The narrative surrounding a so-called "shoplifting crime wave" has been a topic of fervent discussion among law enforcement officials and retail executives for nearly five years. This narrative, despite being thoroughly debunked by independent reporting, has been cleverly manipulated by police and retailers alike, allowing them to exploit fears over a non-existent surge in crime for their own gains.

Each time a dramatic "smash-and-grab" incident goes viral on platforms like TikTok, public sentiment swings wildly. These incidents often overshadow deeper issues, such as poor business management and inventory practices, while simultaneously enabling police departments to acquire more resources and equipment, which they claim are necessary for combating this supposed wave of crime. The reality, however, is that crime rates have plummeted back to their historic lows, and even the fluctuations seen during the COVID-19 pandemic are increasingly recognized as mere anomalies rather than indicators of an ongoing crime crisis.

In the retail sector, this sensationalized narrative has provided a convenient excuse for underperforming businesses to explain away their lack of success. Companies have used the rhetoric of a mass crime spree to divert attention from their own poor decisions, ineffective inventory management, and, in some cases, to justify the closure of stores they had originally planned to shutter regardless of external factors.

Conversely, for law enforcement, this fabricated crime wave has translated into a significant financial boon. Police departments have exploited the fear generated by the narrative to justify requests for increased funding and resources, despite the underlying implication that they have failed to adequately address crime. The data collected by The Appeal indicates that the police have benefited financially from perpetuating a narrative that heightens public anxiety while simultaneously revealing their inefficiencies in deterring criminal activity.

Surprisingly, rather than instilling skepticism among lawmakers when police departments come seeking funds, the trend seems to suggest the opposite: the less effective police seem at preventing or resolving crimes, the more funding they receive. This paradox creates a cycle where fear is commoditized, leading to increased spending on law enforcement equipment and initiatives.

A recent analysis by The Appeal highlights how states such as California, Oregon, and Illinois are currently allocating substantial funds to police departments for investigations related to alleged retail theft. For instance, California has earmarked more than $242 million from 2023 to 2027 for these purposes, while Illinois has allocated approximately $15 million over the last three years and Oregon has set aside $5 million. Notably, California's grant applications reveal plans for the implementation of a comprehensive surveillance network targeting shoplifters, including automatic license plate readers, facial recognition technology, real-time crime centers, and significant overtime budgets for officers.

Furthermore, police departments are increasingly sharing access to their surveillance technologies and data, thereby amplifying the surveillance infrastructure within their respective states. This collaboration extends into retail environments, where police are not only integrating themselves into stores but further embedding their surveillance practices in private spaces.

Some defenders of law enforcement may argue that resources are already stretched too thin to effectively manage what is framed as a new epidemic of shoplifting. However, in light of the ongoing expenditure on equipment that seems unrelated to addressing retail theft, one must question the allocation of these funds. The Appeals investigation reveals that police departments are using money designated for "retail theft" to purchase items such as Stingray devices, police dogs, social media monitoring technology, night vision goggles, and even riot shields. Each of these items was justified under the pretense that they would help mitigate retail theft.

This narrative is also being abetted by companies that supply these items to law enforcement. By fueling public fear, businesses like Axon and Flock Safety find themselves in a lucrative position, lobbying for police departments and leaning into the same disproven narratives that have helped bolster police funding through taxpayer dollars.

Manufacturers of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) are particularly thriving under this climate. There is a substantial demand for these devices from both public and private sectors, resulting in consistent year-over-year growth for the leading companies in this market. The lobbying efforts to secure these contracts are paying off significantly; in California, approximately 70% of police agencies have requested ALPRs in their funding applications, with many departments planning to deploy them in store parking lots and even within retail establishments.

This trend has raised significant concerns among privacy activists and civil liberties advocates, who have long warned about the potential misuse of technology that was initially sold under the guise of tracking the most dangerous criminals. Now, it appears that such technologies are increasingly being repurposed to target shoplifters. The reality is that property crime has historically not been a priority for many police officers, who often lack enthusiasm for pursuing thieves. However, with the promise of new resources, they are obliged to give the impression that they are diligently addressing this issue until public interest wanes.