Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: New Security Measures

This is topic New Security Measures in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000375

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 10-25-2001, 09:05 AM:

Showcase Cinemas/National Amusements has just instituted a company-wide security policy of prohibiting people with packages, backpacks, etc. from entering theatres. In today's crazy world it makes some sense, but as the owner of a shopping mall where we recently built a 16-plex for Showcase it does present a problem. We built the theatre to keep people at the mall longer, and now what are they supposed to do with their purchases? I'm curious if any of you have run into this elsewhere with other chains.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-25-2001, 10:24 AM:

With the increased security awareness, most people probably won't mind taking a few minutes to take their things out to the parking lot to put them in their vehicles before entering the theatre.

Reports like this support the need for extra security:
http://www.kare11.com/news-article.html?NEWS_ID=27108
__________________________________________________________________
"Report: Terrorists Cased Sites Including Mall of America

Internal government reports list the Mall of America as one of at least five sites cased by terrorist groups for possible attacks in the United States.

The St. Paul Pioneer Press reported that two senior Bush administration officials familiar with the reports told the newspaper on condition of anonymity.

The terrorist groups were linked to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network.

According to the reports, investigators found sketches or reports describing the mall and the other sites among the possessions of the suicide hijackers and their alleged colleagues. "

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 10-25-2001, 10:32 AM:

Does this policy cover international i.e UK National Amusement sites as well as those in the states?

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 10-25-2001, 11:44 AM:

Regal has instituted a similar policy chainwide. See the home page of their website.

Posted by Joshua Voorhies (Member # 824) on 10-25-2001, 04:24 PM:

Increasing security measures nation-wide won't do anything to prevent terrorism. In a free country, there are an infinite number of ways a terrorist can hurt you. The only way to prevent terrorism through security is to reduce the country to a police state. It's even harder to defend against people who are willing to kill themselves.
The only way to make the country safe is improve intelligence (which we're already doing) and kill/lock up the terrorists (which we're getting started on). Every security measure is just a temporary patch over one avenue of terrorism. The terrorists will just find something else- unsecured- to strike.
On the plus side, no backpacks and such means no outside food and drink.
Do really large purses count? What about colostomy bags? How about we ban privately owned vehicles (car bombs). And Turbans (you can hide stuff in there). Maybe National Amusements should stop fat people from wearing loose clothing that could conceal weapons or biological agents.
Maybe I'm just paranoid. I'm sure the terrorists wouldn't think of ways around a half-ass security policy that annoys people but doesn't prevent anything. It's not like any of them were educated in the United States before attending thorough training camps in Afghanistan.

Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 10-25-2001, 05:07 PM:

Oh, ferPetessake.

These policies will stop some outside food, but nothing of importance.

How do corporate policymakers expect an untrained minimum wage employee to stop a woman who looks pregnant, but has a bomb package near her gut? How are these employees expected to stop an apparently obese man in a winter overcoat who might have a similar package, or might just be obese and itching to file a suit for discrimination? Who determines what exactly is too large a purse and what is not? How does anyone in an executive capacity seriously think a 16 year old nose-picking doorman will in any way impede the intentions of a trained terrorist, especially when the bean-counters say there isn't even money for another minimum wage usher to back him up? Why on earth does anyone think that "Freddie Got Fingered" is a terrorist target in the first place? (Come to think of it, maybe that last statement isn't so off the mark...)

I can see it now... "I'm sorry big papa and big mama, you'll have to take your big gut and little joey back to the car, come back and see us again when you are thinner and less pregnant."

There is safety, there is paranoia, and there is follow the leader stupidity. These rules are nothing more than the usual nonsensical "look at us, we're so good" opportunistic dribblings that regularly drip out of overflowing executive urinals, get crystalized into policy, and make things harder for those on the front lines.

<grumble> Sorry. Someone had to say it.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-26-2001, 10:05 AM:

Joshua said: "Every security measure is just a temporary patch over one avenue of terrorism. The terrorists will just find something else- unsecured- to strike."

That may be true, but if security measures cause them to choose another (easier) target, your site has just been spared.

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-26-2001, 10:10 AM:

"Increasing security measures nation-wide won't do anything to prevent terrorism."

Surely you jest

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Posted by Joshua Voorhies (Member # 824) on 10-27-2001, 04:36 AM:

Sorry, no jest. While there may some reduction, terrorists will still find a way.

The only way to prevent terrorism is eliminate the terrorists. The government seems to be going in the right direction with their commitment to "rip up" the terrorist network.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-27-2001, 10:26 AM:

The increased security will only stop the amatures. The real "evil-doers" will not be stopped by these so-called security measures. Just about every thing I've see as far as public security (airports or otherwise) are nothing more than putting on a show to help the public conscience.

I agree, that in a free society, a terrorist has MANY avenues to wreck havoc that simply can't be stopped. In my opinion, the best way to deal with those that have caused terrorism is that the penalty be so horrific that the terrorism causes the terrorist's cause more harm than good.

The no bags policy in theatres is merely a no outside food n drink policy using a national tragedy as an excuse.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Zach Zagar (Member # 379) on 10-28-2001, 11:06 AM:

Off-topic but...
the only way to stop a revolution, or a terrorist, or anything of that nature, TAKE AWAY THEIR CAUSE.

Read into that however you want to (ex: certain foreign policies, or whatever else drives people to hate America), but the best way to prevent this in the future is to understand why.

Granted, there's always the occasional madman (Hitler, Hussein, for instance).

Our cause is great, and our resolve is just, and we, by all means, will win, eventually against the people on our list, but remember, these people are fighting for their "god". We're fighting for our safety. I'm not sure which one pushes you more.

We'll take out the people in our scopes now, then move onto others. Odds are, somewhere down the road, someone else down the road will rise up as well. It seems throughout history its been like that.

------------------
If ya smell, what the Zach is cooking.

Zach Zagar, the most electrifying man in theater entertainment today.

Posted by Carl King (Member # 398) on 10-30-2001, 08:36 AM:

I've not heard of any such security measures being taken here in my area. However, it will only take one incident at a public venue (hockey game, concert, movie)to make this a reality everywhere.
Personally, I don't have a problem with asking folks to leave all packages outside the cinema. Better safe than sorry is what I say. It is no infringement on anyones rights or priveleges and people will soon get used to it.

It is also scary to think about how fast numbers will plummet if something does happen at a cinema or arena. One act of terrorism or even the appearance of an act of terrorism and folks will stay home in droves.

It is probably a good idea to keep ones eyes open even if there is no official policy.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 11-01-2001, 05:37 PM:

Loews has adopted a "no packages/backpacks" policy per today's online edition of The Hollywood Reporter.

Loews also is testing a new security system at its Lincoln Square (Upper West Side/NYC) and Wayne (NJ) theaters.

Posted by Zach Zagar (Member # 379) on 11-03-2001, 10:35 PM:

I went and watched a movie at a Wherenberg Theater in Jamestown, MO (in a mall) this past weekend, and they had very large displayed "NO BAGS..." signs. They didn't attribute it to the recent attack in NY and DC, but it was effective on a fairly recent date.

Odd, that a senior citizen lady sitting next to me was allowed her shopping bag. Perhaps they're profiling the exclusions of bags?

"oh sure, go on in old lady, you're not a terrorist"

------------------
If ya smell, what the Zach is cooking.

Zach Zagar, the most electrifying man in theater entertainment today.

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 11-04-2001, 10:47 AM:

My take on this would be that if a company were to come out and say "Watch for Arab looking guys with bags or bombs" they would probably get a lot of flack. (As I will probably get now) So they probably want their employees to read between the lines and do a bit of unofficial "profiling" (oh my god!). The little old lady with the shopping bag is more likely to not be a terrorist than a college student of Arabian decent. Maybe the chain owners just want you to be alert and watch for those who are worthy of watching?

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 11-12-2001, 05:49 PM:

We've just instituted a new policy regarding safety at our theatre. We're not allowing any bags, purses, brief cases, boxes, camera cases, wallets, Zippos, hats, coats, pants, shirts, or anything else that could potentially carry something dangerous. In fact, we're not letting people in at all. We're keeping our doors locked 24/7, and all the lights are off. We have armed guards at every door. That way we have a place for people like Zach to sit quietly and safely so they can try and understand why people hate us and what we did wrong to deserve it. We have a better shot at ridding the world of things that trigger asthma attacks than we do ridding it of people who can find a reason to hate.

Increasing security on such small scales won't do anything to stop terrorism, like Joshua suggests. It just amazes me how willing people are to sacrifice their personal freedoms because they think it's what they're supposed to do to feel safer.

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson