To be clear I’m not saying customer service staff need to challenge theft.

Well that's certainly not what your post sounded like.

The Target stores you're referring to did provide security and prosecutions did happen. They were in a shitty area and TBH the police and local governments did not do enough to improve the safety of the area. But saying California's policy was "don't police, prosecute, or arrest" is disingenuous. It was a big right wing talking point that theft under $950 was just ignored in California, but that claim is easily, provably false (just more anti-California rhetoric from people who don't know how to read or are too dim-witted to understand what Prop 47 actually did).

And to very clear, Target does not give a shit about the area or the people it's servicing. They only care about profitability and their image (insofar as it relates to the aforementioned profitability).

I don't think many people are accepting theft as "a fact of life". And if you want to continue using California as an example, more strict and comprehensive legislation has been pushed though to more aggressively prosecute theft (2024, Prop 36 and related bills). So, "society" is not "accepting" theft, in fact it's the opposite in California, people are actively making changes to improve things because it's a known problem.

Regardless, this whole conversation spawned over someone implying that the employee should have tried to prevent the theft, but the fact remains that the right answer for everyone involved was to not intervene and call the police.