Flippant answer: Pay Target to train your managers in how to not abuse community resources like police. They obviously figured out something that Walmart can't figure out.
I'm curious if there were less disturbances before Walmart, or if they were just more distributed throughout the city.
Whereas Walmart's genius lay in not only continuing to cater to the lower income demographic... but to keep its valued customers addicted to junk food, junk clothing, junk music, junk kitchenware, and just plain... junk in general (peppered with vindictive, quite possibly career- and/or life-ruining arrests for drinking a $0.98 iced tea before paying, now and then) so that they stay in the lower income demographic.
Or shoving it behind something else on a shelf and not paying at all. When people no longer have any respect for authority, social contract or citizenship AND you can't crack them over the head to teach a lesson in hard knocks, how are loss prevention supposed to deal with it? You let it go, then it's suddenly a widespread thing (YES IT WILL BE) and it costs everyone. And frankly it never ends. Certain people will go so low at the expense of others, it makes for an unworkable culture.
In the normal, pragmatic way: wait until you actually see them put the opened drink behind something else on the shelf. Which, not all the time but often enough, you surely will. If they're drinking it out in the open -- in the line at the register, say? Most likely they're going to pay for it.
Certain people will go so low at the expense of others, it makes for an unworkable culture.
By the same token, treating people as if they're already "low" (by not giving them the benefit of the doubt for an opening a $0.98 bottle of iced tea before paying) makes for an unworkable culture, also.
The problem with Walmart in this instance is that it attracts a different audience. For example, there's a stark difference in the type of shoppers one encounters at the Target and Wal-Mart in Mountain View even though they are across the street from each other. This difference has even gained some cultural credence with sites like People of Walmart (http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/).
They are already trying this, it's mentioned in the article.
"Instead of calling police, the store gives first-time shoplifters the option of paying restitution and completing online courses. Eight Tampa Bay stores are enrolled, he said, and the retailer is assessing whether it will expand the program here and elsewhere."
Urban food deserts are a recognized problem. I suspect that Walmart reduces the number of urban "general items" deserts in a way that Target does not.
I've seen quite a lot of Targets in low-income neighborhoods, often within a few blocks of a Walmart.
And you can stop right there. Remember that the Walmart principle is "we pay less and pass the savings on to the customer". That applies to how they treat their employees as well. Anything that requires the company to spend more money is going to be a no-go.