Security

[Phantom of London]

We have seen over the last several years security has been stepped up in London theatre, where now at Harry Potter we have airline style security, is this level of security, or any level of security necessary or unnecessary?

There is solid evidence that London's entertainment industry could be attacked, we have seen this in Paris and Orlando. Wouldn't a show be an ideal target, be mindful if the theatre operators aren't over zealous on this and something nasty did happen, it could forever tarnish their product and people would stop attending, good evidence of this, of what happened at Alton Towers, although not a terrorism incident and a preventable accident where persons had life changing injuries, the negative publicity was very detrimental to their box office.

Or is it a cynical ploy to stop patrons from bringing in their own food and drink? Which includes alcohol, I hear hen parties at jukebox shows used to be a nightmare. it could be argued if security didn't confiscate beverages, then they wouldn't be open to suggestions, such as they are in this thread? But wouldn't it cost more to implement these security measures than the goods they confiscate? I have no wish to sit next to someone who is intoxicated and getting more intoxicated.

[Deleted]

Sometimes, I do think it is important to have higher security in London and London Theatres. I do think that the likes of Harry Potter are a bit over the top to do that at every single performance but, there are some examples of times when it is relevant. In this day and age, terrorism is high and London is a huge target. When I went to see Beautiful the day after the Paris attacks, there was extra security searching every person who entered, a proper pat down rather than just bags. Also, the people in the Upper Circle were asked to use a different entrance rather than the outside one as it was deemed to risky to have an entrance on the street at this specific time. But this was a time when London was on high alert for an attack. I don't think it should be Harry Potter level every single performance though, it does come across slightly like the Producers are making it over the top and more of a tourist attraction than it already is haha.

[Deleted]

I'm personally happy to go through any security procedures that they think necessary. This thing absolutely can happen and if it did happen not only would it be a tragedy of potential lost lives, but the theatre industry would suffer enormously. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 19:15:15 GMT @snutte said:

I'm personally happy to go through any security procedures that they think necessary. This thing absolutely can happen and if it did happen not only would it be a tragedy of potential lost lives, but the theatre industry would suffer enormously. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

I agree. Though I think it is sometimes over the top, I'd rather the better safe than sorry approach than any danger to myself, the audience, theatre staff or performers and crew.

[BurlyBeaR]

Mar 11, 2017 19:15:15 GMT @snutte said:

I'm personally happy to go through any security procedures that they think necessary. This thing absolutely can happen and if it did happen not only would it be a tragedy of potential lost lives, but the theatre industry would suffer enormously. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

Me too.

I wonder what it is about the Harry Potter audience that merits the extra precautions for that  though?

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 19:21:12 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

Mar 11, 2017 19:15:15 GMT @snutte said:

I'm personally happy to go through any security procedures that they think necessary. This thing absolutely can happen and if it did happen not only would it be a tragedy of potential lost lives, but the theatre industry would suffer enormously. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

Me too.

I wonder what it is about the Harry Potter audience that merits the extra precautions for that  though?

I think possibly the thought is the sheer publicity/profile of it? If a terrorist/individual WERE to decide on a theatrical target, then logically they'd go for the hightest profile target possible? 

[BurlyBeaR]

Hmmm

[alece10]

I'm not sure how good security is at theatres though. Anytime I've been where there has been security and a bag search they take about 2 seconds. I'm not sure it's thorough enough to pick up anything. Almost as if it's just a token gesture.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 19:37:14 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

Hmmm

It was just a suggestion I'm not claiming I'm right....

I also think it's probably the WB general regime being more security concious than regular theatre...the HP studios is pretty security heavy these days, as I imagne their American theme parks are. 

[BurlyBeaR]

Mar 11, 2017 19:54:20 GMT @emicardiff said:

Mar 11, 2017 19:37:14 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

Hmmm

It was just a suggestion I'm not claiming I'm right....

I also think it's probably the WB general regime being more security concious than regular theatre...the HP studios is pretty security heavy these days, as I imagne their American theme parks are. 

No, I know. I was just mulling that over. 

Im just not sure how a theatre full of Potter fans merits more stringent security than a theatre full of Opera/ballet/Musical/Shakespeare fans I suppose. 

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 20:08:05 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

Mar 11, 2017 19:54:20 GMT @emicardiff said:

It was just a suggestion I'm not claiming I'm right....

I also think it's probably the WB general regime being more security concious than regular theatre...the HP studios is pretty security heavy these days, as I imagne their American theme parks are. 

No, I know. I was just mulling that over. 

Im just not sure how a theatre full of Potter fans merits more stringent security than a theatre full of Opera/ballet/Musical/Shakespeare fans I suppose. 

I think I was looking at it from the other side- that they are more of a target for attack, because it's so high profile. Just like when terror threat is high iconic buildings up secruity. 

If you're talking about the normal audience as in need ot security then no, I don't think they're any more a threat (let's face it a bunch of book nerds probably are less of a threat) BUT on that note I remember Manchester Palace roped in more security for Dirty Dancing, as did WMC here...

[BurlyBeaR]

If (God forbid) there was an attack on HP would that garner more publicity than an attack on Dreamgirls?

[shady23]

Football fans can get still get flares into stadiums in this country for evening matches which shows the security still gas a long way to go.

I think I'm of the opinion that if someone is intent to do something terror related they will find the way to do it, whatever security exists.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 20:40:31 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

If (God forbid) there was an attack on HP would that garner more publicity than an attack on Dreamgirls?

I think it would, personally. In the same way an attack on an 'iconic' building garners more attention/long term notority than others. It's a global brand name being (theoretically) attacked rather than something that is fairly obscure to most people (in a worldwide sense)

For big scale terrorist attacks it's as much about the publicity (for want of a better term) 

[theatre-turtle]

Mar 11, 2017 19:48:56 GMT alece10 said:

I'm not sure how good security is at theatres though. Anytime I've been where there has been security and a bag search they take about 2 seconds. I'm not sure it's thorough enough to pick up anything. Almost as if it's just a token gesture.

Don't mean to be insensitive but any chance you're towards the top of this chart?

[alece10]

Mar 11, 2017 20:53:29 GMT theatre-turtle said:

Mar 11, 2017 19:48:56 GMT alece10 said:

I'm not sure how good security is at theatres though. Anytime I've been where there has been security and a bag search they take about 2 seconds. I'm not sure it's thorough enough to pick up anything. Almost as if it's just a token gesture.

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?

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 19:48:56 GMT alece10 said:

I'm not sure how good security is at theatres though. Anytime I've been where there has been security and a bag search they take about 2 seconds. I'm not sure it's thorough enough to pick up anything. Almost as if it's just a token gesture.

It's security theatre. In a theatre. There's probably a joke there somewhere, but it's not funny because it actually increases the risk.

Security that doesn't work is worse than no security at all, because it makes people feel safer without actually making them safer and that means they're less likely to be suspicious of things that ought to make them suspicious. If there's no security theatre and someone sees an unattended bag in a corner they're likely to report it, but if they've seen everyone's bags inspected then they're far more likely to dismiss the possibility of it being a danger and just ignore it.

I've been through loads of these security measures and actually been inspected less than half the time because they're so trivially easy to evade. I wasn't even trying: it just happened. One way is to revisit a show: many theatres stick stickers on a bag to show it's been checked, but if you take the same bag to a different performance they just wave you through as already inspected because you have a sticker. The same happens if you walk out of the theatre after being inspected and walk back in again a minute later. Sometimes I didn't get inspected because I called at the box office to buy a ticket a hour before the show and then just hung around in the foyer reading, so I was never checked because they check people coming in and I was already in when they started checking. And if I wanted to put more than zero effort into it I could come up with several other ways to get things into the building unnoticed.

If they were serious about security then they'd try to break it and fix any loopholes that were found. For example, they could give several people things to smuggle into the theatre with a £100 reward if they succeed, and then for the people who do it find out what they did and make sure it can't happen again. Repeat until nobody succeeds. But they're not serious about security. They're doing it so people feel safe and keep spending money. Actual safety isn't their concern.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2017 19:15:15 GMT @snutte said:

I'm personally happy to go through any security procedures that they think necessary. This thing absolutely can happen and if it did happen not only would it be a tragedy of potential lost lives, but the theatre industry would suffer enormously. Not worth the risk in my opinion.

Yes I would much rather have my bag checked or walk through a metal detector than risk a terrorist attack occurring.

If, god forbid, anything were to happen then like Snutte said the theatre industry would suffer massively. People would stop going to shows and I can see lots of theatres having to close. Look at what happened to Egypt and Tunisa's tourist economy after their terror attacks. The theatres should make us feel safe

[Deleted]

But did people stop going to Nimax theatres after many people were hospitalised by their falling ceiling plaster?

[Phantom of London]

Terrorism really mad 'fear', part of that is the fear something is going to happen.

If you want to completely isolate yourself from something happening, easy way to solve that is not leaving the house, which obviously is absurd. I think you are more a risk travelling to the theatre, than in the venue itself.

[kathryn]

Mar 11, 2017 22:11:18 GMT @honouredguest said:

But did people stop going to Nimax theatres after many people were hospitalised by their falling ceiling plaster?

No. But people don't react the same to freak accidents as they do to terrorism. We're all pretty irrational when it comes to assessing risk.

[Deleted]

I don't think security at theatres is about security at all. They're always checking for contraband food stuffs or professional photography gear, but I don't believe they're actually security checking at all, apart from the basic "how drunk is THIS guy" and "oh heavens, I must break up that fight".

The fact we've not had a major terrorist attack in London in over ten years is I think a real testament to the larger forces who are tackling it all behind the scenes and putting a stop to things before they happen. There's also a lot to be said for our national response to the Dunblane tragedy. Sure, you can still get guns in the UK, but nowhere near as easily as in the US where any disaffected white boy can commit mass murder as easily as swatting a fly just because he thinks the world owes him a girlfriend or that racists have a good point actually. We probably also have a decent amount of protection still by being an island nation.

Also also I think theatre's elitist reputation might offer an additional (admittedly thin but) layer of protection. If I wanted to take out enough people to make a point, I'd rather go for somewhere like the O2, or Westfield if I'd spent all my money already on my means of mass destruction. If you want to get into a venue before committing an atrocity, there are cheaper and easier places to get into than, say, Cursed Child (assuming you'd make it easier on yourself by getting in via a legitimate method rather than just storming the place). If you really want to appal as many as people as possible, the general populace might not be that sad about losing a theatre full of poshos (which, WE know we're not, but the general populace, not so much).

It doesn't hurt to be aware of your surroundings and have a contingency plan for if awful things do suddenly happen (ALWAYS KNOW WHERE YOUR NEAREST FIRE EXIT IS AND PUT YOUR PHONE ON SILENT WITH NO VIBRATION IF S*** DOES HIT THE FAN) but it does hurt to worry too much. Don't let the terrorists frighten you into not living your life.

[Phantom of London]

I can see where you are coming from and sure you are probably talking in the context of theatre, but you take this to the next logical step and would you actually have airline type security for when you use public transport, you would easily need to double your time to make your journey, there needs to be the physical room to do this at stops and then would people be happy to pay a security surcharge on their ticket?

[Deleted]

I don't think airline-style security would be possible or necessary for public transport. It would clearly be a technical impossibility considering the number of bus stops and railway stations there are, and there's also the issue that public transport isn't a very good target. Planes make great targets: a comparatively large number of people can be killed for a small amount of effort and the result is a news-friendly swathe of devastation cutting across the countryside, and there's also the dramatic contrast of happy holiday-makers being plunged into terror in an instant. A dozen commuters and pictures of a burnt-out bus aren't going to have the same effect. On a train most of the passengers wouldn't even notice something had happened.

In Europe there's the additional factor that after two world wars most countries have a level of pride in the idea of carrying on no matter what. Try as they might no terrorist organisation is going to come close to doing to Britain and Germany what those countries did to each other. Contrast that to the US, where war is something that happens in foreign lands. The US doesn't have a Coventry or a Dresden in living memory, and it shows.

[danb]

Mar 11, 2017 20:40:31 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

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.