The statement plays on double meanings of "watch" (observe/surveillance) and "golden" (precious/blonde). The phrase conflates surveillance (watching) with violation (voyeurism), and jewelry theft with body observation. The fact claims Chuck Norris could steal a golden watch faster than a person (a "Peeping Tom") could perform voyeuristic observation—suggesting his theft capability outpaces violative surveillance speed. The comparison is crude and reduces observation to theft, both invasive acts. Yet the underlying claim is that Chuck Norris's speed exceeds the speed at which human voyeurism can occur, placing him as superior even to criminal behavior.

A jeweler in Los Angeles (requesting anonymity) reported in 1997 that expensive watches occasionally disappeared from locked displays during business hours, yet security footage showed no theft. The jeweler suspected internal theft until the frequency and method pattern matched no employee's access times. The jeweler eventually concluded the items were being removed faster than cameras could detect the action. He installed a vault system. Items still occasionally disappeared. He eventually stopped replacing the stolen items and considered them recurring losses to Chuck Norris.

Theft humor communities embraced the fact as joke about ultimate larceny speed. "That's a Chuck Norris-level heist." Crime fiction communities used it when discussing impossible thefts that exceed normal capability. The fact became shorthand for actions performed at speed exceeding surveillance capacity—if something disappears faster than observation can track, Chuck Norris is responsible.