April 30, 2015

Question of the Day: Should 11-year-olds be allowed to shop alone?

Emily PrattRebel Correspondent

An 11-year-old Calgary boy was detained by a security guard when he tried to shop unaccompanied in a LEGO store.

I asked whether or not you think it's OK for a child that age to go shopping alone.

Tell me what you think in the comments!

JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-05-01 11:29:21 -0400
If the child in question is responsible and earns their own money, they should be allowed to shop alone. Else, the parent should shop with the child. It should be up to the parent(s) to decide this.
commented 2015-05-01 10:57:04 -0400
The big reason, James, is why the store had this policy in the first place. Whether or not the policy was there is actually irrelevant. Every store has the right to their own policies, as long as those policies are within legal guidelines. But why did this particular store have this age policy, which appears to have been sporadically (and therefore ineffectually) enforced? My take: liability.
commented 2015-05-01 10:28:41 -0400
The issues involved are a lot murkier than most people seem to realize.
Was there a visible notice, prominently displayed, informing the public of the
unaccompanied minors/children below a certain age not permitted on premises store policy?
No mention of that being the case so far.
Detaining the 11 year old shopper was an illegal action unless he had been caught shoplifting, or
after having been made aware of the policy and told to leave, he had declined to do so.
commented 2015-05-01 02:35:11 -0400
I love all of you at the Rebel, but I’m sorry, this is a non story made into a story.

First, look at what Emily said she asked…., “I asked whether or not you think it’s OK for a child that age to go shopping alone.”
But that is NOT what the story is about is it? The non-story is about THE STORE’S POLICY about the reason why the kid was detained ’til the father arrived!!!! The store (private property) has a policy about nobody under a certain age being able to wander about in the store (private property) unsupervised.

That is IT!

End of (non)story!

Whether you agree with that policy or not is completely irrelevant. That is he store’s policy. Don’t like it? Don’t go into the store (again, private property) and don’t bitch if you don’t like their policy! The country’s rules of freedom of association/freedom of movement etc. DO NOT APPLY TO PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!!! That is SOLELY at the discretion of the owner of the establishment!

Get over it.

(Now we can easily figure out why so many people agree with government imposed non-smoking regulations in restaurants. See the precedent that has been set??? No one even understands property rights any more, which is WHY WE’RE LOSING THEM!!!!!!)

Sorry Rebels, I love you but you dropped the ball on this one. This is lazy journalism. No story at all. Nothing to see here.
commented 2015-05-01 00:10:32 -0400
I think you might be right, Glenn Craig. “Liability” has been the watchword for how long now? It doesn’t seem that long ago (when I guess it was decades ago) I was able to watch what my mechanic was doing to my car — I was curious! Now I have to take their word for whatever because they’re afraid I might hurt myself and sue them. Our kids’ plagrounds have gone from metal equipment to plastic, because “somebody might get hurt”, and the parents sue. We got hurt all the time, when I was a kid (not quite sure I’m grown up… I’m older, but… never mind). Kids used to go through stages where parents would entrust them with more and more, so as to grow the child’s sense of responsibility. Guess with these liability policies, that ain’t happenin’ no more. A society of fear, that’s what we live in. Are the days of personal responsibility gone? Is there a waiver I can sign to get somebody off my back so I can do what I enjoy, or what [my] kids can do and enjoy?

Or maybe, should I ever really have kids, I’ll just ignore society around me, and teach them personal responsibility anyways, and [censored] what society thinks and feels.
commented 2015-04-30 22:11:26 -0400
I’m not sure we have all the details. We are told he is a “regular customer” at the store, by himself, so what was different this time? What did the boy do to make management ask his age and then detain him, as the store policy allows?

Of course, 11 years old is old enough to shop alone. But if the store has a policy that does not allow children under 12 to shop unaccompanied, then I think the dad should simply have explained it to the boy and not made such a big deal about it.

It sounds like the store is not diligent in enforcing the policy if they didn’t catch this boy before. So again, why was he detained this time? I bet the store gets kids stealing from time to time.
commented 2015-04-30 22:01:46 -0400
Although I do not agree with it, store policy was being followed by employees.
commented 2015-04-30 20:38:25 -0400
By 11 I was cutting lawns with electric and gas lawn mowers for the people on my street, taking care of people’s places when they were on holidays, and just started a 114 customer paper route and shoveling sidewalks in the winter. All the money I earned I spent by myself (really good at spending the money at that age) . I took the bus to Chinook Mall myself … or walked … as well as Eatons and the Bay downtown all by myself. My parents never had a problem with it.
commented 2015-04-30 20:24:25 -0400
If I couldn’t shop by myself when I was 11, my parents and siblings never would have gotten a surprise opening Christmas presents from me (not that they’d have missed much…. hair nets and Bobbie pins were about as far as my 11 yr. old imagination would take me), but it’s the principle of the thing. If I earned the money, and I did earn it picking blueberries and strawberries in the summer, then it’s my right to spend it. And it was a sign of earned trust that my Parents didn’t have to supervise me 24/7.
commented 2015-04-30 20:17:48 -0400
It’s up to the store isn’t it. Freedom of association you know.
commented 2015-04-30 19:59:19 -0400
Let me consult with the lefties to see what I think
commented 2015-04-30 19:59:03 -0400
Helicopter parenting and busybody do-gooders are creating a generation of young people that can’t handle life at all and need safe zones to protect them from microaggressions.
commented 2015-04-30 18:59:45 -0400
How much does anyone want to bet that this store policy was not the recommendation of some litigation lawyer doing a risk analysis.

The insurance industry and people looking for the lawsuit that will put them on easy street is what has been eroding our freedoms…time for tort law reform….good luck with that campaign.
commented 2015-04-30 18:31:58 -0400
As a gaming store owner; if they have the money I have no problem with them shopping. In fact many of my parents left their kids with my store staff to do window shopping, real shopping and they were never a problem.
commented 2015-04-30 17:19:17 -0400
Well if it were my 11 year old kid that was held by the “store security” I would sue them for wrongfull detention. My 11 year old young man I would expect would be allwed and able to go to a mall with his own money to buy himself what he wanted with out being kid knapped by the store manager. Are you not put off by these busybodies that can’t mind their own business. It’s becoming a pain for me to tell busybodies to get a life and mind their own business And by the way he cuts the grass or he does’nt get any money