TSA At The Movies: Theater Chain Looks To Bring Security Theater To The Movie Theater
from the more-hassle,-same-safety dept
Thanks to a string of theater-related tragedies, going to the theater is about to become as enjoyable as going to the airport.
Following two recent deadly incidents at movie theatres in the US, the Regal Entertainment Group – the nation’s largest movie theater chain – this week added a bag and purse check policy as a security measure in some of the 569 theaters it operates.This may sound like a harmless bit of "doing something" in response to a few tragic incidents, but there's nothing really harmless about it.
“Security issues have become a daily part of our lives in America. Regal Entertainment Group wants our customers and staff to feel comfortable and safe when visiting or working in our theatres,” the chain said in a statement.
First off, it subjects everyone to the same level of scrutiny -- provided they're carrying a bag of some sort. If you have a purse or backpack or (god forbid) a fanny pack, you're a potential threat. Everyone else? Free to go. Weapons tucked into waistbands or shoved into pockets will go undetected.
And, like the TSA its emulating, the security measures will be easily thwarted and ultimately useless. For every weapon the TSA brags about seizing, many more end up on planes. A recent audit of the TSA's security efforts found it missed 95% of smuggled weapons and explosives. Anyone thinking Regal's security force is going to be better trained and more thorough than the TSA is kidding themselves.
Like the TSA's efforts, this will give moviegoers the illusion of safety, rather than actual safety. An illusion might be comforting enough for most moviegoers and it's all Regal can actually offer. This move is more about PR than reality.
According to a new survey conducted by consumer research film C4, following the Nashville incident, 48% of moviegoers are willing to pay $1 or more per ticket for the additional measures. Nineteen per cent of respondents said they would pay $3 or more.And I'm sure Regal will be more than happy to take $1-3 more from every moviegoer in exchange for a hassling a few moviegoers. But Regal's move -- while good-intentioned -- is ill-advised. Offering your customers mostly-theoretical protection places responsibility for any future shootings almost solely on each individual theater. Now, if anyone shoots up a theater, Regal will very likely be successfully targeted in wrongful death suits. After all, it instituted additional measures to prevent further shootings... and then failed to prevent a shooting from happening. The additional measures seem unlikely to dissuade anyone but the most easily-deterred shooters from following through with their plans. In exchange for little more than a temporary bump in goodwill, Regal is assuming a great deal of liability.
And given what we know about the most recent theater shootings, a bag check wouldn't have stopped anything. James Holmes, who killed 12 and wounded 70 in Aurora, CO, stashed his weapons in his vehicle. The shooter in Louisiana may have had a backpack (reports are inconclusive), but it wasn't on or near him when police got to him, and a controlled detonation later proved there was nothing harmful inside it. The shooter at the Antioch, TN theater was carrying two backpacks -- one of which was strapped across his chest. When police engaged him, he was also wearing a surgical mask. Most of what was in his bags weren't actually weapons, though. Pepper spray, a hatchet and an Airsoft gun were used in the theater attack. Only one of these is an actual weapon, and Regal's new policy doesn't make it clear what will happen to those who bring in legal items that aren't weapons but the theater decides could be deployed as one.
This focus on bags also makes it clear to potential attackers that security will be looking out for one thing -- backpacks and bags. Avoiding scrutiny simply means not doing that one thing. So, while some moviegoers will be comforted by this security charade being performed on their behalf, many more will be irritated that attending a movie will be nearly as annoying as boarding a plane.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bag checks, movie theaters, movies, security, security theater, tsa
Companies: regal entertainment
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Awesome
No theater experience, no matter how good, would be worth knowingly handing money to people and groups like that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Awesome
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But if it stops just one person with a bag of corn nuts from getting into the theater, isn't it worth it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
actually, probably would do better than TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which one would that be?
Pepper spray is a non-lethal weapon, intended for defensive use, but it can certainly be used offensively to attack and disable someone.
A hatchet is a tool for splitting wood, but it can be (ab)used as a weapon.
An Airsoft gun is a gun, and while it does not fire bullets or use gunpowder for propellant, and is principally intended for use as part of a team sports game, there's a very good reason why Airsoft players are required to wear goggles and other basic body protection at any reputable Airsoft range.
So how do you figure that one of those three "is a weapon" and the other two aren't?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So... the hatchet? If I had to get attacked with one of those three things, the hatchet would be my last choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Even if, as John states, Tim intended to say "weapons that pose a serious threat", I don't see how that's at all relevant. Their policy doesn't mention weapons at all. Their policy just states that they're trying to ensure the "comfort and safety" of their guests and employees. So the question of whether something is or is not a weapon that poses a serious threat is irrelevant. Pepper spray and hatchets and airsoft guns can all cause some serious discomfort.
(As an aside, Wikipedia states that pepper spray has led to deaths in some cases, but without a citation. So it's possible that at least two of those items pose a serious threat).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unlike the other examples pepper spray (or others like mace) doesn't have to be targeted at anybody. Release that spray into a room and nobody will want to be in that room for awhile.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And pepper spray is the answer. In places where weapons are banned, pepper spray WILL get you arrested where the other two may or may not. In fact, many places now ban pepper spray just like they previously banned mace.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just like I don't mind the airlines, as a private entity, doing luggage checks and whatnot. People may offer them suggestions on how they can be more secure and less invasive as a business but, as private entities, they have that right. Also as private entities theaters and airlines should have some civil responsibility of ensuring safety against terrorist, muggers, etc... or else face possible lawsuits. What we could argue is to what extent they should face liability for failure to provide a safe environment to customers/passengers. But by holding the liable for not offering a safe environment when someone gets hurt I think the private sector is best suited for making an effort of finding the best ways to spend resources efficiently to ensure the safety of customers while minimizing their invasion of privacy so they don't lose business.
The TSA, OTHO, is a governmental violation of our rights and customers have fewer option in terms of protesting by simply choosing another government. The businesses themselves also have fewer options in terms of finding better ways to provide security while accommodating customer privacy when something so specific is imposed on them by law (though they do have some options because they have a strong lobbying influence). If customers feel a private business does too much to invade privacy they can go somewhere else (or go without). This can encourage businesses to find better ways to ensure safety while still not invading privacy. But when it comes to government we are much more or less stuck with their decisions short of our ability to vote for different representatives (or move to another country I suppose). Since their decisions are much more far reaching and less optional we should do more to ensure they don't do anything to invade our privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Makes me wish I went to Regal theaters before, so that I could stop now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Makes me wish I went to Regal theaters before, so that I could stop now
While I respect their right as a business to do this it is my right as a customer to boycott them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Makes me wish I went to Regal theaters before, so that I could stop now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not their responsibility to ensure safety
Given the number of theater shootings per year versus the number of years theaters have been open to the general public, I consider theaters to be reasonably safe from shootings even without any specialized security measures. Thus, I am perfectly fine with theaters not taking extra measures to make me safer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Makes me wish I went to Regal theaters before, so that I could stop now
I disagree. It is their responsibility to show mindless, expensive entertainment without putting us in danger or being dangerously negligent. It is not their responsibility to find better ways of keeping us safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, this is movie theater employees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My chances of getting prostate cancer are vastly greater than being killed in a theatre shooting. That doesn't mean I'd pay to be tested as I enter the theatre.
Well, maybe for an Adam Sandler movie. It would improve the ambiance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not looking for weapons...
The opportunity to charge their customers for this new invasion of privacy is a bonus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not looking for weapons...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not looking for weapons...
Yes. Really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not looking for weapons...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not looking for weapons...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not looking for weapons...
The opportunity to charge their customers for this new invasion of privacy is a bonus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
QUICK DO WHAT THOSE OTHER GUYS ARE DOING!!!!
WE CAN RAISE OUR PROFITS!!!!
Should we perhaps stop running blindly to the fast "fix" that does nothing of benefit for people?
We have in this country some serious issues that a fucking bag check will not fucking fix.
- Our mental health system has failed. Those who require help are priced out of getting the help they need. Their illness is seen as some sort of punishment from a higher power, and as long as they aren't panhandling & bothering me I don't have to care... until the voices tell them the blood god demands blood.
- Which leads to the insanity of MOAR GUNS! FEWER CHECKS! My right to bear arms trumps common fucking sense! The system is woefully inadequate to keep weapons out of the hands of those who legally can not possess them. But this hot button issue results in its own form of mental illness, helped along with the 'the secret mooslim president is gonna take yer guns!!!' rhetoric.
We have more weapons than rational people should need, they are stolen, pawned, and vanish from the grid until someone is murdered. Even those charged with protecting citizens can't keep track of their caches.
We do have many more problems, but we care more about weapons than making sure our neighbors are well. It has a tragic cost, and instead of deciding society would be better off if we showed actual concern about those who need help we decide that some security theatre will solve it (or at least shut people up until the next one... then more theatre... until the next one... then more theatre... until the next one...
At what point is the bodycount high enough to admit that as a society we keep failing those who need help because we "needed" a tax break and to stop protecting the least of us?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
sent from my afterliPhone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thanks for proving my point that fucking guns are more important than human lives in this country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guns are scary.
And we human beings like to freak out about the scary and pretend the sad and embarrassing will go away if we stop looking at it.
The consequences of this is that more people who feel the need to be heard are going to take the scary route.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Utterly depressing
This is utterly depressing. I cannot imagine a circumstance in which I would be willing to undergo a bag check just to go to a movie theater.
But people are willing to pay to be subjected to this?? That's pure insanity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Utterly depressing
The thing to remember about such polls is that they're often done not for research, but to back an agenda.
Working for a computer store a couple decades ago I did a lot of service calls to a polling firm. Customers - political parties, corporations and unions - would tell them the result they wanted, and the polling firm would produce in impeccably valid poll to produce those results.
Results could be tailored based on where they called. Rural farm areas vs rural non-farming areas vs inner city vs middle class suburban vs wealthy suburban areas would produce predictably different results. And of course how the questions were phrased made a huge difference.
A poll on theatre searches done "following the Nashville incident" smells of being tailored to fit a desired result.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Utterly depressing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Utterly depressing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Utterly depressing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Utterly depressing
What percent would not be willing to pay as much (or at all)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The mark up on the pop corn stand is some where between comical and scary
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fuck the MPAA.
I recommend grabbing this projector. It is simply amazing.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00511ITEM
My only complaint is that the sound quality is abysmal on the built-in speaker. I would recommend also picking up an HDMI box that splits the audio so you can hook up 5.1 or 7.1 speakers.
Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fuck the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other news....
this is my country yo... a nation full of cowards and crybabies!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: In other news....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HOnestly, I'm surprised at the LOW percentage, since they put the questions to their Board of Directors, but then again, they are a bunch of money-grubbing arseholes that that percentage is actually reasonable for them. (not that they'd ever actually PAY to go watch a movie)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
Wonderella explains it best here - http://nonadventures.com/2015/06/20/the-some-of-all-fears/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
I'm sure no one remembers the names of the people who got killed there, but everybody remembers Some Asshole and His Buddy who did the killing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
Yes, as you say, stop glorifying these kinds of people in the news.
But how about also stop glorifying these kinds of people IN THE MOVIES. Don't make hundreds of movies about the kind of twisted sick people you don't want in real life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Want to ACTUALLY deter these shooting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Some Asshole
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just sent this email
Hello,
I just read about your plan to institute a Security Theater plan so it looks like your doing something. Like the TSA this is a bad joke to make people afraid and give up their privacy rights. This band-aid approach will do nothing to stop the next tragedy and distracts from real problems in our society that will take time and effort to solve. Because of this I will not be going to any Regal Cinema and will be encouraging other to do the same until you revoke this benighted policy.
CorporateBoxOffice@RegalCinemas.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just sent this email
But seriously good idea actually! They will not learn if we all just take it laying down, or at least tell them why they see a slump in sales!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just sent this email
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Two-fold endeavor?
If people really start staying away from theaters because of this hassle, then all of a sudden the MPAA can point to the fact that less people are going to the movies because of piracy....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Total Security Theater
However....he missed the pepper spray and folding knife (both legal) that were sitting in plain sight in her purse...oh and he didn't even look at me and was probably completely oblivious to the fact that I was legally CCW and carrying a handgun, extra magazine and a folding knife on my person.
I'm not sure exactly what the management thinks this will accomplish except to be a visual deterrent for those who aren't intent on breaking the law in the first place. Those who are intent on doing harm will likely just barge in, smoke the poor unarmed ticket checker and everyone in the lobby on their way into a theater....
This "Security Measure" changes little, it just makes the first victim a theater employee (which I suppose is noble of management to volunteer one of their minimum wage staff as cannon fodder, not so good for the poor ticket checker though).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You're really not. If you can't go 2.5 hours without eating something, you should see a doctor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It depends on whether that is enjoyable.
I think not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A long time ago on television...
To which he replied "inconvenience"
Stepping up airport security adds one to three hours to travel time for an awful lot people and that amount of inconvenience puts a bit pall on everybody's day.
Just because an attack got through once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Question About the Food
A question for people who have been to the movies within the last couple of decades: What kind of food can you get at the concession stand. Can you get mineral water? Can you get some fruit, say, an orange or an apple, or a small bag of raw walnuts? Older people don't live on popcorn, and it's normal for a lot of women to carry around a supply of things they can eat and drink. That's a considerable part of what they keep in their big purses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A Question About the Food
No. Not in my experience, anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A Question About the Food
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: A Question About the Food
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I first I read that as "mostly-theatrical protection" .. same difference I guess
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Civil liberties
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who are these people?
What happens when a guy wears a trenchcoat full of weapons? Now, granted, the chances of this happening are slim, but still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everyone that isn't a felon needs to be a trained, armed citizen at ALL TIMES. But, if you prefer to be a victim-in-waiting that's your Right, too. Remember, the Supreme Court ruled that the police are NOT obligated to protect you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Nice false dichotomy you have there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Odd that, but there was a similar story, I think came out of Canada - 3IC in the 5-I coalition - a decade or so ago, about a pair of criminals let out on a weekend pass who did not return. The government failed to note their absence from the prison roster for a week or two apparently.
The 2 crooks went on a crime spree and at some point raped a woman after stabbing her in the throat.
They left her for dead but she survived and later, tried to sue the Canadian government, claiming it was their responsibility to insure that incarcerated murderers were kept away from the citizenry and not allowed to roam free.
The courts there ruled the same way - that the government of Canada was under no obligation at all to protect individual Canadian citizens. Case dismissed.
It appears that none of the 5-I nation's governments - that's the folks sporting the White Hats with the words Good Guy on the front - have any actual responsibility to the people who pay their wages.
Their real job is to protect and promote their own members' and their associates' businesses and incomes apparently. The general public is little more than another natural resource, to be used as needed. Hardly any wonder that such a regime would eventually turn to full fascism. More amazing is that it did not do so long ago... but that likely has to do with finally achieving technological excellence in surveillance first.
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One More Reason to Torrent and Stream
Thank goodnes all the women (and girly men, who carry "purses") will be disarmed...I feel safer already. \s
In a related story, VPN sales soared...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All hail the king, the empire, the tyrants
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Down with Security Theater
First you put the frogs into a pot of warm water then you incrementally bring the water to a boil and before the frogs know they're kaput!
Same goes for invasive/unconstitutional security theater first you condition people to expect security theater in airports, then at bus/train stations, then sporting venues, then the roadside, then movie theaters and by now most people are conditioned to willingly accept security theater in their daily lives they will not think twice when security theater begins at their childs school or at the mall or supermarket. Good frogs.
Boycott Regal Theaters, boycott flying by air, boycott any business that needs to treat you like a criminal in order for you to attend, defund DHS/TSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Down with Security Theater
And we're pretty darned sure that boycott does not mean shopping... and that it has a lot to do with the notion of "doing without", or "not owning", or something like that.....
If turning the tide away from a future of fascist totalitarianism actually depends on We The People using our awesome and massive purchasing power to NOT BUY STUFF from the Billionaires in Power, then we are absolutely doomed.
So We The People have decided to simply grab our Credit Cards and go Shopping, oh blissful, wonderful Shopping, until whatever happens, happens.
/s
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Down with Security Theater
If one looks back a mere twenty years, the notion that the USA would be like it is today would have made people back then laugh out loud at such "foolishness" and doomsday thinking.
In fifteen years from now, when the police walk the streets in groups of five, wearing full metal armor, bearing heavy assault weapons and a variety of anti-personnel frequency generators, and curfew is at 9PM, and more citizens are killed annually by government forces than by auto accidents, clinical drugs, and alcohol combined, we will all likely look back at these early 21st century years as the Good Old Days.
Ribbitt. Ribbbbittt. Rib....gah!
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Really?
So you're suggesting that A) movie theater security would be significantly better than that and B) DHS-operated airport security is top notch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]