because of organized theft. What would be the tally if you included Walmart, Apple stores, Foot Locker, Lowe’s Home Improvement, etc.? Answer: There’s a trade group called RILA that estimated (in 2020) that retailers were taken for $70 billion this way. Surely that number has only gone up. In Target’s case, the CEO of the company says its stores have experienced a 120 percent increase of theft and violence in the first five months of this year.

The suits will tell you that closing a store is a remedy of last resort. Because companies don’t make money when stores are shuttered. They might even lose a lot on the initial investment.

But then, you gotta do what you gotta do. When gangs of young people, and not just young people, run off with your inventory, sometimes you have to cut your losses in a community. And that community loses not only the services of the store, but all those jobs, too.

There are a lot of people to blame in this. Primarily the gangs. But also the kind of local politicians and prosecutors who make this possible by “defunding” police (or playing to that crowd) and either refusing to prosecute offenders or making the law toothless.

British statesman George Savile, who died many years before the United States came along, once said that men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that horses may not be stolen. That is, if the law has teeth and is enforced, fewer crimes will be committed. It’s a lesson that should be learned in some of the United States’ bigger cities.

There is a lot of blame to go around when it comes to companies shutting the doors because of crime and violence.

Who’s not to blame? Target.