Jump to content
IGNORED

Hightened Security at AG


RedLionLad
 Share

Recommended Posts

As a sidenote on this , one of the Stewards out the back of the KFC entrance was a proper jobsworth.

Upon arrival at about 2.15 when the queue was crazy long i asked if I could go to the front with my Grandad who wouldn't have made it to the back of the queue let alone stood in it!

His exact response was 'well that's unfortunate, tough luck'... I then said are we supposed to sit in the car until 3pm and he simply replied 'that's not my problem'.

Fortunately another steward heard this exchange and ushered us straight through. No issue with extra security but needs to be communicated (although I do get that somewhat lessens the impact) and some common sense.

Also, I get the Stewards have it tough, but don't be a dick!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Aipearcey said:

Bit of a weird thought, but want if they they scanned someone and they genuinely think they have an explosive device on them.... what then? Surely the person would then let it off there where they are. Yes it’s better than going off in a stadium where even more people would be affected but it’s hardly a preventative measure.

Well as you’ve just said it’s a reduction/preventative on what they’d hoped to do. The impact would potentially be less eg the Liverpool attack as terrible as it was, was clearly not the damage the attacker intended.

Also it may be a deterrent not to try? The attacker may get nervous and change plans?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Roe said:

Massive waste of time basically.

I understand the idea behind security but this stops absolutely nothing and is just a pain in the ass

The problem is, most people have this attitude the 99% of the time when nothing happens. Massive inconvenience, waste of time, nothing achieved by it (in part because of the half arsed enforcement of the checks)

However when the worst does happen, many are quick to ask why wasn’t more done to stop it. Eg the Manchester bombing

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 12:01, MarcusX said:

The problem is, most people have this attitude the 99% of the time when nothing happens. Massive inconvenience, waste of time, nothing achieved by it (in part because of the half arsed enforcement of the checks)

However when the worst does happen, many are quick to ask why wasn’t more done to stop it. Eg the Manchester bombing

Only two things I would raise, they only 'scanned' by arms and upper body - all body or nothing in my eyes

The club should have made us more aware of the checks being implemented as it created bottle necks getting into the ground at kick off

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, phantom said:

Only two things I would raise, they only 'scanned' by arms and upper body - all body or nothing in my eyes

The club should have made us more aware of the checks being implemented as it created bottle necks getting into the ground at kick off

They did mention it in the Gate Guide - albeit in a way that would be very easily missed: "Supporters are advised to arrive at the ground early as extra security checks will be in place for this weekend's fixture."

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always think it's a bit knee-jerk and daft when these things are done "in response" to some unconnected event.

It's looking increasingly likely that the Liverpool bomber was just a lone nutter with a death wish who wanted to take others out because he was going to be deported to a country he had never actually lived in.  He's dead, so how does that event pose a threat to crowds in AG?

Obviously, there may be other threats out there, but they've been there for years. Either boost security all the time or leave things as they were.

It reminds me of when I used to work at Television Centre. There'd been a Real IRA car-bomb outside once and for the next month, as you drove into the car-park you had to have your boot search and your pass scanned by a beefed up security team ..., then things went back to normal.  Clearly the thinking is that terrorists are only going to attack in the immediate aftermath of one failed attack and after a few weeks they lose interest in the "armed struggle" and just give up. 

:dunno:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We walk through the gate at the Raynes Road entrance and there was no security measures there at all.

You can near enough see that entrance from the main KFC one so a completely pointless exercise as anyone who wanted entry without being checked could have just seen that, walked round the block and gone in that way.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

They did mention it in the Gate Guide - albeit in a way that would be very easily missed: "Supporters are advised to arrive at the ground early as extra security checks will be in place for this weekend's fixture."

Thank you, I will admit to not reading that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 07:25, Port Said Red said:

I had my phone, keys and inhaler in my pockets and nothing happened. It made me wonder if they were scanning for chemicals rather than metal? Might explain the opal fruits that @The 51 user mentioned. :)

As someone who lived through the 70s it often feels strange. The only security I remember then was people looking at my mum "a bit funny" because of her Irish accent.

I have an Irish - sounding surname and was forever having my luggage `randomly checked` at airports back then. It didn`t bother me as they often upgraded us on the flight after they didn`t find anything untoward.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 12:01, MarcusX said:

The problem is, most people have this attitude the 99% of the time when nothing happens. Massive inconvenience, waste of time, nothing achieved by it (in part because of the half arsed enforcement of the checks)

However when the worst does happen, many are quick to ask why wasn’t more done to stop it. Eg the Manchester bombing

Any suicide bomber would have killed more people stood outside in the queue than he would have inside the stadium.…

Also, anyone wanting to smuggle something into the stadium could have placed it somewhere inside the search area well before the stewards arrived and picked it up AFTER being searched/scanned.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 12:01, MarcusX said:

The problem is, most people have this attitude the 99% of the time when nothing happens. Massive inconvenience, waste of time, nothing achieved by it (in part because of the half arsed enforcement of the checks)

However when the worst does happen, many are quick to ask why wasn’t more done to stop it. Eg the Manchester bombing

 

Surely the repeated complaint is that it wasn't done correctly rather than that it happened.

This is a perfect example of "do it properly or not at all".

If you don't do it properly then you are inconveniencing lots of people without actually achieving the aim of preventing weapons or bombs being brought in.

Which is coming close to a definition of pointlessness.

When I am sometimes randomly selected for searches at airports, and there is obviously nothing to find, I actually thank the staff for being so thorough as I want to have a safe flight.

These are clothes on searches before anyone leaps in with a witticism.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I have an Irish - sounding surname and was forever having my luggage `randomly checked` at airports back then. It didn`t bother me as they often upgraded us on the flight after they didn`t find anything untoward.

I would have thought it's more French than Irish. But what do I know? I cant tell Male from female these days, dont even ask what problems that causes.

Kissing French Kiss GIF by Capital Pride | Have Pride 365!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, phantom said:

Only two things I would raise, they only 'scanned' by arms and upper body - all body or nothing in my eyes

The club should have made us more aware of the checks being implemented as it created bottle necks getting into the ground at kick off

Fair point, if it's done it needs to be done "properly" or not at all. I understand the complaints that it's a "tick box" exercise

9 hours ago, RedLionLad said:

Any suicide bomber would have killed more people stood outside in the queue than he would have inside the stadium.…

Also, anyone wanting to smuggle something into the stadium could have placed it somewhere inside the search area well before the stewards arrived and picked it up AFTER being searched/scanned.

 

That's debatable but not necessarily wrong. The "target" might not be total body count but a particular individual e.g. a club official, player or team

Second statement also isn't wrong, fair point.

8 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Surely the repeated complaint is that it wasn't done correctly rather than that it happened.

This is a perfect example of "do it properly or not at all".

If you don't do it properly then you are inconveniencing lots of people without actually achieving the aim of preventing weapons or bombs being brought in.

Which is coming close to a definition of pointlessness.

When I am sometimes randomly selected for searches at airports, and there is obviously nothing to find, I actually thank the staff for being so thorough as I want to have a safe flight.

These are clothes on searches before anyone leaps in with a witticism.

Again, as above I agree and it's a fair point. For some just having the risk of being checked could cause someone to back out, especially a lone wolf / opportunist type rather than a thoroughly planned attack.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't there Saturday, but seeing a few posts the obvious and continued problem stands out, communication .
It may be a pain, and you won't stop queues backing up. But just tell everyone in advance, give people a chance to allow a few more minutes. It's the most simple, obvious thing to do. This is supposed to be a professional organisation, imagine theatre or arenas keeping it a secret that it could take longer to get in, it won't happen. They would have known days before and a simple message could have been spread, it wouldn't stop all the problems, but it might have got a few to arrive early, and more importantly, you would know why things were backing up.

How many times have "we" complained about communication from the Club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

I always think it's a bit knee-jerk and daft when these things are done "in response" to some unconnected event.

It's looking increasingly likely that the Liverpool bomber was just a lone nutter with a death wish who wanted to take others out because he was going to be deported to a country he had never actually lived in.  He's dead, so how does that event pose a threat to crowds in AG?

Obviously, there may be other threats out there, but they've been there for years. Either boost security all the time or leave things as they were.

It reminds me of when I used to work at Television Centre. There'd been a Real IRA car-bomb outside once and for the next month, as you drove into the car-park you had to have your boot search and your pass scanned by a beefed up security team ..., then things went back to normal.  Clearly the thinking is that terrorists are only going to attack in the immediate aftermath of one failed attack and after a few weeks they lose interest in the "armed struggle" and just give up. 

:dunno:

Priti Patel is home secretary with an agenda of self-promotion using fear of such attacks. She then plays the 'strong woman' role for the consumption of clueless Daily Mail and Daily Express readers.

Part of this 'strategy' is increasing security levels when given any excuse so that our day to day lives are affected. This heightens the fear levels and allows her through the media to manage  consent for whatever she wanted to do in the first place which rarely has anything to do with our actual security and well being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 12:01, MarcusX said:

 

However when the worst does happen, many are quick to ask why wasn’t more done to stop it. Eg the Manchester bombing

Manchester bomber entered the arena as the concert was finishing so, probably walked in unchallenged. If the same were to happen at Ashton Gate or any other football stadium after the final whistle once again the nutter could walk in towards the exiting mass unchallenged. Scary thought :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Bard said:

Priti Patel is home secretary with an agenda of self-promotion using fear of such attacks. She then plays the 'strong woman' role for the consumption of clueless Daily Mail and Daily Express readers.

Part of this 'strategy' is increasing security levels when given any excuse so that our day to day lives are affected. This heightens the fear levels and allows her through the media to manage  consent for whatever she wanted to do in the first place which rarely has anything to do with our actual security and well being.

 

Yup, there's something in that. 

In the last 15 years, 2000% more Britons died from falling from horses (or being kicked by them) than have died in terrorism attacks. Yet the fear of such incidents is used to justify a sometimes insidious power grab. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 10:26, Olé said:

Wouldn’t it have been quicker to have people hold out their season cards and wave them through and only scan the rest? Because if you're a terrorist you're not going to have held a season ticket to watch football at Ashton Gate for any length of time or you'd have blown yourself up months ago.

We used to have a similar conversation in the canteen when I was a bus driver. If someone looked shifty and bought a return or dayrider then, likely they were no worries.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/11/2021 at 10:26, Olé said:

Wouldn’t it have been quicker to have people hold out their season cards and wave them through and only scan the rest? Because if you're a terrorist you're not going to have held a season ticket to watch football at Ashton Gate for any length of time or you'd have blown yourself up months ago.

Genius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/11/2021 at 09:56, The Bard said:

Priti Patel is home secretary with an agenda of self-promotion using fear of such attacks. She then plays the 'strong woman' role for the consumption of clueless Daily Mail and Daily Express readers.

Part of this 'strategy' is increasing security levels when given any excuse so that our day to day lives are affected. This heightens the fear levels and allows her through the media to manage  consent for whatever she wanted to do in the first place which rarely has anything to do with our actual security and well being.

Patel's a prat, much like every Home Sec I worked under, but your post is about as misguided and ill-judged as one might imagine.

In the last 5 years OSCT prevented 33 'serious incidents' taking place on UK soil ('serious' denotes that 10 or more persons would have died.) Most incidents you'll never have heard of as the brave folks who risk their own necks to prevent them often have to 'disrupt' rather than 'take down' so as to keep information flows open.

At present in the UK there are nearly 32k 'Subjects of Operational Interest' (SOIs) - folks mostly free to roam unrestricted who present a danger to the public, many pose severe danger to public safety. It takes a minimum 9 person team to surveille an individual. For that reason only the top 1,800 are daily monitored, the rest are risk profiled and go into the ether. Richard Reid, Kahlid Masood and The Abedi brothers all fell into that latter category. If you've ever listened to the bloke with overall responsibility with making that risk call you'll hold nothing but utter admiration for him in explaining how he lives with knowing he got it wrong in those cases.

The fact we are at war and folks like you can post such drivel happens only because of the brilliant and brave work undertaken by thousands to keep us safe. Extraordinary work using cutting-edge digital innovation. That occurs irrespective of the party in power. That you don't understand what National Security levels are there for, who dictates and publishes them and what 'triggers' those levels enable only serves to emphasise your ignorance in such matters.

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...