Retail stores, grocery outlets, convenience stores, and restaurants are increasingly challenged by homeless individuals loitering near their properties. Security and asset protection professionals must address safety risks, operational disruptions, guest comfort, and the need for humane, legally sound interventions.
In the National Retail Federation’s most recent study on retail violence and theft, 72% of respondents stated that violence associated with homeless loitering is more of a concern than it was a year ago. A key takeaway from industry experiences is that incidents involving homeless loitering account for a significant proportion of security-related interventions. For example, one restaurant security study noted that while panhandler and loiterer activations made up only 1.5% of all security activations, they accounted for nearly half (47%) of police dispatches.
Historically, retailers and restaurants have taken a hard stance toward homeless loitering. Calling law enforcement or simply “shooing” people away from their storefronts — often with anger and disdain — is a very common first line of defense. However, more recent practices have shown that leading with empathy and understanding can result in better outcomes while maintaining dignity and sensitivity towards everyone involved.
Let’s look at the risks and challenges associated with homeless loitering and then we’ll propose some concrete solutions using technology, training, and empathy.
“72% of retailers stated that violence associated with homeless loitering is more of a concern than it was a year ago.”
— National Retail Federation
Risks and Challenges
Safety and Security Concerns
- Illicit Activities: Public restrooms and parking lots are common sites for substance use, vandalism, or aggressive behavior.
- Threats to Employees and Guests: Loiterers under distress or influence may become verbally or physically aggressive.
Discomfort Among Employees and Guests
- Employee Stress: Staff who feel unsafe or ill-equipped to handle these situations can experience increased anxiety and reduced morale.
- Customer Experience: The presence of loiterers may negatively impact the guest experience and foot traffic.
Operational and Liability Challenges
- Property Damage: Vandalism, misuse of facilities, and increased maintenance demands are common.
- Legal Risks: Untrained or inappropriate responses can result in liability claims, public relations damage, or legal action.
Emotional and Societal Effects
- For the Homeless: It’s worth considering how homeless are affected when they are removed from restaurants or retail stores:
- How does it make them feel as people?
- Will it be effective?
- Will it deter them from coming back?
- Will they just come back later with more anger, potentially seeking revenge?
- How do you want your business to be perceived by customers?
- For Employees: Few if any employees feel good about treating someone else with indignity or cruelty. Even though it’s their job, employees may suffer emotionally from having to take harsh stances against homeless people in their community.
Ask yourself:
“If I eject this person from the store with disrespect and cruelty, will they come back later with more anger? Will they come back later seeking revenge?”
The Effect on Homeless Individuals
When homeless individuals are ejected from retail stores or restaurants, they often experience a mix of indignities and deep emotional distress. Some common feelings and experiences include:
Indignities
- Public Humiliation – Being escorted out or asked to leave in front of customers can be deeply embarrassing.
- Loss of Dignity – Being treated as an unwelcome presence rather than a human being in need.
- Assumption of Criminality – Often, store staff or security assume they are there to steal, beg, or cause trouble rather than simply seeking warmth, rest, or food.
- Physical Discomfort – Many enter stores just to escape extreme weather, and being forced out means returning to unbearable heat, freezing cold, or rain.
- Dehumanization – Store employees may refuse to make eye contact, speak in a condescending tone, or dismiss their existence entirely.
Emotions
- Shame & Embarrassment – Being singled out and made to leave reinforces feelings of rejection and low self-worth.
- Frustration & Helplessness – Many homeless people feel trapped in a cycle where they are denied even basic access to rest, shelter, and sanitation.
- Anger & Resentment – Being excluded from public spaces fosters a sense of injustice, as if they are being punished simply for existing. This can often lead to feelings of revenge and rather than deterring them from returning, they may come back with greater anger leading to greater violence.
- Sadness & Isolation – Constant rejection deepens feelings of loneliness, making it harder to maintain hope.
- Fear & Anxiety – Being ejected forcefully, especially by security or police, can be traumatic and trigger past experiences of violence or mistreatment.
For many, these moments are yet another reminder that they are not seen as equals, that society views them as a problem rather than people with real struggles.
Losing Our Humanity? What We Lose When We Treat Homeless With Indignity
When store owners and employees treat homeless individuals with disdain, it doesn’t just impact those being ejected—it also erodes the compassion, empathy, and moral integrity of those enforcing these actions. This process can contribute to a broader societal loss of humanity in several ways:
Emotional Numbing and Desensitization
- When someone repeatedly ejects or mistreats homeless individuals, they may shut down their empathy to justify their actions.
- Over time, they stop seeing homeless people as human beings with complex struggles and instead view them as nuisances, threats, or obstacles.
- The more they engage in these acts, the easier it becomes to dismiss suffering in general, extending beyond just the homeless population.
Justification & Shifting Responsibility
- People often rationalize harsh treatment by saying:
- “It’s just store policy.”
- “If we let one person stay, more will come.”
- “It’s not my job to help them.”
- These justifications allow people to distance themselves from moral responsibility, making it easier to ignore suffering elsewhere in their lives.
Loss of Personal & Community Integrity
- Every time a person treats another with contempt instead of kindness, they chip away at their own sense of morality.
- Small acts of cruelty—like speaking harshly, refusing eye contact, or ejecting someone without regard—create an internal conflict that often leads to emotional callousness rather than reflection.
- As businesses adopt these attitudes, entire communities begin to feel less welcoming, colder, and more transactional, reducing overall social cohesion.
Reinforcing Negative Stereotypes & Fear
- The more employees or store owners interact with homeless individuals in negative ways, the more they may start believing harmful stereotypes (e.g., “They’re all dangerous” or “They don’t want help”).
- This creates a feedback loop: treat them as a problem → they respond negatively → reinforces bias → even harsher treatment next time.
- Fear and resentment replace understanding and nuance, making real solutions even harder to reach.
The “What Kind of Person Am I Becoming?” Effect
- Deep down, many employees and owners know when they are treating someone unfairly. Over time, these actions can create inner conflict and emotional discomfort.
- Some respond by becoming even more rigid and unfeeling, pushing away guilt.
- Others may feel a quiet sense of regret or loss, realizing they are becoming someone they never intended to be.
The Bigger Picture: A Society That Forgets Its Humanity
- When enough people dehumanize others, society starts to normalize indifference and cruelty.
- It becomes easier to ignore suffering, not just for homeless individuals but in other areas—poverty, discrimination, injustice.
- This loss of humanity doesn’t just harm the homeless—it harms all of us, making the world colder and less compassionate.
When we treat homeless individuals with disdain, it doesn’t just impact those being ejected—it also erodes the compassion, empathy, and moral integrity of those enforcing these actions.
Effective Strategies to Mitigate Risk
- Environmental and Physical Design
- Improve Lighting and Visibility: Enhancing lighting at entrances, parking lots, and alleys can deter unwanted activity.
- Use Strategic Signage: Clearly posted property rules—communicated in respectful language—can help set expectations.
- Modify Public Spaces: Adjust landscaping and seating arrangements to reduce areas where individuals can settle for extended periods.
- Leveraging Security Technology and Trained Personnel
- Implement Remote Monitoring Solutions: Utilizing surveillance cameras and interactive remote monitoring offers a non-confrontational way to deter loitering.
- Use Trained Interactive Specialists: Rather than relying solely on in-house staff, some businesses employ trained remote specialists who engage with loiterers via speakers before escalating to in-person intervention.
- Establish a Persistent and Planned Escalation Process: Rather than immediately calling the police, security personnel should follow a structured escalation process—attempting multiple de-escalation steps before contacting authorities.
- Partnering with Local Authorities and Community Resources
- Engage Law Enforcement Thoughtfully: Recognize that many police departments may hesitate to intervene in homeless-related incidents absent criminal behavior. Work with community liaison officers to develop proactive strategies.
- Attend Neighborhood Meetings: Regular participation in police-led meetings to discuss crime trends, resource allocation, and best practices can be invaluable.
- Know Local Shelter and Assistance Options: Ensure that staff are aware of local shelters, mental health services, and crisis intervention teams.
- Lead With Empathy
- Train Employees in De-Escalation: Encourage calm, respectful interactions and provide guidance on distinguishing between shelter-seeking and disruptive behavior.
- Differentiate Mental Health & Financial Hardship Cases: Tailor responses by understanding the root causes of homelessness.
- Provide Alternative Solutions: Share information on shelters and community programs, and partner with local organizations for long-term support.
Leading With Empathy: a Non-Confrontational Approach
A cornerstone of an effective response is compassionate engagement. Treating all individuals with dignity helps avoid unnecessary conflict and contributes to long-term solutions.
- Train Employees in De-Escalation
- Remain Calm and Use Respectful Language: Employees should be trained to remain calm and avoid hostile language during interactions.
- Assess Situations Accurately: Guidance on distinguishing between someone simply seeking shelter and someone exhibiting disruptive behavior can be found in de-escalation training programs provided by organizations like the CUCS.
- Differentiate Between Mental Health and Financial Hardship Cases
- Tailor Your Approach: Recognize that some individuals are homeless due to financial difficulties, while others may be struggling with mental health challenges. For more information on these distinctions, consult the National Institute of Mental Health.
- Provide Alternative Solutions
- Offer Information on Assistance Programs: If a loiterer is cooperative yet lingering, providing information about nearby shelters or community programs can be a non-confrontational way to address the issue.
- Partner with Local Organizations: Establish relationships with local groups that offer job assistance, housing referrals, or food programs.
Conclusion
Homeless loitering at retail and restaurant locations presents real security and operational challenges. However, by employing a multi-layered approach—integrating environmental modifications, advanced security technology, structured escalation protocols, and strong partnerships with local authorities and community groups—businesses can effectively balance safety with compassion. Leading with empathy through proper training and outreach not only maintains a secure environment but also contributes positively to the broader community.
By integrating these strategies and referencing authoritative sources, businesses can create safer spaces for employees and customers while upholding their commitment to community support and responsible security practices.
Additional Resources
For further reading on balancing security and community engagement in retail and restaurant settings:
- National Retail Federation
- U.S. Department of Justice
- For best practices on deterring criminal activity through environmental design, see the International CPTED Association.
- For guidance on creating safer work environments, consult OSHA’s Workplace Safety Guidelines.
- For legal guidance on handling such sensitive issues, see resources available from the American Bar Association.
- Municipal resources and organizations like the International Dark-Sky Association offer guidance on effective lighting strategies for safety.
- For best practices on security technology, refer to the guidelines offered by ASIS International.
- Detailed community policing and escalation protocols can be reviewed in documents from the U.S. Department of Justice and the International Association of Chiefs of Police.
- Resources from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the National Alliance to End Homelessness can provide critical support.
- CUCS (Center for Urban Community Services) offers excellent guidance on distinguishing between someone simply seeking shelter and someone exhibiting disruptive behavior.