[Masthead] Overcast ~ 48°F  
High: 61°F ~ Low: 50°F
Saturday, Nov. 22, 2014

Why to Wal-Mart?

Posted Tuesday, April 27, 2010, at 3:17 PM

I went to Wal-Mart this morning, bought a few items, paid for them with cash and thought I was ready to leave for home.

As I headed with the exit a nice lady just doing her job told me she had to mark all receipts.

I reached in the bag, handed it to her and she marked it with a colored marker. Then I was on my way.

For some reason I think once I fork over my cash Im free to leave.

Am I looking at this the wrong way?


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

No you are not looking at it the wrong way at all. I may could understand them checking receipts for items to large to be bagged but to make you stop at the door to show a receipt from your bag is ridiculous. Not to mention they are standing right there at the registers and see you walk from the register to the door.

They did the same thing to me over the weekend I purchased 150$ worth of groceries and they wanted to see the receipt. She glanced at the receipt never looked at what was in the bags just wanted to see if I had a receipt. Now please tell me what kind of idiot tries to walk out with a buggy full of bagged groceries? I can see them trying to stop shop lifting but com'on On top of that isn't the security system suppose to go off if you walk out with unpurchased items?

-- Posted by Dianatn on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 4:00 PM

Not at all.

They have no authority, or reason, to stop anyone leaving the store, unless they have witnessed the person steal something.

When someone at the door asks to see my receipt I usually say "no thanks" and keep walking.

-- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 4:02 PM

They're training us for the... Can I see your papers now?

-- Posted by Evil Monkey on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 4:04 PM

I am with you Bo. Sams and Costco are the same. We should stop buying their chinese garbage.

-- Posted by jim8377 on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 4:17 PM

To me what's even more aggravating is the 26 registers lined up at the front, yet they only have 4 or 5 staffed.

Do they not see the lines 8 people deep?

-- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 4:50 PM

Can you imagine having to work in a Chinese manufacturing company that employs armed guards to prevent you from leaving? Nearly everything purchased at Wally-World is manufactured under those conditions. I try to avoid Wal-Mart like the plague.

-- Posted by Tim Lokey on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 5:01 PM

I agree with quietmike on this one. Not one single Wal-Mart employee has the legal authority to detain you and/or search your possessions. Once you've purchased some of their Chinese junk, it's yours.

-- Posted by Tim Lokey on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 5:05 PM

Doesn't Sam's Club stop you on the way out and mark your receipt with a hi-liter? Sam's Club and Wal-Mart are the same company... maybe it's because everything you buy at Sam's goes out the door without a plastic bag? I'm not sure.

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 9:59 PM

It's because of the foolish dummies that steal out there that Wal-mart has to check us honest folks.

-- Posted by Sharon22 on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 10:13 PM

Wal-mart has no authority to stop and ask you to see your receipt, Sam's on the other hand includes it in your member's agreement so if you do refuse to let them look at your receipt, they can revoke your membership. I haven't been to Wal-mart in over four months so I haven't been approached by them trying to look at my receipt.

-- Posted by Thom on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 11:26 PM

I asked if "if they were doing the sans club thing" and the lady at the door said they have had problems recently. I agree with you Tom that they should not have to check our receipts, but they should not have to place they alarms at the door either. I guess I feel those serve the same purpose but without someone physically asking me.

-- Posted by Sharon22 on Tue, Apr 27, 2010, at 11:40 PM

I am pretty sure the reason they are marking the reciepts with a highlighter marker is to make sure you dont walk out the door and put your merchandise in your car and then turn around, walk back into the store and pick up identical merchandise and walk out with the reciept a second time...getting twice the merchandise with one reciept. When I stop having to stand in line behind 8 other customers when there are 20 other registers closed, then I will be glad to let them look at my reciept...but not until then. Next they will want to frisk each one of us on the way out the door.

There is atleast one employee that has worked there for years and NEVER has a smile on his/her face...if he/she doesnt like his/her job, he/she needs to move on. If WalMart cant be a pleasant place to shop without having to look at a unfriendly frowning employee or have your reciept checked everytime you walk out the door then there are plenty of other places to shop. I take alot of my buissiness out of town for many reasons such as these.

-- Posted by AmericanWoman on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 7:17 AM

I agree with AmericanWoman one hundred percent . . . why should they hinder me even further by checking my receipt which I just received seconds earlier after waiting in a long congested line because they only have 4 checkout lanes open out of 15 while being served by an unfriendly employee who cant even bother to open their mouth and tell me the total. That is why I try and give my business to Kroger and Dollar General(or Target in Murfreesboro) . . . at least they say hello and usually are faster to check people out.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 7:27 AM

I wish we had a Target..their stuff is higher quality.,

-- Posted by 4fabfelines on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 7:43 AM

I really don't mind showing my receipt at Walmart, because I realize that it is their policy in trying to cut down on theft. I don't believe that us honest people have a clue how much is stolen from retail stores. Kroger has the alarm, and that is embarrassing when you know that the checker has made a mistake, and Walmart has their policy of checking receipts.

-- Posted by cookie on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 8:17 AM

We really need a Target here. Something to compete with Walmart.

-- Posted by Evil Monkey on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 9:23 AM

When we lived in Philly, we always had to show our receipts at Walmart before leaving the store - when we first moved here it was weird that we didn't have to. I don't really go to Walmart, though, since I work in M'boro I tend to do most of my shopping there.

-- Posted by cfrich on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 9:36 AM

I would totally go to Target instead of Wal-Mart if we had one here . . . they offer better merchandise at the same price as Wal-Mart and the cashiers actually talk to you at checkout. The super Targets are really nice!

-- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 10:01 AM

Hang in there folks, Roses is coming! Thank goodness for someplace to shop besides Wal-Mart.

-- Posted by justmytwocentsworth on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 11:18 AM

This has been one of many thorns in the side of Wal-Mart; when they come to a city the size of Shelbyville, they slowly but surely eliminate all competition... Remember when we had a Big Lots, that was in the same building were you used to have a K-Mart?

Wal-Mart may be the lost cost leader, but it is also the low quality leader, from everything to waiting in line to check out, to having to walk clear across the store if all you need is milk. It's no wonder Dollar General reported a revenue growth rate of 12.8%, and a profit growth rate of 213.8% in 2009 http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/fort...

-- Posted by darrick_04 on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 11:43 AM

I was told by a Shelbyville detective this morning that the receipts are being checked because of a scam in which people pick up disposed receipts in the parking lot, go inside and choose the listed items then walk out with "proof" of their "purchase."

-- Posted by David Melson on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 1:28 PM

It seems to me it's a matter of trust...come to think of it I don't trust them either. Maybe I should make the receipt checker mark each item to make sure I have what I paid for. If enough people made them mark each item, this foolishness would soon stop. Just a thought......

-- Posted by chs61 on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 1:44 PM

Just my thought, but maybe this is their way of trying to deter the thefts in order to keep costs down to those that are honest. I have not had any unpleasant experience with the checking of my receipts. And, at Sam's, the person has always checked my items against the items on the receipt.

-- Posted by ILoveRoses on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 2:02 PM

I believe there is another way to look at this Bo.

There is a lot of space between the cash register and door. Someone else could meet another after they checked out and add their illegally acquired merchandise to the package.

Maybe because I have been in retail before and had to figure out how our merchandise was "shrinking", I can appreciate what they are trying to do.

AmericanWoman has a plausible scenario for the marker being used and I do not have a problem with them trying to reduce theft. If they don't, who do you think will eventually pay?

Anyone working for any business or operating a business, (except maybe government who just raises taxes to adjust for their loss), better better hope they find a way to make profit and reduce costs, or they won't have a job very long.

-- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 2:38 PM

My last visit to Walmart was a crowded one. When the "greeter" ask to see my receipt I with some frustration showed it. A few customers walked past with her yelling I need to mark your receipt. She looks at me and says they know I need to mark it but they just keep on going. I kinda giggled since all the years I have gone to Walmart my receipt has always been looked at.....

I am sure I should be offended....I guess it's hard to eraser that long haired 70's criminal look! LOL

-- Posted by truckindaddy on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 3:03 PM

I can understand the opinions of all these posts, and am ususally offended by such actions of these stores. But, after working in retail some years ago, I can see the stores point. The loss that these stores have in a years time is staggering. I'm sure if we could all see the stolen merchandise that goes out the doors, we would not mind. The losses that they incur also affects the pay and bonuses that their employees get. I do agree however about the merchandise being cheap and from China, Tiawan, etc. Very few items are Made in the USA.

-- Posted by mercy1 on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 3:18 PM

I noticed this on our last shopping trip. We bring our own bags so we don't have to use the plastic ones. And she asked to see my receipt and she kind of skimmed over what we had in the cart. We have been using our own bags for a while now and they have never checked our receipt before.

-- Posted by PrpleHze on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 8:40 PM

My parents live in Ohio and about a year ago my dad was sitting on a bench out side of a Wal Mart and he watched as a Mexican walked in and bought a case of beer then he walked out and handed the receipt to another Mexican and he walked in and got a case of beer and showed the same receipt to the lady at the door, he then handed it to amother Mexican and he did the same only he went out the other door so as not to make draw attention from the door greater. My dad went in and asked for a manager and told them what he saw but by then they had already left the parking lot.

-- Posted by bellbuckletn on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 8:58 PM

If some one walks out of WalMart without paying for it they should expect to be arrested, but if we walk out with a bag left at the register because we were too busy paying for our purchase to notice the turn table still had another bag on it on the other side... we can't have the cashier arrested for stealing several items from us, nor if they short change us it is just a simple mistake and not a crime if you are on the other side of the counter.

Illegal search is what it is without probable cause. They have security stands to detect items that may be stolen which would be probabale cause, but coming from a register there isn't anything to buy or steal but a water fountain or toilet paper.

They only want to open 4 or 5 registers when they are busy then expect 2 greeters to search everyone when they leave the store. No wonder they don't want to smile, they are over worked as greeter and know it is embarrassing to look at shoppers person items sometimes.

They should have greeters at the back doors too to check the receipts of the employees as they take out the trash and leave to go home after their shift is over.

Maybe WalMarts Friendly Shopper Policy of their, Simple but illegal, Stop, Search and Arrest is the Procedure that the Governor of Arizona has fashioned her stop and request legal ID papers at the Mexico/Arizona borders from.

Now it seems that Puerto Rico is now going to be the 51st Sovereign state added to the United States of America.

This will automatically give the Puerto Rico People Full Constitutional Rights, but they don't know this and the government isn't going to tell them.

I wonder if they will have a border patrol search ID papers from tourist, Lol?

Oh yeah, one more thing!

The Governor of Arizona will just get started with her border control program when Canada, the United States and Mexico will become the North American Union, combining all three countries into one.

There goes all the borders!

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Wed, Apr 28, 2010, at 10:25 PM

I can deal with them checking my receipt even though it's another inconvenience after waiting in the checkout lines forever but what I do not appreciate is the hateful or sourly tone that is given by the employees. And yes, I worked at the Wal-Mart here for two years while in college so I know exactly what it is like to deal with the public but there is no excuse for their attitude. If they agree to pick up their paychecks then they agree to the demands of the job.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 7:28 AM

Well let someone have a purse stolen from their cart and Wal Mart all of a sudden has no concern about theft in their store !! It took days for them to even check back on the securtiy camera when a friend of mine had their purse snatched from her cart, when she called the manager he stalled calling the police and would not check the video, days later he told her that "THAT'" security camera was not working at the time her purse was taken. If they had thought she stole their merdhandise that camera would have most like;y been instantly replayed and police call at once. I have sworn off Wal Mart, if it is important enough to buy it's important enough to go to Target or somewhere else.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 9:39 AM

Why was it the store managers responsibility to call the police? Had my purse been stolen out of the cart I would have called the police before store management even knew, if my phone had been in my purse, management might have known first only because I was calling the police. We have to realize that there are some downright dumb people out there that do not care about another persons property, be they at Walmart, Krogers, Target, or dillards. I call them as I see them and thevery is thevery no matter what store or neighborhood it is in. Wal-Mart is not the bad person here, it is the person stealing that is making it more difficult for the rest of us.

-- Posted by Sharon22 on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 12:48 PM

I could not spell correctly on my phone. Anyhow, thievery is thievery no matter where it occurs.

-- Posted by Sharon22 on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 2:13 PM

The manager was informed in hopes of trying to catch the thief, not everyone always has a cell phone, It is the responsibility of a store manger to see to the safety of the customer. Any store that does not care about what goes on in their business does not deserve to have customers. Had he/she taken a moment to check the security camera ( um key word here SECURITY )they may have been able to catch the thief, who may have been looking for the next purse to snatch up. If they had thought that is was one of their products instead of a customers purse that camera would have been checked in time to catch the thief.

So by your post it sounds like you think you shop at your own risk and that stores have no accountability to the customers. Do you think the security camera is only to protect the store? The manager was negligent in his duties plain and simple. Part of his job is to see to the safety of those who are in his store. His actions protected the thief more than the customer.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 9:39 PM

Yes, stores do have accountibility to keep their customers safe, but you did not answer the question. Were the police called? There is no way you are going to convince me there was not any phones around for the police to be notified. When camera's were first placed in stores most shoppers did not even know they were in place and they were in place to protect the merchandise and not the customer. Do we not do anything we do at our own risk, otherwise we would not ever leave our own homes to go anywhere. My first personal thief that occured happened in my own church, guess I should have blamed that on them, funny thing, they stole my Bible.

-- Posted by Sharon22 on Thu, Apr 29, 2010, at 10:08 PM

Sharron, yes the police were called they wanted to see the video. Wal mart stalled and was uncooperative in producing it. It took days for them to finally say "that" camera was not working. Had they thought their stuff was being stolen they would have looked then so the thief could be stopped. Yes we do risk things when we leave home, but we also trust that businesses will help protect us while we are giving them our business. From the sound of your post I would tend to think your a manager at Wal Mart. There are thief everywhere true, but some places are more susceptible to it than others. If the place is wary enough to protect themselves then they owe it to their customers to make an effort to protect them as well, by your logic the thief are free to do their game with little worry at all.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Apr 30, 2010, at 4:37 PM

Wonderwhy,

And just how do you expect the cameras to identify the individual. Maybe you can see his face maybe, maybe you can't, but the camera certainly does not give a name to track down the individual.

I'm quite glad I'm not a manager at walmart (though I hear at certain levels the pay is pretty good) - I certainly would not want to have to do deal with stupid customer complaints like this.

On another note, if a camera happens to pick up a crime committed against an individual then the information available is just a positive aside. Those cameras exist for company security...the same as any other businesses security cameras. Please get a grip, the world doesn't revolve around your purse.

-- Posted by gottago on Fri, Apr 30, 2010, at 5:51 PM

Yea I guess it is stupid to expect Wal Mart to give a hoot about their shoppers. It was not my purse, but even if it had been I would expect the business I was spending my money at to have enough respect about my business to care about a crime committed against me on their property. No they can not prevent the crimes but by being proactive in finding the culprits then they would help prevent future crimes. Hey it might even help prevent you from being the next victim. But then again I guess you would not want them to try to protect the customer. The only person your attitude helps is the one committing the crime. Shouldn't we want to try and help prevent crime rather than defend the criminal? Had they checked the video they may have been able to identify the theif and possible stop them from doing it again. Perhaps they more afraid of the bad mark on them for having the crime on their turf? Maybe they saw the tape and knew who did it so they decided to say the camera malfunctioned to protect the theif, or maybe the manager just did not give a darn. Which ever, it is a reasonable to expect the businesses we frequent to do all they can reasonable do to protect their customers and not the criminals.

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Fri, Apr 30, 2010, at 10:22 PM

The smart thing to do is to NOT leave a purse unattended. If it's on your person,it's less likely to be snatched. The fault obviously lies with the thief but also with the IDIOT who left it siiting in the cart.

-- Posted by gottago on Sat, May 1, 2010, at 11:22 AM

All one needs to do is turn their head for a split second, be distracted by a child or other shopper. That does not make them an idiot, only human. I wonder why your so intent on protecting the thief and so strongly against having the security monitor checked to try and catch them? No I don't think you steal purses, but you are so against stores attempting to protect the customers it seem very odd. Do you actually think that the manager of a store should not help catch the thief? That they do not have a responsibility to help insure the customers right to be safe in the store from criminals?

-- Posted by wonderwhy on Sat, May 1, 2010, at 12:08 PM

Oh yes, store managers are quite intent on catching thieves...mainly the ones that are stealing from the store. THAT is a full time job. There are other duties in running a store and chasing after purse thieves is hardly one of them...especially when someone refuses to exercise diligence in protecting there own belongings.

Don't be a twit and claim that I have some desire to defend thieves. I'm telling you that your personal belongings are your own responsibility and it's very clear that you are not thinking this through. It's also clear to me that the fleeting moment that may be caught on camera MIGHT give a clear shot of the face but will in no way give an identity. Further people are mistaken for others in police lines all the time so a split second camera shot ( that lacks the world's best resolution could result in a mistaken 'finger pointing' toward some innocent individual).

Here's a note to all those dumb enough to leave your purse IN THE SHOPPING CART(?!?!): It is YOUR responsibility to watch your purse. Cross it over your body or keep it on your shoulder but if you leave it sitting there like that, you almost deserve it.

The manager did his or her job...please stop maligning this individual.

Wonderwhy, please use your head.

-- Posted by gottago on Sat, May 1, 2010, at 1:19 PM

There is actually a whole lot of grey area concerning retailers rights when dealing with suspected thieves, and their responsibilities to their consumers. Retailers do currently have the right to detain anyone, by force if need be. At the same time, they are also responsible for the safety of their customers. The entire issue needs legal clarification. Most large retailers work closely with local LEA's to ensure what is accepted, and expected, locally, but that tends to change with jurisdictions.

-- Posted by memyselfi on Sun, May 2, 2010, at 10:21 AM

Retailers do currently have the right to detain anyone, by force if need be.

-- Posted by memyselfi

Unless I am mistaken, that only applies IF they have witnessed someone conceal or otherwise attempt to steal merchandise.

Even police, with their specialized training, have to have probable cause to detain (arrest) someone, I doubt if a stock boy at wal-mart has been given more authority.

If that has changed, could you cite that new law please?

-- Posted by quietmike on Sun, May 2, 2010, at 6:07 PM

quietmike, No new laws that I am aware of, maybe just a different understanding of the ones we already have in place. It seems as though we already argued this one through last year in a completely different context.

I guess you view the laws as an effort to set limits upon merchants, but in reality, they do exactly the opposite. As structured, they confer broad detaining powers to stock boys (or loss prevention professionals.) By not clearly defining an "attempt", it remains wide open for interpretation. There is absolutely no clarity in place. Furthermore, the technicalities of law are debated within a courtroom, while what happens at Wal-Mart or Target is more firmly rooted in pragmatism than in legalism. Officers will always accept the word of the employee over that of the accused at the time of the arrest with absolutely no consideration of guilt, burden of proof, or cause. Depending upon the location, the arrest report may even cite the store employee as the arresting officer. Not that any of these formalities matter, the odds of a small shoplifting case actually going to trial is slim, let alone the probability of an effective civil suit in recompense.

You, of all people, should be troubled by the trend. As an advocate of civil rights, surely you can relate to the search and seizure issues relevant to the issue. Several years ago, there was at least some clarity involved in the searching of detained customers, but it seems to me that even those understandings have been somewhat muddied by the demands of those who have the ability to demand. I hope not as an indicator of the future.

I appreciate that you respectfully decline to have your receipt checked. I also honestly hope that you do not encounter an idiot on an ego trip. I have unfortunately stumbled upon two of them. Both events led to my subsequent arrest. One young man was in the parking lot of Tullahoma's Wal-Mart banging a lady's head on the parking lot after he tackled her. The other teenager was dragging (literally) a lady through the aisle by her arm at Target in Murfreesboro. That is not to claim that all, or even most, people in that position conduct themselves in that fashion, but it does happen, and it happens against the backdrop of valid authority, wholly irrespective of your own doubts.

-- Posted by memyselfi on Mon, May 3, 2010, at 1:00 AM

The fourth amendment sets limits to preserve our free movement.

It takes probable cause to overcome the 4th, no matter who is trying to detain you.

TCA 39-14-103 and 39-14-146 clearly spell out theft, so there is no gray area about it.

No policeman will accept that I was trying to shoplift an item when the receipt is in my hand.

If I find a "stock boy on a power trip" who tackles me in the parking lot, I will finally be able to retire.

-- Posted by quietmike on Mon, May 3, 2010, at 3:43 AM

quietmike, Once again, you confuse what should be with what is. 1st: You failed to give me a clear and universally accepted definition of "probable cause." You neglected to because there is not one. It is a judgment call. 2nd: You are assuming that you will be out the door with your receipt in hand before you are detained, that is not necessarily the case. 3rd: You will unfortunately not be able to retire. The way the law is structured, (and more importantly, understood) your resistance (resistance can be passive) justifies escalation. Furthermore, your refusal (or inability) to produce your receipt creates probable cause in the first instance. Unless your pockets are very deep, or you have some close friends working at the ACLU, you will actually be working harder and longer to pay for your defense, and most likely you will still ultimately either plea or be convicted. Let me be very clear, to defend oneself against legitimate authority is a crime. If you struggle with an employee who chooses to detain you, you are committing an act of assault. If charged, even by the employee, the charge will stick, as can a charge of resisting arrest. These charges prevail, even in the absence of any theft charges. I am not performing an exercise of conjecture. I know.

Look, I do not really want to argue this particular issue with you. As far as I can tell, we are closer to theoretical agreement on this one than any other. It is just that my own first hand experiences trump your interpretation of legal code. If you are that intent upon understanding the practical application of the laws in question, by all means, find out for yourself how much discrepancy and grey area prevails. You may have to go to a different town though. Thankfully, I have never witnessed anything of the sort happening at any of our local stores. Hopefully it does not.

-- Posted by memyselfi on Mon, May 3, 2010, at 8:09 AM

Let me be very clear, to defend oneself against legitimate authority is a crime. If you struggle with an employee who chooses to detain you, you are committing an act of assault.

-- Posted by memyselfi

Resisting an illegal arrest, even if it is by a law enforcement officer, is LEGAL.

The whole point being, a door greeter who did not witness a theft, and who tries to detain a person anyway is not acting under legitimate authority. In fact it would be False Imprisonment under Tennessee law (39-13-302).

They are committing the assault by trying to illegally detain you, and defending yourself against in that situation would be no different that if you were being mugged on the street.

Just because you were apparently charged in a similar circumstance and chose to take a deal instead of fighting for your rights does not negate the fact that the right exists.

I would suggest you, and anyone else who is interested, to ask an attorney, judge, or police officer if a door greeter has the authority to stop people willy-nilly, without witnessing an offense, against their will, to look through their things.

You're not the only one with legal experience. ;-)

-- Posted by quietmike on Mon, May 3, 2010, at 5:42 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Bo Melson is a retired sports and police beat editor of the Times-Gazette. He passed away November 15, 2014, at age 81.
Hot topics
Shelbyville Mills School
(779 ~ 11:40 PM, Nov 17)

Your Dreams
(15 ~ 4:00 PM, Nov 17)

Hope I'm Wrong, But-
(6 ~ 9:51 PM, Nov 8)

More Annoying Television Ads
(11 ~ 2:23 PM, Oct 31)

Just Some Thoughts
(93 ~ 2:43 PM, Aug 26)