A proposal to prevent tragedies like what happened in CO.

[jp11]

13. I don't exactly follow the point, as in I was not aware that the theatre advertised being

gun free and had no security/metal detectors so you believe that is the reason the nut job was able to get in. A policy of not permitting weapons which seems to be what the point was is to say that people caught with weapons, and the point is if you are caught are then removed from the premises/police are called and probably banned from returning. It serves as a deterrent for sane people that might do something stupid like bring a knife etc because they want to show it off or use it afterwards for mischief. Obviously it doesn't do much if you don't get caught till after you commit a crime/kill/hurt people but the point is to deter people from bringing those things with them. No sign or guard will stop someone bent on killing from coming to kill or someone who deems they need their knife/gun/etc and won't listen to a sign.

Beyond that I don't have a problem if a business wants to claim being 'gun free' they need to meet certain regulations like installing metal detectors and hiring armed security guards to search you, your belongings and perform enhanced pat downs ala the TSA. But 'gun free' shouldn't be a blanket that covers businesses that prohibit weapons on their premises(as most do now) and reject/eject people caught with them from their property or firing employees that violate the policy if not authorized to be armed. I find that the point of a 'gun free' business to be pretty pointless as once you leave the 'gun free' aspect is over. In this case 'big deal' the nut can't have his victims sitting in rows for him to open up on, instead he can mow them down from across the street or in the parking lot as they lineup for tickets or exit the theatre. Likewise with just about any other business with large crowds of people, or for someone as prepared/calculating as this particular guy they employ the use of explosives and other weapons to deal with very obvious armed security posted at the doors etc.

Maybe this 'gun free' zone pushes the nut to go down the block to the hospital with less security or the school, or the office building, etc so in making one place more 'secure' you could just push the crime down the street. The only way to 'fix' that is to then have everyplace employ those kinds of security measures so you are searched and patted down at every entrance you step through and the street becomes the target lane.

Employing armed guards to sit in every theatre and you'd need probably 2 in each theatre to even have a chance of covering both the entrance and exit and could easily need more for multiple entrances/exits that provide blind spots from eachother.
Plus the cost of the metal detectors and armed guards in front of the building and perhaps more guards to patrol the parking lot all adds up. It just doesn't seem likely that would happen absent rampant violence and sustained consumer demand to provide that security which I'm fairly sure isn't happening on either front. Movie theatres are 'losing' patrons while consumers remain in decades of stagnant wages and fewer jobs.

I admit not knowing where this 'gun free' idea comes from and who thinks it is such a draw to consumers or even why it might be, as I said it just pushes the nut to deal with the guards first, escalate the violence(explosives), target consumers on the way in/out when they have less 'protection' if any or just move to easier targets. I'm not saying that having some security is a bad thing but to do what you seem to be describing, guard entrances/exits and monitor theatres, parking lots, etc requires more than just a few guards. Or else any nut can come in absent their guns then walk to the exit and prop the door open during the film then come back with weapons or go next door/etc.

Personally I wouldn't be interested to go through metal detectors, get an enhanced pat down to see a movie, shop in a mall, etc. Though I fully admit to being a homebody, if I had to deal with that kind of fear mongering behavior left and right I'd go out even less. If someone wants to defeat the 'system' you put in place to fight this or that they will find a way or come up with something that completely circumvents it. Then when we are all safe hiding in our homes ordering our supplies online the nuts can look to mailing out bombs in packages or poisoning food/clothes in warehouse jobs they get.

Again not saying that means no one does anything to provide some safety/security but if the solution is more situations that treat your average consumer or citizen as the criminal through searches/id/detainment/etc *I*, at least, am not interested. I think efforts would be better used to help people with mental problems, rebuild our country to get people employed, reduce the mobility problems, as well as address other issues that affect the quality of life that people have that can push them to do horrible things. Will it stop crazy people from doing crazy things and killing/hurting other people no, but I think it would do loads more to try and avert these people's fall than to try and be there to get them as they start their violent outburst against other people.

Sorry for the long post.