Fox Theater installs metal detectors

Discussion in 'Places Off-Limits' started by AtlPhilip, Aug 1, 2016.

  1. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,950
    104
    63
    The typical set-up for a full-house event will have eight to 10 metal detectors in the arcade area as guests head toward the main entrance doors. Vella said he is cognizant of patrons’ time and, ideally, the process of standing in line; removing cellphones, keys and wallets from pockets and handbags; and walking through the detector will take between five and seven minutes.

    http://music.blog.ajc.com/2016/08/01/fox-theatre-installs-new-security-measures/
     
  2. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,173
    244
    63
    Sheeple exchange freedom for safety...and so it goes.

    "Vella said he realizes that, as with any change, there is the possibility of grousing from some patrons. But he believes those numbers will be small."
    “The large majority of people who have already experienced (the process) have been appreciative,” he said. “The goal is to have a safe environment, and the majority will understand that.”
     

  3. mrhutch

    mrhutch Well-Known Member

    1,423
    188
    63
    And then the terrorists will just wait for everyone to get seated, shoot the guards at the metal detectors, and then do what they were gonna do anyway. Absolutely nothing gained from this.
     
  4. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,173
    244
    63
    Security theater....in a theater. Somehow it provides some symmetry.
     
  5. Savannah Dan

    Savannah Dan Cross-drawer

    6,953
    260
    83
    I haven't been to a theater in years. Couldn't someone buy tickets and gain access to the theater, then open a fire door that leads outside and let someone with a scary black rifle and tactical vest in?
     
  6. Phil1979

    Phil1979 Member Georgia Carry

    11,493
    600
    113
    If the Fox Theater doesn't do pat-downs, require removal of belts, or x-ray bags, then bad guys will be able to easily smuggle weapons past the metal detectors.

    All a bad guy needs to do is claim they have a metal hip joint or metal spinal pins, or claim they have a metal implant in an ankle while carrying inside a boot. Or, they could hide a pistol inside their pants just beneath a large metal belt buckle. I'm sure there are other tricks such as false-bottom bags.

    If the Fox is going to disarm their patrons, it needs to have real security, not security theater, otherwise they will be sitting ducks. If a bad guy does manage to get a weapon in and injures or kills people, I hope the Fox Theater gets sued for not allowing innocent people the chance to effectively defend themselves.

    Think of airport-style security, and even then a loaded pistol has been brought onto an airplane by a man who forgot it was in his carry-on bag. I say let people be armed wherever they go where a criminal or terrorist might show up. We have the natural human right to protect ourselves!
     
  7. AzB

    AzB Well-Known Member

    2,361
    61
    48
    Will they be escorting the now unarmed patrons back to their cars after the show? I'm far less worried about issues inside the theater than I am going back and forth to my car.

    But as long as the Fox business folks have their butts covered, I suppose everyone else is on their own.

    I guess my recent visit to the Fox will have been my last. Too bad, I was looking forward to seeing Post Modern Jukebox this Fall.

    Az
     
  8. ET.

    ET. Active Member

    1,657
    2
    38
    They want us to believe these detectors are for stopping criminals with guns, when in reality they are there to keep legal guns out of the buildings. As was so astutely pointed out above, criminals and mass shooters will simply shoot their way in. They are more afraid of GWL holders shooting innocent people in a tense shootout than they are afraid of the mass shooter. That is the exact argument made to me by a liberal. He was so sure that I would, in the stress of a shootout, fire my gun "willy nilly", only adding to the number of casualties. (Really, "willy nilly", people still say that?) Liberals would fail in that scenario. They assume we would do likewise, so they go out of their way to stop us from exercising our 2nd amendment rights spending millions of dollars, mostly tax dollars, in the process.
     
  9. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,950
    104
    63
    They need to get a lot of letters, phone calls, and FB.messages now
     
  10. mark5019

    mark5019 what me worry?

    6,504
    13
    38
    To many atnti gunners read hear how the carrier in such places
     
  11. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,173
    244
    63
    We need a law that says that property owners that deny 2A rights on their property assume ALL risk's involved in compliance. That would change a few equations for the bean counters quickly.
     
  12. mrhutch

    mrhutch Well-Known Member

    1,423
    188
    63
    You mean like the cops do? There was a short news blurb about how as many as half of the orlando shooter's victims appeared to have possibly been shot by police by accident and then the topic was never brought up again.
     
  13. ET.

    ET. Active Member

    1,657
    2
    38
    I forgot about that. I do remember seeing that reported on Brietbart. The police chief said they were looking into the "friendly fire" scenario possibly adding to the causality count.
     
  14. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,950
    104
    63
    No, we do not. If you CHOOSE to enter, you assume the risks of being there.

    Using the law to deprive property owners of their right to exclude whomever they wish to is wrong.
     
  15. UtiPossidetis

    UtiPossidetis American

    3,173
    244
    63

    Ok, you probably live in the Metro area give you are "Atl"Philip. For my friends in rural areas there is often ONE option and if its a gun free zone they are f'd. No, if you want to deprive me of my rights then you should be willing to man up and take responsibility. Don't homeowners have a responsibility under the law to their guests? Why not business owners?
     
  16. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    12,814
    819
    113

    So I cannot choose to keep someone out based on nationality or race or height or weight or sexual preference?

    Govt has laws that say I cannot. So that needs to be changed to permit me to exclude those?

    Nemo
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2016
  17. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,950
    104
    63
    Correct. Your business, your property, your choice.

    I believe people should be free to be complete *******s if they want to.

    No one is depriving you of your rights. You voluntarily surrendered your rights when you entered another man's property who established terms and conditions for your entry.

    And no, a homeowner does not have an obligation to protect you. I'm not sure where you heard that hogwash from.
     
  18. Rugerer

    Rugerer GeePeeDoHolic

    6,387
    70
    48
    Slip&fall on your property. Who pays the medical bill?
     
  19. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    Well, I guess I'm not buying any more tickets for The Fox any more any time soon. Shame.
     
  20. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    Yeah, that argument would be a whole lot more relevant if we weren't talking about a licensed public accommodation.

    If they want to keep their business license -- required by the public, issued by the public on behalf of the public, and for the benefit of the public -- then is it unreasonable, as part of that applying for and holding the license thing, to require sufferance of (allegedly) protected and guaranteed civil rights while acting under the authority of that business license?

    We aren't talking about some dude saying "...take your dress off before you come into the living room or else don't bother under pain of criminal trespass..."