More security for broadway audiences?- Page 6

[lovebwy]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 1:41pm

I've wondered about this since that Russian situation many years ago. The events in Paris reawakened it. A packed Broadway house could be a prime target. I pray to God this never happens in our lifetimes or beyond.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 1:48pm

I had my tickets to the first showing of the Hunger Games at the Chinese Theater in Hollywood and this was immediately after the Paris attacks. I still went out as I normally would but I can't deny that I was scared. Hollywood Blvd (which is LA's Times Square) is usually packed with people but it was empty that evening. I was more than vigilant. Upon entering the theater, they had metal detectors installed. I know those won't really do much for suicidal gun or bomb wielding maniacs but it did calm my fears down a little. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:17pm

As has been rehearsed here several times already, metal detectors or bomb sniffing dogs offer no security for what happened at Bataclan. And bombs powerful enough to do significant damage cannot be carried in under human power. It seems people like window dressing and worrying about the wrong threats. 

[DAME]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:27pm

HogansHero said: "As has been rehearsed here several times already, metal detectors or bomb sniffing dogs offer no security for what happened at Bataclan. And bombs powerful enough to do significant damage cannot be carried in under human power. It seems people like window dressing and worrying about the wrong threats. 

 

"

Personally I don't mind people wanting to talk about it and wanting to have a civilized discussion.  As has been "rehearsed" on this board in many threads;  if you don't want to talk about something then simply ignore it or don't click on the thread.  

Updated On: 12/1/15 at 02:27 PM

[Jane2]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:33pm

I agree with you, Dame. If you don't feel at all threatened, then please don't give it a minute's thought.

 

Those who quote that they don't want to be affected by what "could" happen - well, it' more than "could" happen. It's happened, it's happening, and probably will continue to happen. By definition, terrorism takes place when and where it is not expected. So, no, I don't give it much thought when a terrorist threat consists of when and where they will strike. That only serves to frighten, and that's what they want to do,

 

Since it "could" happen at any time and any place, there's not a thing wrong with doing what we can to protect ourselves.

[DAME]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:37pm

Jane2 said: "I agree with you, Dame. If you don't feel at all threatened, then please don't give it a minute's thought.

 

 

 

Those who quote that they don't want to be affected by what "could" happen - well, it' more than "could" happen. It's happened, it's happening, and probably will continue to happen. By definition, terrorism takes place when and where it is not expected. So, no, I don't give it much thought when a terrorist threat consists of when and where they will strike. That only serves to frighten, and that's what they want to do,

 

 

 

Since it "could" happen at any time and any place, there's not a thing wrong with doing what we can to protect ourselves.

 

"

That is right.  Nothing wrong with being vigilant, smart and aware.  That doesn't mean living in fear and not going on with your life.  

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:40pm

The security precautions did work at the Stade de France. The casualties could have been greater had the terrorist made his way inside. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:47pm

Dame, I don't want not to talk about it. What I want it rational discussion, rational precaution and rational protection. Metal detectors and dogs at Broadway theatres is window dressing-substituting meaningless action for effective action. I can't stop the paranoid for being that way, but if we discuss what the priorities are and should be i think it helps us all.

[DAME]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:51pm

Well then we do want the same things.  I actually think those dogs do a great service.  And perhaps there are security measures in action that we are not aware of.  

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 2:59pm

Seeing that most sidewalk-located orchestra doors (used for exiting) are a few feet from patrons, I guess I'm not clear why someone would need to get a bomb into a theater?

 

But if people want a dog to sniff them to feel safe anyway, go for it!

[DAME]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:02pm

From what I saw this last week.. the dogs don't only sniff patrons and their belongings as they go into the theater but also patrol the theater areas and surroundings.   It is a good tool and I am glad they are being used.  There is a whole 60 minutes segment on these dogs somewhere.  You should find it.  The job they do is actually quite extraordinary. 

Updated On: 12/1/15 at 03:02 PM

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:12pm

I get that for an airplane you need to get stuff through security, but not sure why people think you have to get inside a theater to do damage. Not to mention, they are often suicide bombers. So, they aren't packing C4 around a door and getting a timer rigged up... you just need a pickup truck, pull up onto the sidewalk, and boom.

 

That is the problem with a lot of this discussion, since we're inventing parameters to feel safe, without any context for actual safety.

 

Of course, any security system immediately just gives people something to work around, more than anything:

 

 

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:22pm

"That is the problem with a lot of this discussion, since we're inventing parameters to feel safe, without any context for actual safety."

FEELING safe and BEING safe are two different things. Are we ever really safe? Not at all. But if people don't feel safe, they will stop going about their business and doing everyday things. That's what these precautions are trying to prevent. The psychological impact of increased police presence, security measures and sniffing dogs in itself makes a big difference, regardless of whether they can actually prevent an attack or not. 

[Jane2]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:25pm

 There is no use in speculating about whether it will be a bomb, suicide bomber,  gas, machetes, whatever. Stop wasting your time on that. There's no way of knowing what will be used. The only thing we can do, since the govt. isn't interested in doing anything, is trying our best to be protected. You call it paranoid, I call it wise. vive le difference!

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:42pm

Wildcard said: "FEELING safe and BEING safe are two different things. Are we ever really safe? Not at all."

 

That's fine then. Can they sing "We've got magic to do..." when they scan me with the wand, at least?

 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 3:48pm

Can we revisit why metal detectors are meaningless?

[Jane2]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 4:18pm

Well, village starker, it's because everyone is so paranoid. Why, the whole world is paranoid. There are actual countries with security measures in place. Even at our airports, we have to send our things through X-ray cameras. What a waste, those workers should be let go. Why have bomb sniffing dogs? Why have surveillance cameras, TSA, anything meant to protect us. There is nothing to worry about, it's just paranoia!

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 4:37pm

snark--

metal detectors are not meaningless, they are important where they are rationally related to the risk. But they are irrational in theatres, They won't stop gunmen like at Bataclan. That would require an armored  fortress to be built in front of every theatre. And it won't stop bombers because, as I said, and as haterobics elegantly explained above, a bomb you can bring into a theatre without being noticed is of minimal effect-a bomber would just drive up the street and blow themselves up-or plow right into the doors and straight into the auditorium. Interdicting small bombs makes sense on planes, where it takes minimal explosion to do horrific damage. Not in a theatre. And yes if you need to imagine what looks irrational, you need look no farther than this very thread. 

New York is unquestionably the most secure city on earth and suggesting that our government doesn't do anything to protect us is both unfounded and insulting.

Updated On: 12/1/15 at 04:37 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 4:50pm

New York is unquestionably the most secure city on earth and suggesting that our government doesn't do anything to protect us is both unfounded and insulting.

 

It is hyperbole but it's definitely not "unfounded" (many lobbyists and corporations, who donate to politicians, profit off ineffective security measures -- do your own research for more on this...). It doesn't make it insulting just because you are not as educated on the corporatization of public/private national security as others. We cannot control that. Sorry. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 5:01pm

Liza's Headband said: "New York is unquestionably the most secure city on earth and suggesting that our government doesn't do anything to protect us is both unfounded and insulting.

It is hyperbole but it's definitely not "unfounded" (many lobbyists and corporations, who donate to politicians, profit off ineffective security measures -- do your own research for more on this...). It doesn't make it insulting just because you are not as educated on the corporatization of public/private national security as others. We cannot control that. Sorry. "

Huh? I'm all against security profiteering, but to suggest that we are not better protected than any other city on earth is arrant nonsense. 

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/1/15 at 5:02pm

"That's fine then. Can they sing "We've got magic to do..." when they scan me with the wand, at least?"

 

I prefer they sing "When You Got It, Flaunt It" instead

[Dave13]

Posted: 12/4/15 at 12:29am

You wanted added security for free? Allow concealed carry permit holders to carry in NYC and in the theaters.  I have a CCP and I carry all the time in theaters across the country except NYC. I feel naked in NYC as CCP holders cannot carry in NYC. 

If people were allowed guns in Paris, I can assure you it would never been as bad. Without guns in the audience, you are sitting ducks. 

Updated On: 12/4/15 at 12:29 AM

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/4/15 at 12:31am

There is nothing safer than crossfire.

[Dave13]

Posted: 12/4/15 at 12:50am

haterobics said: "There is nothing safer than crossfire.

 

"

Maybe. Maybe not but it beats sitting in a fetal position waiting to die.  At least you have a fighting chance to save people and get out alive.  

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 12/4/15 at 12:55am

Wow. This thread just got worse. Thanks, Dave!