Aurora shootings: Survivors sue owners over security

[Deadvolcanoes]

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything, especially in America. It however doesn't mean that they ever had a chance of winning. I would imagine the case being thrown very fast but I don't really know the procedure in the US well enough to make an educated comment.

I would be very surprised if this case was thrown out. They have a completely legitimate complaint that should be argued in front of a jury if the movie theater doesn't settle out of court.

I mean if you can spill a hot cup of coffee on yourself and win millions, this should be an open and shut case.

[Verain]

I'm of mixed feelings.


The cinema prevented anyone in that theater except the bad guys from being armed, but had no security to keep their disarmed customers safe. To a small degree they share in the blame. For instance, it would not have taken an armed strike force to be aware that the door was propped open, nor would it have been out of line for them to have some knowledge of their own perimeter.

That being said, this was a unique tragedy that would have most likely have gone down in a similar fashion regardless, and this lawsuit is ultimately a cash grab- the theater chain has some money, so they'll try to shake them and see what comes out. Not impressed.

[Deleted]

Yeah, kill those cinema owners!
They allowed people to buy and carry guns!
/sarcasm off

[Themius]

Are you seriously trying to defend the lawsuit?
If you read my earlier post, I did state that the cinema maybe should offer some money to help with the medical bills, but trying in any way to put some onus of blame on them is moronic to say the least. But the point remains the cinema is in no way at fault for this, how anyone can even think they are needs to have a serious think about things and not just try and blame someone else. It's not the cinema's fault if people were inadequately insured, it's the individuals. I am not saying that medical insurance is a good thing, to my mind, it should all be free, but attempting to blame someone else for not having adequate coverage for yourself is laughable. The onus is on the person to provide their own cover, not someone else to do it for them. Its a horrific tragedy, and one I feel heartfelt and sorry for, but doesn't change the outcome. Maybe the cinema should help or pay for them, but they are in no way obligated to do so.
So, what, they have security guards checking the doors? And? The guy might have just shot them and moved in anyways, or maybe gone through the front and shot his way in. You cannot argue that "What if" argument as a defence. He went in with the intention to hurt people, and kill. Seriously, I doubt you have actually thought through what you are saying. "Security" would have done literally fuck all, but as usual with these boards, it doesn't stop the silly people attempting to justify every silly thing that goes on.

Please tell me why the cinema would give them money and why you think they should if you think they aren't responsible in any sense.

The reason people don't have medical insurance is because it's fucking expensive.

I know a girl, she makes just above minimum wage. She has three kids, they gave her medicaid just for her kids. She has no health coverage and if she gets health coverage her check will be so little she won't be able to buy food, or gas to get to work.

People have no idea what it's like for Americans who are tight on money, especially those who earn so little they can't afford insurance and can't get medicaid. Medicaid isn't for the poor, it's hard for the poor to even get it.

It's our governments fault for allowing medicine to become purely a capitalistic operation that bleeds dry the lower and lower-middle class.

---------- Post added 2012-09-23 at 08:10 AM ----------

Yeah, kill those cinema owners!
They allowed people to buy and carry guns!
/sarcasm off

By them not thoroughly checking doors they allowed a gun man to get inside through an exit. You know... they should have been checking simply for people breaking in to watch the movie, considering it was the premier or batman for goodness sakes.

[Palmatum]

Sorry but this is absurd. Unless cinemas become like airports, it won't make a difference.

TSA - Coming to a cinema near you...

[Deleted]

By the logic of people in this thread every public space (including those privately owned) should have armed security to protect the people there from random lunatics. I mean I understand that you already have things such as "high school police" or "campus police" and so on but if this case was won (incl. appeals) then it would literally set a precedent for that because who would want to pay milions in court, it's probably better to pay hourly wage to a security guard. Going to a steak house? Guard with M4. Going to a public library? Bam, guard with an AK...

Man I really wouldn't want to live in your "land of free".

[Themius]

By the logic of people in this thread every public space (including those privately owned) should have armed security to protect the people there from random lunatics. I mean I understand that you already have things such as "high school police" or "campus police" and so on but if this case was won (incl. appeals) then it would literally set a precedent for that because who would want to pay milions in court, it's probably better to pay hourly wage to a security guard. Going to a steak house? Guard with M4. Going to a public library? Bam, guard with an AK...

Man I really wouldn't want to live in your "land of free".

By the logic of people like you in this thread.

Spaces such as malls, cinemas, enclosed parks, museums, have no responsibility to have any degree of security.

[Kalis]

It's a cinema and their security policy should only go as far as to satisfy the health and safety of their patrons, according to the relevant laws. They couldn't be reasonably expected to provide military base level security so that people can go and watch a fucking film.

[Deleted]

2013 Public win landmark case for security improvements at all cinemas and theatres
2014 Riots as public unrest over $100 movie tickets and pat downs whenever you arrive or return to the auditorium after visiting the toilet
2015 Cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria

Nah, this sounds very much like someone just wants to make a few bucks, possibly not the actual victims, but someone unaffected who has convinced someone who was there to do this.

[Deadvolcanoes]

By the logic of people in this thread every public space (including those privately owned) should have armed security to protect the people there from random lunatics. I mean I understand that you already have things such as "high school police" or "campus police" and so on but if this case was won (incl. appeals) then it would literally set a precedent for that because who would want to pay milions in court, it's probably better to pay hourly wage to a security guard. Going to a steak house? Guard with M4. Going to a public library? Bam, guard with an AK...

Man I really wouldn't want to live in your "land of free".

Don't be absurd, no one is suggesting such a thing.

However, we must be cognizant of the fact that places where large crowds gather have become soft targets for this type of violence. We also must hold private establishments responsible for the security and safety of their patrons.

All you would need for a theater to avoid something like this is an upgraded security system. Install cameras outside , motion sensors, breach contacts on the exit door. Have a security officer monitor these systems.

[Themius]

It's a cinema and their security policy should only go as far as to satisfy the health and safety of their patrons, according to the relevant laws. They couldn't be reasonably expected to provide military base level security so that people can go and watch a fucking film.

They should have checked the doors for people slipping in, they would have seen it was open and closed it.

[Deleted]

Don't be absurd, no one is suggesting such a thing.

However, we must be cognizant of the fact that places where large crowds gather have become soft targets for this type of violence. We also must hold private establishments responsible for the security and safety of their patrons.

All you would need for a theater to avoid something like this is an upgraded security system. Install cameras outside , motion sensors, breach contacts on the exit door. Have a security officer monitor these systems.

companies are struggling is it is do you really think they could afford it? or would you be happy paying more?

[Kalis]

By the logic of people like you in this thread.

Spaces such as malls, cinemas, enclosed parks, museums, have no responsibility to have any degree of security.

Are the emergency exits in working order? Are procedures in place to deal with an emergency, such as staff training and knowing who to call? Are the premises free from artifacts that could impede any exit? These are the levels of security that they have responsibility for, not terrorism risks.

---------- Post added 2012-09-23 at 03:37 PM ----------

They should have checked the doors for people slipping in, they would have seen it was open and closed it.

There probably is someone responsible for checking that doors are closed, mainly to stop people getting in without paying, but to expect them to be under constant surveillance is ridiculous.

[muto]

Sounds like Angst to me, could have happened anywhere.

[levandor]

Fascinating where people see the Problem...

wouldnt one think that the fact, that someone bought MILITARY grade weapons, AND was able to transport them throught town UNDETECTED is a way bigger problem?

The *whole* drama would have been stoped dead in his tracks allready if someone has asked: What do you need an assault riffle for?

But yeah i know, that would be totaly not feasible, because, how would you protect your fammily? And your property?

Well, oh wait a second!

I have yet to read somwhere: man saved dozens of lifes because he used his Trusted Assault riffle to stop a terrorist from bombing "someplace"
all you read about is how someone went nuts with his (most likely legaly) owned weapons and started to murder people.

If i would be those guys, i would team up with the Cinema and sue the IRA, for trying to keep laws alive which make it possible that such disasters happen,
and next i would sue the goverment for allowing that kind of arms beeing in private hands.

[Deadvolcanoes]

companies are struggling is it is do you really think they could afford it? or would you be happy paying more?

A comprehensive system like that is relatively cheap, maybe $5,000 plus security officer wage. I used to monitor electric substations with those exact systems in place. They are highly efficient. We could also remotely close doors.

I would gladly pay an extra 50 cents for the peace of mind. I don't go to the movies often so I might not be the best person to ask.

[Kalis]

A comprehensive system like that is relatively cheap, maybe $5,000 plus security officer wage. I used to monitor electric substations with those exact systems in place. They are highly efficient. We could also remotely close doors.

I would gladly pay an extra 50 cents for the peace of mind. I don't go to the movies often so I might not be the best person to ask.

The cost of the system is irrelevant, as there is no reasonable expectation for a cinema to have such a system other than to stop people from sneaking in without paying, which is not a security issue.

[FathomFear]

I think it might be the victims looking for someone to *blame* or find a reason it was allowed to happen.

It's probably not even that. It's probably a case of money-hungry lawyers convincing them to take advantage. Because realistically, had you asked any of them prior to the incident, I doubt any of them would expected airport-style security at a movie theatre. And realistically that's the only thing that could have probably prevented it.

[draykorinee]

I hope they dont get a penny, what a weird thing to do. What next security at every KFC or every walmart. Amercian compensation culture at its worst.

[Deadvolcanoes]

The cost of the system is irrelevant, as there is no reasonable expectation for a cinema to have such a system other than to stop people from sneaking in without paying, which is not a security issue.

Are you denying that shootings and violence occur at places of mass gathering? Or are you just denying the need and efforts to stop such things from happening? Is it your belief that we shouldn't spend money to prevent these things from happening because they are incredibly rare?

Oh, and people sneaking into movie theaters without paying is a security threat. Overcrowding, Fire Marshall regulations, etc.