Support NeoGAF

[Buddha Beam]

I'm fine with this, so long as they're only looking for weapons and such, and are reasonable about letting things like pocket knifes or defensive keychains through.

But if it turns into "you can't bring this thing that could potentially be used to harm someone, but in all likelihood won't" or "you can't bring your own food in", then I'll have to find another theater to go to.

 

[gutter_trash]

I blame the 2nd amendment, crazy people and guns

 

[Siegcram]

I think that it will do more harm (i.e., nuisance to movie-goers, increasing costs, dissuading people from going to the theater) than good (deterring an actual attack).

What would a bag-checker even do if he found a duffel bag with an AK-47 in it? Say "sorry sir, you can't bring this in here?"

Again, you have no factual evidence to back this up.

And I'd imagine they'd start with taking the bag and going from there.

 

[Lights and Waves]

I'm here for this. I was at a theatre yesterday and I was so fucking afraid. It's not a good feeling.

 

[backflip10019]

Again, you have no factual evidence to back this up.

And I'd imagine they'd start with taking the bag and going from there.

Ok, going that route, what factual evidence do you have showing that bag checks have deterred actual public attacks in the past?

 

[Vincent Grayson]

Again, you have no factual evidence to back this up.

And I'd imagine they'd start with taking the bag and going from there.

Again, neither do you.

Assuming there's no evidence either way (and I don't think there is), we can instead posit logically that *no*, this will not change anything. There's no reason whatsoever to think that someone intending on harming people will be deterred or stopped because they're forced to open up a bag they're carrying.

Do you have a compelling argument in favor of this? Because I've yet to see one, and generally speaking, I feel like any kind of "new thing" we must do for the sake of laws, security, etc needs to be logically justified instead of simply happening and then you get to argue there's no evidence that it's bad.

Present evidence that this is a good thing, and then we can have a worthwhile discussion.

 

[muu]

Haven't gone to theaters in a good long time thanks to my daughter. Guess I won't be going back.

 

[cameron]

This is about safety and people are complaining. Blows my mind.

This is about pacifying paranoid people. Might as well have a counter-terrorist rock at the concession stand.

 

[Pastry]

I'm fine with this, so long as they're only looking for weapons and such, and are reasonable about letting things like pocket knifes or defensive keychains through.

But if it turns into "you can't bring this thing that could potentially be used to harm someone, but in all likelihood won't" or "you can't bring your own food in", then I'll have to find another theater to go to.

Of course they won't let you take your own food in lol

 

[Schlep]

There's a Regal (UA) theater about 5 miles from here that was just begging for a reason to go out of business faster.

 

[Acerac]

This is about pacifying paranoid people. Might as well have a counter-terrorist rock at the concession stand.

Listen, anything done in the name of safety is instantly justified no matter what the circumstances are.

And I simply don't believe this would do "more harm than good" and then have things like "inconvenience" listed as harm. In a country that has collectively deluded itself into the non-existence of a gun problem, maybe inconvenience will do the trick. Dead children apparently won't.

I doubt that this will be an effective measure, but hey, maybe having bags getting checked will wake America up to the existence of a gun problem. -_-

 

[Siegcram]

Again, neither do you.

Assuming there's no evidence either way (and I don't think there is), we can instead posit logically that *no*, this will not change anything. There's no reason whatsoever to think that someone intending on harming people will be deterred or stopped because they're forced to open up a bag they're carrying.

Do you have a compelling argument in favor of this? Because I've yet to see one, and generally speaking, I feel like any kind of "new thing" we must do for the sake of laws, security, etc needs to be logically justified instead of simply happening and then you get to argue there's no evidence that it's bad.

Present evidence that this is a good thing, and then we can have a worthwhile discussion.

Nowhere have I said this is a "good thing". I even called it "half-assed". Nor am I able to produce conclusive evidence that this acts as a direct detterrent, since such evidence is impossible to obtain.

All I can do is point to other places where this works in greatly reducing the likelihod of mass shootings compared to movie theaters, like airports, federal buidlings or places outside the US, like Israel, where bag checks and pat-downs are mandatory nearly everywhere, be it mall, cafe or theater.

And I simply don't believe this would do "more harm than good" and then have things like "inconvenience" listed as harm. In a country that has collectively deluded itself into the non-existence of a gun problem, maybe inconvenience will do the trick. Dead children apparently won't.

 

[Saroyan]

I already didn't like going to a theater, one more reason not too I guess. I'd much rather watch movies on my couch, better experience in every way.

 

[ReAxion]

they should give the theater staff guns... lol

 

[Petrae]

It wouldn't surprise me to see more of these pop up at other chains as insurers will want some sort of system in place to try and reduce liability. With no deterrent system in place, insurers should have the right to not offer liability coverage in cases of shootings or weapons-based violence.

The better solution is to install metal detectors (or wands, at the very least) and to hire X amount of police to deal with weapons that are found. More really should be done-- including stationing either an employee or a police officer in each theater to secure exits and be alert for suspicious activity. These solutions would mean significant rises in admission costs, though, so having employees check bags is the preferred attempt at deterrence.

Sadly, these are the times we live in. People shoot up movie theaters now. Thankfully it's not a frequent occurrence-- but it's happened enough that safety can no longer be assumed. Some sort of deterrent makes sense, despite the customer inconvenience. The candy-smuggling crackdown that allegedly results from this deterrent is a secondary objective.

 

[NickFire]

This is sad it's come to this but I'm alright with it. I like my chances of survival much more if the gun is revealed at a security line than inside a packed and dark theatre when my attention is on the screen.

 

[wildfire]

Former Regal employee here. We did this for about a month after Aurora before dropping it because it pissed off customers and in all likelihood made no actual difference in terms of safety.

Why am I not surprised.

 

[PhineBuyM3]

Well, looks like I have 2 options now.

Wait for the home release.

or go to the theaters with candy in my ass.

 

[samn]

How many people are killed at the movie theatre?

 

[Acerac]

This is sad it's come to this but I'm alright with it. I like my chances of survival much more if the gun is revealed at a security line than inside a packed and dark theatre when my attention is on the screen.

How many theatre shootings have there been recently? Has there been dozens of them over the last year or something?

I mean, statistically I'd imagine the drive to the theatre is more dangerous than sitting in one. The odds would be fairly close at any rate.

 

[Doctor Ironic]

All I can do is point to other places where this works in greatly reducing the likelihod of mass shootings compared to movie theaters, like airports, federal buidlings or places outside the US, like Israel, where bag checks and pat-downs are mandatory nearly everywhere, be it mall, cafe or theater.

Okay, then go ahead and do that instead of just making claims if you're so desperate for proof from others. Let's see some sources.

 

[Dion314]

I used to work at a movie theater that had a shooting happen there years before I started working there. They installed metal detectors, used to check bags and had security guards working the door. This was back in the late 90's to early 2000's.

People used to complain about having to go through all of that and used to say that was "ghetto" and never acknowledged all of that was for their safety.

Fast forward to today I think this is the right move. It's Bullshit that it has to be this way but it's also bullshit that I've had to look for the exits and contemplate what I'd do and how I'd get my wife and daughter to safety if a shooter came in the theater EVERY TIME I go to the movies since the DKR incident.

You damn near can't even have FUN anymore.

 

[Acerac]

You damn near can't even have FUN anymore.

I mean, you can, you just need to realistically assess the odds of such an event occurring. Not being overly paranoid helps a lot.

How many theatre shootings are there yearly? How many movie theatres are there in the US? How many movies do each of those theatres show daily?

It's like talking with people who don't want to go swimming for fear of a shark attack. (Talking as somebody who doesn't live near an ocean)

 

[sixteen-bit]

Keits (FGC guy/Dev at Iron Galaxy) got screwed over by this change and blew them up on twitter for it.

what happened?

 

[zelas]

I think that it will do more harm (i.e., nuisance to movie-goers, increasing costs, dissuading people from going to the theater) than good (deterring an actual attack).

What would a bag-checker even do if he found a duffel bag with an AK-47 in it? Say "sorry sir, you can't bring this in here?"

Can you quantify something as subjective as peace of mind and safety? If you can, do the numbers make it clear that people would rather be able to sneak in junk food than lower the likelihood, even by a small amount, that they'll lose their life to a psycho or unsafe gun nut?

 

[Acerac]

Can you quantify something as subjective as peace of mind and safety? If you can, do the numbers make it clear that people would rather be able to sneak in junk food than lower the likelihood, even by a small amount, that they'll lose their life to a psycho or unsafe gun nut?

Lisa, I want to buy your rock.

 

[Resident_UA]

Anyone who thinks that this will make any difference besides inconveniencing people is very naive...

 

[Siegcram]

Okay, then go ahead and do that instead of just making claims if you're so desperate for proof from others. Let's see some sources.

70% of 160 active shooting incidents investigated by the FBI from 2000 - 2013 took place in a public place. Only 10% in government buildings.

Keep in mind that those are by far not the only mass shooting incidents over that period, just the ones used in this particular report.

Detailed report can be found here.

For Israel, I'm only aware of 3 mass shootings in a public space over the same timeframe: Beersheba (2013), Tel Aviv (2009) and in Jerusalem in 08.

 

[UnforgivenTwin]

Nice world that we live in now that going to the movie theater is a risk to one's own life. I mean,I know they aren't common occurrences,but it's just a shitty thing to see at a movie theater.

 

[milanbaros]

this is because Regal are worried people aren't coming because they are paranoid fearful people. This is to pacify them and make them confident enough to come. It's a business decision and not a safety one.

 

[The Maverick]

Anyone thinking this will change a thing is foolish. Some teenage kid is not going to stop a prepared criminal. It's just inconvenience.

 

[karmaforgotme]

I am torn. I hate knee jerk reactions like this, and if someone wanted to get a gun into a theater it would be easy to do even with this search (ankle holster for example) . That said if it gives someone peace of mind I'm ok with it.

Actually the more I think about it, the more I think it is stupid. This will pretty much stop nothing.

I'm here for this. I was at a theatre yesterday and I was so fucking afraid. It's not a good feeling.

There are tons of things you do which are a 1,000 times more dangerous than going to a theater. I know we all have our fears (I am afraid of snakes), but outside of the getting our bag searched it didn't cross my mind last weekend. I actually thought they were being racist, because of the movie we was seeing (it was before I heard this story). I mean come on, they want you to live in fear. Don't.

or go to the theaters with candy in my ass.

Last Saturday my wife had her purse searched when we was going to see Straight Outta Compton at a Regal (I live near the Regal headquarters in Knoxville). In her bag she had water bottles and snacks. They could of cared less, and let us pass with all our goodies.

Edit: What is the difference in 'theater' and 'theatre'?

 

[tearsintherain]

I mean, you can, you just need to realistically assess the odds of such an event occurring. Not being overly paranoid helps a lot.

How many theatre shootings are there yearly? How many movie theatres are there in the US? How many movies do each of those theatres show daily?

It's like talking with people who don't want to go swimming for fear of a shark attack. (Talking as somebody who doesn't live near an ocean)

It is a completely silly thing, in the past 5? 10? 15? years there have been a total of two movie theater shootings: the Aurora Colorado Batman crazy guy one in 2012 and the recent one in Louisiana. With over 40,000 movies shown every day in America that's basically 2 incidents out of millions of screenings per year.

Your chances of finding a $10m lottery ticket blowing into your hand while being attacked by rabid squirrels and being saved by Emma Watson are higher than getting shot in a movie theater.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Shit, Regal runs the theater I usually go to. Well, that'll be a good excuse for me to branch out and avoid the blockbusters. Or bring a bag with side pockets - it's not like they ever check anything but a bag's main compartment. It's a pretty useless security process as a whole.

This particular theater has had bag checks periodically, and I usually assumed it was to check for food. They made me toss out a water bottle once, of all things. The benefit of this pixie dust is that people get to feel safer while the theaters increase concession revenues.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

They just want to make these poor minimum wage teens have to open backpacks full of dildos and what not. In reality 99% of people are probably going to get little more than a quick glance into their bags so I don't know what this is supposed to do besides inconveniene a lot of people while giving a few others a false sense of security.

 

[bananafactory]

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

 

[Acerac]

Nice world that we live in now that going to the movie theater is a risk to one's own life. I mean,I know they aren't common occurrences,but it's just a shitty thing to see at a movie theater.

As long as you're not absurdly paranoid you have nothing to fear.

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

Mainly due it being pointless. I dislike pointless inconveniences. If people wish to be paranoid they can equip their family with bullet proof vests. That would help more than this joke of a policy.

 

[Resident_UA]

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

Because there's absolutely no reason to do it and it will make absolutely no difference.

Why stop there? They should check bags when you go into McDonalds. Maybe even create checkpoints in NYC and check begs everywhere within 1 mile of times square. Or just make it easy and check bags when you walk out of your apartment building. That way everyone will be safe!

 

[muteki]

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

They say it is about safety, but they won't find any guns or knives in women's purses. Only cokes and twizzlers from Target next door.

 

[UnforgivenTwin]

As long as you're not absurdly paranoid you have nothing to fear.
Mainly due it being pointless. I dislike pointless inconveniences. If people wish to be paranoid they can equip their family with bullet proof vests. That would help more than this joke of a policy.

No I'm not paranoid lol. But more of this shit and I probably will be.

 

[Opiate]

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

It's not a big deal on a personal, practical level. It is a much bigger deal on a larger, philosophical level.

 

[Acerac]

No I'm not paranoid lol. But more of this shit and I probably will be.

More of what shit? People being paranoid? Theatre shootings are EXTREMELY rare.

Granted, being paranoid because others are is a fairly human reaction.

 

[Instro]

It is a completely silly thing, in the past 5? 10? 15? years there have been a total of two movie theater shootings: the Aurora Colorado Batman crazy guy one in 2012 and the recent one in Louisiana. With over 40,000 movies shown every day in America that's basically 2 incidents out of millions of screenings per year.

Your chances of finding a $10m lottery ticket blowing into your hand while being attacked by rabid squirrels and being saved by Emma Watson are higher than getting shot in a movie theater.

There are shootings at movie theaters all the time, let alone other kinds of violence.

 

[UnforgivenTwin]

More of what shit? People being paranoid? Theatre shootings are EXTREMELY rare.

Granted, being paranoid because others are is a fairly human reaction.

I would say just more of these shootings in general. Just seems to happen more and more now and nobody seems to be doing anything about it.

 

[Resident_UA]

I would say just more of these shootings in general. Just seems to happen more and more now and nobody seems to be doing anything about it.

There are plenty of ways to address the shootings (proper mental care, background checks for guns etc). Searching bags in a movie theater is not going to address anything besides your ability to sneak in candy and soft drinks.

 

[Siegcram]

There are plenty of ways to address the shootings (proper mental care, background checks for guns etc). Searching bags in a movie theater is not going to address anything besides your ability to sneak in candy and soft drinks.

I don't think any of those measures are within Regal's authoritative reach. Looking for a gun in the bag you brought to the theater is, ineffective as that might be.

 

[Resident_UA]

I don't think any of those measures are within Regal's authoritative reach. Looking for a gun in the bag you brought to the theater is, ineffective as that might be.

Regal should not be the one responsible for addressing shootings.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Is this a big deal? Bag checks are already common at public sporting events, why is it unacceptable with movies?

Sporting events are primarily done to find stuff other than guns, like food and drinks and such.

 

[Siegcram]

Regal should not be the one responsible for addressing shootings.

Obviously, but to turn this around on them when they do, while the legislative branch is collectively sitting on their hands, is disingenuous to the max.

 

[UnforgivenTwin]

There are plenty of ways to address the shootings (proper mental care, background checks for guns etc). Searching bags in a movie theater is not going to address anything besides your ability to sneak in candy and soft drinks.

Completely agree. But if you advocate for those things you just want to take away people's guns. I don't want to take away anyone's guns lol.