Regal Cinemas Now Checking Bags and Backpacks

[Plan2Live]

Tirod said:

Looks like another underinformed thread just posted to see who will bite.

Interesting assumption. I saw the article, thought it might be an attempt to police for guns, I opened the thread and asked if anyone had noticed any change in policy at their local Regal Cinema. That seemed more practical than driving around the contiguous 48 to become personally informed.

In Post 11 I said I was going to swing by my local Regal to see if they had posted signs too. It's hard for me to see how those posts get interpreted as trolling.

 

[herrwalther]

I highly doubt it is for firearms. Not many people carry firearms in backpacks. Shortly after the Aurora shooting, I went to see a movie. They had a police officer doing the same check: bags and purses. They were looking for big firearms, like a broken down AR or shotgun.

 

[The Red Hot Rider]

Two words: cargo shorts. Good for water, candy, or what have you.

 

[Ryanxia]

Eh, ok. So that's fine.

But I simply read that they're checking bags and backpacks. That, in itself, is not an effective "no guns" policy. It's a pretty decent "no outside snacks" policy though, so I can see why they like it!

Now, if they're going to put up metal detectors and wand people ... well, that's a different story.

Their press release said it was for safety reasons in light of recent attacks and so customers/employees can feel safe, I didn't see anything about candy. Anywho, I'm surprised at how many people don't mind being searched even if it's "just a quick toss".

 

[JSH1]

I doubt this is for firearms too. However, the recent theater shootings gives Regal a convenient reason to do something they have likely wanted to do for a long time. Instead of appearing greedy (We are going to check you bags for snacks so you have to buy our outrageously priced food) they appear like they are concerned about their customer's safety.

 

[Sam1911]

Their press release said it was for safety reasons in light of recent attacks and so customers/employees can feel safe, I didn't see anything about candy. Anywho, I'm surprised at how many people don't mind being searched even if it's "just a quick toss".

I don't LIKE having my bag searched, but I really don't carry one, so I can only get theoretically worked up about it. And I go through thousands of things I "mind" but have to put up with.

Of course it's so people can "FEEL" safer. Like the TSA, this doesn't actually stop anything from happening. Just "security theater."

And, again, this doesn't stop me or any other patron from going armed. So why would I be particularly upset? Don't carry a bag, and conceal your sidearm. No worries.

 

[danez71]

Tirod said:

Looks like another underinformed thread just posted to see who will bite.

Interesting assumption. I saw the article, thought it might be an attempt to police for guns, I opened the thread and asked if anyone had noticed any change in policy at their local Regal Cinema. That seemed more practical than driving around the contiguous 48 to become personally informed.

In Post 11 I said I was going to swing by my local Regal to see if they had posted signs too. It's hard for me to see how those posts get interpreted as trolling.

Actually, it's more like an 'underinformed' accusation by Tirod.


From their website:

http://www.regmovies.com/theatres/admittance-procedures

Backpacks/Packages/Bags:

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. To ensure the safety of our guests and employees, backpacks and bags of any kind are subject to inspection prior to admission. We acknowledge that this procedure can cause some inconvenience and that it is not without flaws, but hope these are minor in comparison to increased safety.

Regal Entertainment Group has formally stated the potential inspection of bags etc is due to safety.


Sure, they could be using "safety" as the reason to look for contraband Redvines and Popcorn..... but seriously, when was the last time someone's purse was inspected and had their Almond Joys taken away?

 

[njl]

We went to a Regal Cinema last weekend, and they did ask to look inside my wife's purse on the way in. It's a small purse...not big enough to stash much food or a drink larger than a small flask. I assumed it was more to force us to spend another $20 on drinks and popcorn for the kids. If it's for safety, it's a big fail. I was carrying concealed (and not very well...comp-tac paddle with a G26 on the right hip, untucked shirt for cover) and had no problems. They're not going to stop weapons from coming in without metal detectors.

 

[DeepSouth]

They're not going to stop weapons from coming in without metal detectors.

And you'd be surprised just how ineffective those are. More times than not its the "operator" of the metal detector that the problem. I wear steel toe boots almost all day everyday, except for church on Sunday's.

I'd say 80% of the time I come up to a metal detector I tell the guard I have steel toe boots on and they tell me to just go around, or they just tell me to go on through, sometimes they ask if I have weapons. I have never, not once, had to take my boots off and go through without setting it off.


All I'm saying is that metal detectors (make that metal detector operators) are easily overcome, unless your at an airport. I no longer even take my leatherman out of the belt holster, I know they'll just let me walk through. If the theater I go to puts up metal detectors, I can assure you I'll go in and I'll be armed. I'd bet on it.

 

[TwinReverb]

I was carrying concealed (and not very well...comp-tac paddle with a G26 on the right hip, untucked shirt for cover) and had no problems. They're not going to stop weapons from coming in without metal detectors.

To be fair, if they have a no guns sign on the door, if you disobey, you can be taken to court and/or sued, depending on your locality. At minimum, in my mind, you lose the ability to call yourself a law abiding citizen.

But either way, it would be a huge win for the anti-gun crowd if the theater made a big deal out of it. My advice: either respect their property rights or don't patronize their establishment.

In my state those signs have no force of law, so if they caught me, i have a chance to immediately leave their business without criminal ramifications. However, if they are feeling froggy, they can take me to civil court for damages, and probably win. Let those who disobey the wishes of a business make sure they keep the consequences on their minds.

So if i go to the theater here, i carry. But my solution is not to go at all. Google play, Amazon, and Netflix are cheaper and more convenient.

My advice is still to boycott Regal. Not only is purse searching disrespectful and a violation of my rights, it's stupid because last i checked, these shooters didn't buy tickets: they snuck in from the back.

 

[redbone]

Just take a backpack full of dirty underwear and socks.

 

[Sam1911]

To be fair, if they have a no guns sign on the door, if you disobey, you can be taken to court and/or sued, depending on your locality. At minimum, in my mind, you lose the ability to call yourself a law abiding citizen.

Really? You can not be considered a law abiding citizen for having broken NO law?

But either way, it would be a huge win for the anti-gun crowd if the theater made a big deal out of it

how? I don't know how being asked to leave would be a big win for the anti gunners. I've been asked to go put my gun in my car by one establishment. No anti gunners won anything.

In my state those signs have no force of law, so if they caught me, i have a chance to immediately leave their business without criminal ramifications. However, if they are feeling froggy, they can take me to civil court for damages, and probably win. Let those who disobey the wishes of a business make sure they keep the consequences on their minds.

say again? How's that? Civil damages?

 

[Evil-Twin]

I think freedom and personal safety will be exponentially tested over the next decade, until something drastic happens... exponentially= it will only get worse and worse for us freedom loving peaceful citizens. this may be the best (safest year ) year of the next ten...for safety and freedom.
No I'm not crying " the sky is falling "... what I am saying is the thugs and terrorist of the world are saying to each other.. " Can you top this "?

My only defense against this is to convince people to be aware of their surroundings and arm themself, wherever they go. Enjoy their life, but be prepared to defend the values we all hold dear to our way of life..

 

[njl]

To be fair, if they have a no guns sign on the door, if you disobey, you can be taken to court and/or sued, depending on your locality. At minimum, in my mind, you lose the ability to call yourself a law abiding citizen.

I can't say I noticed any "no guns" signs, but I didn't really look for them. Like I said, I assumed the bag check was just to make sure we weren't trying to save money by skipping the $5 drinks and $5 popcorn.

In my state, no-guns signs on private property have no force. If I conceal badly enough that it's noticed, the worst they can do is ask me to leave. At that point, if I refuse, it's trespassing and the police can get involved. My attitude is, if some [copycat] nutjob wants to shoot up the theater, the theater should shoot back.

 

[old lady new shooter]

It still amazes me (as a good thing) that besides Oklahoma City, you still have to go back to the 1910-1927 for numbers 2-4 (Bath Michigan, the Anarchist bombing of Wallstreet, and LA Times building). Even #6 is from the 19th Century (Haymarket Square). It's actually been a quiet century.

Mike

Where does the Boston Marathon bombing rank?

 

[JSH1]

Where does the Boston Marathon bombing rank?

I'm not sure. Not in the top 10.

 

[Drail]

In my opinion any business that requires me to stand in line and be searched (no matter what reason they give) should go out of business shortly and we should make sure they know why. Incredibly though most people will actually go along with it just like they do at the airport. We have become a nation of sheep.

 

[Stony]

Just saw a report on a Dallas news channel last night about the Regal theaters and them starting to search bags. They interviewed some guy in the street out front of the theater that was all in favor of it as a means to protect people.
Just how far are people willing to go, and how much of our rights are we willing to give up so easily?
No way am I going to submit to a search to enter a theater. This is an invasion of our privacy...plain and simple.
One time I was entering a gun show and one of the guys asked too look in the bag I was carrying to make sure I wasn't bringing in a gun that hadn't been checked by their people ( I often carry my muzzleloading possibles bag to carry small items in). I declined and he didn't press the subject...but we have to draw the line somewhere.

 

[justice06rr]

In my opinion any business that requires me to stand in line and be searched (no matter what reason they give) should go out of business shortly and we should make sure they know why. Incredibly though most people will actually go along with it just like they do at the airport. We have become a nation of sheep.

Unfortunately our country has sacrificed freedom (2A) for safety and security. Airports and other large companies like Disney all do bag checks, and they are not going out of business anytime soon. Whether the policy carries the weight of the law or not (as they do in airports and other gov't facilities), its also up to you to patronize or not.

Although I like watching movies in the theathers, they do have become quite an expensive outing. These new security policies will likely hinder their patronage.

 

[pockets]

I am not going to check the only Regal Cinema in my city. I don't normally go to that crappy part of town and I am not about to start now.
At that Regal location, I would be far more concerned about safety while outside the theater, than inside it.

As for our country? The appearance of safety is not the same thing as safety.
The USA has become really good at substituting appearance for reality.
I'm honestly glad I won't be around many more years. This land is getting very weird.

 

[Sam1911]

At that Regal location, I would be far more concerned about safety while outside the theater, than inside it.

And that's honestly the FAR, far, FAR more likely avenue of danger at all times. Theater shootings are very sensational, but extremely rare. Concerns about having to shoot to defend yourself in a crowded screening room are (while a useful exercise) not really the big question. (If you don't think you should shoot in a crowded room because you might hit someone else ... DON'T. Easy.)

The primary issue is the street, the parking lot, the parking deck, the alley, etc. All the places you have to pass through, twice, between the relative safety of your moving car and the relative safety of the bright lights and security cameras and crowd of the theater.

As for our country? The appearance of safety is not the same thing as safety.
The USA has become really good at substituting appearance for reality.

Humans have always given themselves whatever it was they wanted to believe that they were safe. And it works both ways. Insufficient, but good sounding public measures to protect themselves from real dangers, but very often as well, overblown measures taken to defend against sensational, but highly unlikely/rare/unusual dangers that worry people far out of proportion to real danger levels.

We like to feel comfortable. That's not usually the same thing as understanding the world as it really is.

 

[TwinReverb]

I can't say I noticed any "no guns" signs, but I didn't really look for them.

In my state, no-guns signs on private property have no force. If I conceal badly enough that it's noticed, the worst they can do is ask me to leave. At that point, if I refuse, it's trespassing and the police can get involved. My attitude is, if some [copycat] nutjob wants to shoot up the theater, the theater should shoot back.

I agree to a point. It's just my personal stance: my reputation is more important than theirs. Your state's laws are similar to mine. It's just that i prefer to try to treat others like I'd like to be treated.

Say they put in metal detectors: I'm not risking being caught off guard. I just won't support them with my money. They don't deserve my money if they do this kind of stuff.

I support gun rights AND property rights. I feel not supporting both is hypocrisy. And i refuse to frequent businesses that don't support gun rights.

As for the theater shooting back, actually responding to a shooter in that crowded area presents many problems in the first place. It would be difficult to prevent innocent bystanders from being shot. I'd still do it if i could, I'd just be very cautious about that. Much less if i hit the screen, I'm paying for it, I'd imagine.

 

[Sam1911]

As for the theater shooting back, actually responding to a shooter in that crowded area presents many problems in the first place.

As I just pointed out, that's only the least likely of the situations you might be responding to. More likely by far is being assaulted as you walk from your car to the theater, or late at night as you're leaving. Having to shoot IN the theater is pretty unlikely, but if you don't have your gun in the theater, then you don't have your gun on the walk to it or from it, either. Big deal right there.

It would be difficult to prevent innocent bystanders from being shot. I'd still do it if i could

Of course it would be a difficult thing to do, but we've talked about responding to a theater active shooter before and the real big question is, if you're seeing a room full of patrons being fired on, or you're about to be shot yourself, what is the greatest evil here? That you might wound or kill someone if you are unlucky in defending yourself? Or that you and a lot of other people are about to DIE, period?

Much of the self-defense question really comes down to this sort of math. Shooting and/or killing someone is a life-changing thing, costing the defender a very great deal in money, time, mental stress, possible conviction and loss of freedoms, and a risk of injuring some innocent party. But it is the lesser of the two evils, when compared to dying or letting your loved ones be harmed.

Same thing here. I'd far rather have the option to defend myself, if I think I MUST and I think I CAN, than to be gunned down in a theater, secure in the knowledge that at least I can't hurt anybody because I left my gun outside.

Much less if i hit the screen, I'm paying for it, I'd imagine.

Seriously? You're talking about drawing a weapon because someone is actively trying to KILL the patrons, including you, and you're worried about the value of the movie screen? You'll pay your lawyer more than that regardless.

 

[GAF]

I always buy popcorn at any movie I go to. I always bring my own water. When I am challenged about the bottle of water I say it is for medications I might have to take during the movie. They give me no hassle after that.

 

[Deanimator]

One time I walk into a grocery store and there's a guy with a backpack and I swear he's an Arab. That guy could have a bomb in his bag and no one would know.

He could just as likely have been wearing an explosive vest or belt under his clothing.

Are we going to strip search all movie goers to prevent that?