|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 8:46:36 GMT
Think the security situation is over zealous and is a knee jerk reaction to recent events. Unfortunately if someone is a lone wolf and hell bent on committing terrorism and has total disregard for his/her own life all the security in the world would never stop them. You could make an coherent argument that the queue for the bag check, makes an ideal target for people who want to commit atrocious acts. I have to disagree. Sadly it's necessary in our current times and if even the remote prospect of a bag search deters someone with malicious intent, then surely that's to be welcomed? But in that case why have the pub with no security and people massing outside in large numbers? Either you accept the tiny risk of an attack and keep everything more or less as usual or you say the risk is unacceptable and shut everything down. As previously stated, I would go for the former every time and am more than happy to accept what is still an absolutely minuscule risk to continue to enjoy my life (excepting where there is a specific threat, which may be the case with the NT currently, in which case I understand taking short-term exceptional actions). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 8:47:32 GMT
Suddenly wondered if the NT security is to do with the subject matter of "Angels In America" making the place more vulnerable to attack. Hence thier level being higher than anywhere else? It's a sad state of affairs that this is still a very plausible theory. Given that they're also running the 'Queer Theatre' readings over Pride weekend I can't see things being lessened until then (I actually wonder generally what security will be like for Pride this year) There's an extent to which I'd feel slightly better about the world if I thought that potential terrorists were informed enough to know what Angels in America is about... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 8:51:25 GMT
@abby this is very true.... Also there's a part of me that feels Angels is saved a bit from our general homophobic ranters simply because a two part 7 hour play is a bit too much of a challenge  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 9:07:20 GMT
Oh, another thought - maybe Nathan Lane's insurers insist on it? Maybe Mr Lane insists on a crowd of handsome security men to follow him around?
@ryan another job for you at the NT?
|
|
858 posts
|
Post by duncan on Jun 23, 2017 10:26:08 GMT
As we saw in 1999 there are far easier targets than the NT available to homophobic idiots with a bomb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 12:56:43 GMT
I have no issue with any extra security measures, especially at theatres. I think people need to remember that theatres are places that most people go once a year or once every few years. They're not a necessity or normality of life for the vast majorty of people. And they also struggle to make money most of the time. If one did get targeted it could throw the whole industry into a flux with people not visiting them altogether meaning many shows would close and many people would lose their jobs. It's bigger than just the security risk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 13:01:55 GMT
Indeed! and I'd rather go through ridiculous security every day even if I'm just nipping in to the loo, than have one person die at the hands of terrorists or similar. Speaking of though, I've had a classic one today in the realm of 'ooh what on earth is going on over there?!' only to discover it was Casulty filming (you can tell becuase their ambulances are in English not Welsh ) |
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jun 23, 2017 13:34:04 GMT
Indeed! and I'd rather go through ridiculous security every day even if I'm just nipping in to the loo, than have one person die at the hands of terrorists or similar. Speaking of though, I've had a classic one today in the realm of 'ooh what on earth is going on over there?!' only to discover it was Casulty filming (you can tell becuase their ambulances are in English not Welsh ) Oh me too ! A mnior delay against well I really don't want to think what... Plus you could win several quizzes with that piece of Casulaty info  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 14:17:04 GMT
Indeed! and I'd rather go through ridiculous security every day even if I'm just nipping in to the loo, than have one person die at the hands of terrorists or similar. See, I know what you mean but I'm not sure I'd agree (and I say that carefully) - it feels like saying 'I'd rather everyone walked everywhere than have one person die in a car accident'. We all choose convenience over risk every single day - and it's far more risky to get into a car than go into a theatre. The risk of being affected by terrorism is so so minimal that acting as though we're living under siege when we really aren't feels like a rather stupid act of self-harm. Yes, I was nervous getting on the tube the day after the London bombings; but no, I didn't want the tube to stop running altogether because of the tiny risk that one day a suicide bomber might be on there with me. That's not in any way to take away from the utter awfulness of it for people who have been affected, of course. |
|
|
|
Security
Jun 23, 2017 14:28:40 GMT
via mobile
Rory likes this
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 14:28:40 GMT
Except the tube is still running, people still drive and theatres are still open. It's just that people take precautions. You put on your seatbelt and you have your bag checked when you enter the theatre.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 14:32:24 GMT
@abby I get what you mean, and I'm inclined to agree to an extent- I think what I mean is 'in times of increased threat' I'd rather there but upped security etc etc not that we should live in a permenant state of it. I'm definatly one for 'living life as normal' And I don't think I was quite making that car type analogy, I'm the first to tell people 'you're more likely to get run over by a bus than get killed by a terrorist' and I LOATHE people who go 'Oh I won't go to x or y or (in particular) I CAN'T GO THERE I HAVE CHILDREN I MIGHT DIE OF TERRORISM Ok I'm taking the piss a bit. But I was talking in light of the increased measures we were speculating on. As in 'if there's a particular threat I'd rather we all go through this' I certainly don't want that forever-for example some of the airline restrictions introduced post 9/11 are ridiculous and without much bearing on actual threat any more- but they're what we do now. And we shouldn't have to. And on that fitting note I'm going back to holiday browsing |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 14:44:06 GMT
@abby I get what you mean, and I'm inclined to agree to an extent- I think what I mean is 'in times of increased threat' I'd rather there but upped security etc etc not that we should live in a permenant state of it. I'm definatly one for 'living life as normal' And I don't think I was quite making that car type analogy, I'm the first to tell people 'you're more likely to get run over by a bus than get killed by a terrorist' and I LOATHE people who go 'Oh I won't go to x or y or (in particular) I CAN'T GO THERE I HAVE CHILDREN I MIGHT DIE OF TERRORISM Ok I'm taking the piss a bit. But I was talking in light of the increased measures we were speculating on. As in 'if there's a particular threat I'd rather we all go through this' I certainly don't want that forever-for example some of the airline restrictions introduced post 9/11 are ridiculous and without much bearing on actual threat any more- but they're what we do now. And we shouldn't have to. And on that fitting note I'm going back to holiday browsing Ha ha ha! I totally agree with you - exceptional measures for an exceptional threat totes make sense. I just hope the NT aren't going to make a habit of confiscating my bag every time I try to go there for a swift bevvy - summer is all about a white wine on the terrace as far as I'm concerned... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 14:46:31 GMT
@abby I get what you mean, and I'm inclined to agree to an extent- I think what I mean is 'in times of increased threat' I'd rather there but upped security etc etc not that we should live in a permenant state of it. I'm definatly one for 'living life as normal' And I don't think I was quite making that car type analogy, I'm the first to tell people 'you're more likely to get run over by a bus than get killed by a terrorist' and I LOATHE people who go 'Oh I won't go to x or y or (in particular) I CAN'T GO THERE I HAVE CHILDREN I MIGHT DIE OF TERRORISM Ok I'm taking the piss a bit. But I was talking in light of the increased measures we were speculating on. As in 'if there's a particular threat I'd rather we all go through this' I certainly don't want that forever-for example some of the airline restrictions introduced post 9/11 are ridiculous and without much bearing on actual threat any more- but they're what we do now. And we shouldn't have to. And on that fitting note I'm going back to holiday browsing Ha ha ha! I totally agree with you - exceptional measures for an exceptional threat totes make sense. I just hope the NT aren't going to make a habit of confiscating my bag every time I try to go there for a swift bevvy - summer is all about a white wine on the terrace as far as I'm concerned... Not to mention I rely on their Loos |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 15:00:11 GMT
I think it's a bit selfish , at a time of the highest known risk of terrorism, to say that security checks should be abandoned because any incident will probably occur at a time when you aren't present, and so you probably won't be directly affected. Please consider having a thought for the workers at the theatre who probably will be there in the event of terrorist attack, because they're there every day.
It really is unforgivably selfish to want security checks to be put on hold for ten minutes just so as to make it easier for you to pop into a building at high risk without the minor inconvenience of using the cloakroom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 15:14:18 GMT
I think it's a bit selfish , at a time of the highest known risk of terrorism, to say that security checks should be abandoned because any incident will probably occur at a time when you aren't present, and so you probably won't be directly affected. Please consider having a thought for the workers at the theatre who probably will be there in the event of terrorist attack, because they're there every day. It really is unforgivably selfish to want security checks to be put on hold for ten minutes just so as to make it easier for you to pop into a building at high risk without the minor inconvenience of using the cloakroom. Oh don't be such an arse, that's clearly not what I'm saying. No wonder people give up on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 15:48:13 GMT
I was wondering when Theatre's would start stopping people taking drinks in. Concert venues - no food and drink but you can film whatever you like. Theatres - no filming but you can take in whatever beverages and food you like within reason.
Some theatres didn't allow alcohol in to be fair especially for popular shows like Mamma Mia where you could get "Hen party" type groups in. Also all soft drinks/water had to be sealed on people weren't filling water bottles with wine etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 15:58:48 GMT
I think it's a bit selfish , at a time of the highest known risk of terrorism, to say that security checks should be abandoned because any incident will probably occur at a time when you aren't present, and so you probably won't be directly affected. Please consider having a thought for the workers at the theatre who probably will be there in the event of terrorist attack, because they're there every day. It really is unforgivably selfish to want security checks to be put on hold for ten minutes just so as to make it easier for you to pop into a building at high risk without the minor inconvenience of using the cloakroom. Oh don't be such an arse, that's clearly not what I'm saying. No wonder people give up on this board. Indeed. And for my part I work IN a building that's considered a high security threat (for yourself HG you don't need to be a genius to gather which one). So I feel some authority in saying on both sides of the coin: 1. If there's increased threat as there is now, I will go through 10 security points to get to work/the toilet if that is what the professionals involved have deemed neccessary. 2. But once there is no direct threat, just a general sense of 'the world we live in' then frankly I don't want to live under seige as that plays into their hands so a sensible 'level' of security is fine (ie, ID for restricted areas, security presence) 5 days after Manchester happend I can understand the NT and others hiking up security. But we can't exist forever in that state, the object of terrorism being to promote terror and if we all live in that state they've won. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 16:00:10 GMT
I was wondering when Theatre's would start stopping people taking drinks in. Concert venues - no food and drink but you can film whatever you like. Theatres - no filming but you can take in whatever beverages and food you like within reason. Some theatres didn't allow alcohol in to be fair especially for popular shows like Mamma Mia where you could get "Hen party" type groups in. Also all soft drinks/water had to be sealed on people weren't filling water bottles with wine etc. And some theatres pretend they "don't have a liscence for the auditorium" but really just don't want to a) clean up the mess b) encourage the Mama Mia crowd any more than they already are... |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jun 23, 2017 17:46:48 GMT
Note the national have decreased their allowed bag size and mine is now too big to make it past the cloakroom. And no I'm not complaining, just quite glad I know in advance so can plan if I'm doing a must run for train don't have time to check bag out again thing.
Coming back borough market last week I felt like I ought to walk through it like I usually would (no reason not to, no more dangerous than anywhere else) and then thought this isn't like when you're faced with a field of cows and feel you must walk through it as it scares you and then immediately thought, statistically I'm still much more likely to get squashed by cows and felt a bit better.
|
|
230 posts
|
Post by hal9000 on Jun 24, 2017 7:47:18 GMT
Buy a coffee or suchlike from a shop en route if you can, they might be feeling the financial pinch.
|
|
591 posts
|
Post by lou105 on Jun 24, 2017 8:40:46 GMT
Note the national have decreased their allowed bag size and mine is now too big to make it past the cloakroom. And no I'm not complaining, just quite glad I know in advance so can plan if I'm doing a must run for train don't have time to check bag out again thing. I'm glad you mentioned this as it prompted me to measure the fairly standard shoulder bags which both I and my friend usually carry, and both come up slightly too big in one dimension. I'd just assumed they'd be OK, so I'm pleased I was prompted to check. |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jun 24, 2017 9:19:45 GMT
Note the national have decreased their allowed bag size and mine is now too big to make it past the cloakroom. And no I'm not complaining, just quite glad I know in advance so can plan if I'm doing a must run for train don't have time to check bag out again thing. I'm glad you mentioned this as it prompted me to measure the fairly standard shoulder bags which both I and my friend usually carry, and both come up slightly too big in one dimension. I'd just assumed they'd be OK, so I'm pleased I was prompted to check. Yeah and since I don't know just how precise they are being figured best to downsize if at all possible and then keep an eye out for what bag sizes are allowed in. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 14:39:19 GMT
I was once told my bag could make people feel uneasy as it was a rucksack. Imagine if I'd said that about a person!
I can understand the bag checks but why would a terrorist buy a ticket or want to commit a terrorist act in a theatre/concert hall anymore than say a local library/shopping centre/museum etc. They don't have bag checks!
In B'ham they do bag checks at Symphony Hall and can do random bag checks on people walking through the ICC which houses the Symphony Hall but don't often do so. Also B'ham Rep are doing bag checks but building is attached to the library and is often like the ICC a through fare but I've not seen one bag check done on anyone going into library. And you could argue that younger people who are being radicalised could be more likely to use the library or that guy who murdered the MP did his research on the library internet PCs.
|
|
2,051 posts
|
Security
Jun 24, 2017 14:42:28 GMT
via mobile
Post by infofreako on Jun 24, 2017 14:42:28 GMT
Very quick glance in my bag at west end live
|
|
2,780 posts
|
Post by n1david on Jun 24, 2017 14:58:53 GMT
Royal Albert Hall very thorough last night with bag searches (larger bags being asked to be emptied) and a wand-down with all metal objects out of pockets. Also ID checks, matching photo ID to ticket name - this was for Kraftwerk where they were worried about touting of tickets.
|
|
