by SCIAG » 13 Aug 2017 15:33
by Hampshire Royal » 13 Aug 2017 15:46
by Gunny Fishcake » 13 Aug 2017 15:50
by The Royal Forester » 13 Aug 2017 16:02
by SCIAG » 13 Aug 2017 16:13
by Hampshire Royal » 13 Aug 2017 16:14
by PieEater » 13 Aug 2017 16:25
by The Royal Forester » 13 Aug 2017 16:33
SCIAG If a terrorist was going to strike a football match, they'd choose one with 60,000 people rather than 6,000. It would be in a big city. They'd probably attack outside the ground, before any searches have taken place. Probably use a combination of vehicle and personal weapons rather than an IED in a bag.
The remote threat of an attack on the inside of the stadium is not worth harassing thousands of people. I mean it's probably about a 1 in 10 million chance of an attack which kills someone happening in the next ten seasons, over which time they'll have harassed millions of innocent fans. As a liberal, I'm against that sort of thing.
Unless there's been a specific threat made against the club, then they're in the wrong.
by Snowflake Royal » 13 Aug 2017 16:41
SCIAG If a terrorist was going to strike a football match, they'd choose one with 60,000 people rather than 6,000. It would be in a big city. They'd probably attack outside the ground, before any searches have taken place. Probably use a combination of vehicle and personal weapons rather than an IED in a bag.
The remote threat of an attack on the inside of the stadium is not worth harassing thousands of people. I mean it's probably about a 1 in 10 million chance of an attack which kills someone happening in the next ten seasons, over which time they'll have harassed millions of innocent fans. As a liberal, I'm against that sort of thing.
Unless there's been a specific threat made against the club, then they're in the wrong.
by bobby1413 » 13 Aug 2017 16:52
SCIAG If a terrorist was going to strike a football match, they'd choose one with 60,000 people rather than 6,000. It would be in a big city.
by Silver Fox » 13 Aug 2017 21:13
by West Stand Man » 13 Aug 2017 21:21
SCIAG If a terrorist was going to strike a football match, they'd choose one with 60,000 people rather than 6,000. It would be in a big city. They'd probably attack outside the ground, before any searches have taken place. Probably use a combination of vehicle and personal weapons rather than an IED in a bag.
The remote threat of an attack on the inside of the stadium is not worth harassing thousands of people. I mean it's probably about a 1 in 10 million chance of an attack which kills someone happening in the next ten seasons, over which time they'll have harassed millions of innocent fans. As a liberal, I'm against that sort of thing.
Unless there's been a specific threat made against the club, then they're in the wrong.
by Nameless » 13 Aug 2017 21:35
by bobby1413 » 13 Aug 2017 22:27
Silver Fox Pretty flabbergasted by this, can the OP really not think of a reason for the security?
by Jagermesiter1871 » 13 Aug 2017 23:01
Gunny Fishcake I dont think it's we're suspected hooligans, I'm afraid it's a reflection of the sad world we live in today where terrorism is achieving what it sets out to do and that is ruin the lives of normal decent people . Where ever there are big crowds these searches happen unfortunately.
by Reading4eva » 13 Aug 2017 23:36
by Reading4eva » 13 Aug 2017 23:40
bobby1413Silver Fox Pretty flabbergasted by this, can the OP really not think of a reason for the security?
Same, I'm flabbergasted anyone who saw this did not immediately think "terrorism" and not "football violence prevention".
The measures imposed took two of us around 8 seconds to get through - literally. I walked through - same as every game actually.
by CountryRoyal » 14 Aug 2017 01:56
bobby1413SCIAG If a terrorist was going to strike a football match, they'd choose one with 60,000 people rather than 6,000. It would be in a big city.
That really is a terrible attitude to take with terrorism. There are no rules or boundaries. Having a domestic terrorism policy based on "they'd probably..." won't work. It's called target hardening and the net has to be cast as wide as possible.
Is it solely based on numbers and location?
by RoyalBlue » 14 Aug 2017 07:39
Gunny Fishcake I dont think it's we're suspected hooligans, I'm afraid it's a reflection of the sad world we live in today where terrorism is achieving what it sets out to do and that is ruin the lives of normal decent people . Where ever there are big crowds these searches happen unfortunately.
by LWJ » 14 Aug 2017 09:25
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 141 guests