2,702 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by viserys on Mar 12, 2017 7:00:03 GMT
I am thinking, like Baemax, that security checks are more about contraband than security. The producers of Harry Potter will be particularly keen on preventing someone from smuggling a camera in to film the show and make it available online.
Not sure if theatres are concerned with food though. I remember one case where I had bought packaged sandwiches, drinks, etc. which I planned to have for breakfast at the Travelodge next morning (not paying for their fairly lame breakfast). There was a bag check at Kinky Boots and the guy was like "um, what's that?", so I explained and he laughed and let me pass with my bag of food.
Speaking of security, when I was in Paris last December, the first theatre I went to (the Casino de Paris) did have "airport-style security", first a bag check, then further in people were checked with one of those hand-held metal detector things. I was thinking OMG, is this what it has come to? But the next theatre had only a half-hearted bag check and the other two theatres nothing at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 7:51:39 GMT
Oh dear We all have much MUCH more chance of being murdered by a family member then being killed in a terrorist attack but then I guess less likely that a lazy journalist will report that kind of thread, eh  Pretty insulting to theatre security too as I'm guessing they know slightly more on protecting than a load of people bored on a Saturday night |
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 8:03:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 8:03:38 GMT
If (God forbid) there was an attack on HP would that garner more publicity than an attack on Dreamgirls? Yes, it absolutely would. If I was a a terrorist it is less likely that I'm gonna attack something I have no prior knowledge of on the outskirts of the West End. HP is in one of the most central and iconic theatres which would. Taking that junction out would bring the West End to a standstill for days (as would an attack on the Savoy but its a fair bet that more people are aware of Harry Potter as a thing than Dreamgirls.) edit...and I think Theatre bag checks are far more of a deterrent than an anti-terrorism measure. Certainly the guys from 'Four Lions' might discount it as a deterrent anyway. You're discussing which terrorist attack would be more popular. I find this kinda distasteful at a minimum |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Mar 12, 2017 8:16:16 GMT
Is that the second time you have posted that or did I dream the first? Ok i'll bite. I don't think they are. I think popular completely changes what they have said.
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Mar 12, 2017 8:25:31 GMT
Changing the subject slightly, I walked into the supermarket last week and the security guy was five feet tall and very slight. We'll call him an statesman so as not to upset anybody but I think he may have been in his late sixties/early seventies. I know his job is slightly different to other security roles but I did wonder how he may tackle a theft in the store.
Now walking around the said supermarket I came across Frank Bruno, former heavyweight boxing champion of the world which made me smile. All I could think of was Bruno shoplifting from the store and making his escape in a cartoon style haze of dust with boxes flying everywhere and the slight and older but obviously fearless security guard clinging onto his leg as Frank is running down the road.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Mar 12, 2017 8:43:48 GMT
Yes, it absolutely would. If I was a a terrorist it is less likely that I'm gonna attack something I have no prior knowledge of on the outskirts of the West End. HP is in one of the most central and iconic theatres which would. Taking that junction out would bring the West End to a standstill for days (as would an attack on the Savoy but its a fair bet that more people are aware of Harry Potter as a thing than Dreamgirls.) edit...and I think Theatre bag checks are far more of a deterrent than an anti-terrorism measure. Certainly the guys from 'Four Lions' might discount it as a deterrent anyway. You're discussing which terrorist attack would be more popular. I find this kinda distasteful at a minimum Look at it another way...if your terror cell (and I know you have one Mrs Lovett...don't deny it) were going to assasinate a politician, it wouldn't be some unknown back bencher would it? You'd be doing it for maximum publicity for your cause and attention. Ergo you'd attack the biggest theatrical event of the century not a revival of Brigadoon at the Landor. I could call up numerous posts of yours that I have found distasteful, but it would serve little point. Terrorism is a real thing. |
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 8:48:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 8:48:56 GMT
Tell that to Thomas Mair.
|
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 9:27:43 GMT
via mobile
Post by danb on Mar 12, 2017 9:27:43 GMT
Tell that to Thomas Mair. A fair point... |
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 9:45:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 9:45:34 GMT
You're discussing which terrorist attack would be more popular. I find this kinda distasteful at a minimum Look at it another way...if your terror cell (and I know you have one Mrs Lovett...don't deny it) were going to assasinate a politician, it wouldn't be some unknown back bencher would it? You'd be doing it for maximum publicity for your cause and attention. Ergo you'd attack the biggest theatrical event of the century not a revival of Brigadoon at the Landor. I could call up numerous posts of yours that I have found distasteful, but it would serve little point. Terrorism is a real thing. If I were a terrorist I think I'm much more likely to go to Leicester Square or a crowded train platform than buy a ticket to something I'm going to get searched at that cud be half empty We are much more likely to get killed by a family member. Maybe we should start a scaremongering thread about how to be secure against them? No coz that would be silly This thread is isn't about security, it's about increasing anxiety and to be macabre about which show would be the biggest 'hit' I apologise if u find lots of my posts distasteful, can't say iv ever seen any other of urs to be able to make a judgement |
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 9:52:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by danb on Mar 12, 2017 9:52:56 GMT
Oooo burn 😂
|
|
8,153 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 12, 2017 10:00:10 GMT
Don't mean to be insensitive but any chance you're towards the top of this chart?  I have no idea what that means. Can someone explain please? Still confused by this. Have I got the wrong end of the stick or is the poster implying I'm racist? The mods removed their post and my reply last night and then put it back later which must indicate that there was an issue but I've no idea why. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 10:07:52 GMT
I have no idea what that means. Can someone explain please? Still confused by this. Have I got the wrong end of the stick or is the poster implying I'm racist? The mods removed their post and my reply last night and then put it back later which must indicate that there was an issue but I've no idea why. They weren't saying u were racist but implying the reason u don't get hassle is ur prob white and that generally it isn't white people that get stopped |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Mar 12, 2017 10:08:19 GMT
I assumed it was because 'Family Guy' wasn't cool any more?
|
|
8,153 posts
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 10:17:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by alece10 on Mar 12, 2017 10:17:50 GMT
I assumed it was because 'Family Guy' wasn't cool any more? Well I've never seen Family Guy so had no idea what the cartoon was. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 10:20:08 GMT
I have no idea what that means. Can someone explain please? Still confused by this. Have I got the wrong end of the stick or is the poster implying I'm racist? It's implying the security services are racist. |
|
8,153 posts
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 10:29:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by alece10 on Mar 12, 2017 10:29:40 GMT
Still confused by this. Have I got the wrong end of the stick or is the poster implying I'm racist? It's implying the security services are racist. Blimey. No idea where they get that idea from but thanks for the clarification. |
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 10:41:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 10:41:18 GMT
It's implying the security services are racist. Blimey. No idea where they get that idea from . Yes, I think that's the point, as a white person u probably wouldn't (Not having a go or owt) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 11:37:38 GMT
It's implying the security services are racist. Blimey. No idea where they get that idea from but thanks for the clarification. Perhaps this sort of thing: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-39037385Or perhaps profiling a completely innocent Brazilian worker as a terrorist, ordering their public execution on the London Underground and then being appointed Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police? |
|
8,153 posts
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 12:25:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by alece10 on Mar 12, 2017 12:25:15 GMT
And I thought this was a discussion about having your bags checked as you enter the theatre.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Mar 12, 2017 12:25:23 GMT
No mention of the alleged 13 major terrorist plots that have been foiled in the last year though?
It does concern me how I accept collateral damage but then it's never me or mine that are affected. It is certainly more involved than a few glib comments on a message board so in retrospect I shall think before posting in future as everything affects someone somewhere.
|
|
5,054 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Mar 12, 2017 12:35:18 GMT
Look at it another way...if your terror cell (and I know you have one Mrs Lovett...don't deny it) were going to assasinate a politician, it wouldn't be some unknown back bencher would it? You'd be doing it for maximum publicity for your cause and attention. Ergo you'd attack the biggest theatrical event of the century not a revival of Brigadoon at the Landor. I could call up numerous posts of yours that I have found distasteful, but it would serve little point. Terrorism is a real thing. If I were a terrorist I think I'm much more likely to go to Leicester Square or a crowded train platform than buy a ticket to something I'm going to get searched at that cud be half empty We are much more likely to get killed by a family member. Maybe we should start a scaremongering thread about how to be secure against them? No coz that would be silly This thread is isn't about security, it's about increasing anxiety and to be macabre about which show would be the biggest 'hit' I apologise if u find lots of my posts distasteful, can't say iv ever seen any other of urs to be able to make a judgement No this thread isn't about what show would be the most likely to be attacked, Harry Potter example was used by me for no other reason than it uses the toughest security operation at their theatre, my original post did give a reasoned - both sides of the argument, to allowed both subjective and objective debate to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 13:13:27 GMT
If I were a terrorist I think I'm much more likely to go to Leicester Square or a crowded train platform than buy a ticket to something I'm going to get searched at that cud be half empty We are much more likely to get killed by a family member. Maybe we should start a scaremongering thread about how to be secure against them? No coz that would be silly This thread is isn't about security, it's about increasing anxiety and to be macabre about which show would be the biggest 'hit' I apologise if u find lots of my posts distasteful, can't say iv ever seen any other of urs to be able to make a judgement No this thread isn't about what show would be the most likely to be attacked, Harry Potter example was used by me for no other reason than it uses the toughest security operation at their theatre, my original post did give a reasoned - both sides of the argument, to allowed both subjective and objective debate to happen. the thing is your original post said 'There is solid evidence that London's entertainment industry could be attacked ' and there is NO evidence to suggest this. Sighting the Paris and Orlando killings is not 'solid evidence' is subjective evidence We all scoff at Trump banning Muslims for certain countries from the US as the lack of terrorist attacks in the name of Islam on their soil. what is the difference here? because the is no evidence there will be an attack on a theatre and i wonder sensiblness of discussing how many people u could take out in a theatre or which shows would get the most publicity from an attack vs the anxiety such discussions will cause some people (maybe just me)...... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 13:46:23 GMT
I deliberately went to shows in London just after 7/7 because I figured they might be getting a dip in support, I'll listen to security services if they suggest not going somewhere, as not to do so would be stupid, but every person who changes their activities is just one more victory for those seeking exactly that.
You can't live your life being afraid (or I suppose you could read the Express and be frightened of everything and everyone).
|
|
|
|
Security
Mar 12, 2017 14:00:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2017 14:00:56 GMT
Exactly! And this thread is JUST about fear and not based on ANY evidence
|
|
5,054 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Mar 12, 2017 15:28:48 GMT
No this thread isn't about what show would be the most likely to be attacked, Harry Potter example was used by me for no other reason than it uses the toughest security operation at their theatre, my original post did give a reasoned - both sides of the argument, to allowed both subjective and objective debate to happen. the thing is your original post said 'There is solid evidence that London's entertainment industry could be attacked ' and there is NO evidence to suggest this. Sighting the Paris and Orlando killings is not 'solid evidence' is subjective evidence We all scoff at Trump banning Muslims for certain countries from the US as the lack of terrorist attacks in the name of Islam on their soil. what is the difference here? because the is no evidence there will be an attack on a theatre and i wonder sensiblness of discussing how many people u could take out in a theatre or which shows would get the most publicity from an attack vs the anxiety such discussions will cause some people (maybe just me)...... Isn't that solid enough evidence? I mean both are events that people paid admission to attend, I could've also included a soccer match in Paris. So not subjective but objective as it is a matter of fact. In my first paragraph I did say terrorism means fear. |
|
