What level of security would you accept?

[PillingerClan]

Following awful events in Manchester I know everyone is in shock.

My knee-jerk reaction is that I can not take the kids to Glastonbury this year - do I have a right to take a gamble with their lives? Clearly that is a decision that only I can make but my question is what level of security would you accept?

We already have to queue for hours to get through the ticket checking process and there are a few bag checks but not many. Would you be willing to wait longer so that every bag can be checked/ scanned?

and - would that be enough anyway - I am sure a device could be put together from a variety of components all carried to the festival by different people.

What can realistically be done to avoid such terrible events?

 

[Gnomicide]

2 minutes ago, PillingerClan said:

What can realistically be done to avoid such terrible events?

 

Nothing. Could happen any place, any time. Just got to get on with your life.

[babyblade41]

I'm not sure there is much we can do, and I would feel the same as you re: children.

 

When my girls have gone in previous years it was always a constant worry but as a parent it's what we do.

 

To take younger children then only the parents can make that call. if it were me and I was taking my children it would be a no go, I myself would not stop as we must show these scum that you won't defeat us, but a child can't make that choice Would be forever on edge of my surroundings so close to such an atrocity.

 

I'm sure others view points differ 

[Jon F]

Whilst never say never, I would imagine inside the festival is relatively safe, with a combination of the difficulties getting tickets and the super wall. 

[Wilfko]

Agree with Gnomicide.. It's almost impossible to properly police at the venues.. counter terrorism efforts are the only real defence we have.

I have no children, but I will never let atrocities like this have any effect on wether or not I go to a gig or a rugby match or anything.. I suppose it's far more likely I'll be killed in a road traffic accident on the way to the venue than being victim of a terrorist incident.

I think people get on with their lives for the most part, and that's not being disrespectful to the innocent victims, it's our enthusiasm for life and what it has to offer that these guys despise so much, that's why they turn to religion to justify their bullshit agenda.

Edited May 23, 2017 by Wilfko

[giantkatestacks]

I would rather take them to Glastonbury than into Central London but unfortunately we live in London. You can't lessen the threat individually. We let our children do things everyday that are statistically much more risky - putting them in the car and driving down the motorway for instance. 

[devonhammer]

No level of security can guarantee safety.

If an attack is protected against then an attack will come in a different way. No more planes, now we have lorries attacking us. Was the attacker at the MEN arena even past security? If Glastonbury had airport security then they could attack the queue outside.

The only thing we can do is avoid hate and retaliation. Don't stop doing what you do; don't be fearful; don't hate people; don't support revenge.

This is an ideaology fed by conflict. Peace will starve it and ultimately destroy it more effectively than any war.

 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

As has been stated, it can happen at any place at any time. I'd say Glastonbury has to be one of the safest places with regards to risks of terrorism. Getting a ticket is a massive hassle, planning an attack would be really difficult as it's not a physical venue as such, any attackers would be more or less going in blind. I'm sure they'd much rather concentrate their efforts on an easier target. Nowhere is immune of course, but you are not gambling with your kids lives by taking them to Glastonbury.

[Dave_c]

You take more risk putting your kids in the car everyday than taking them to Glastonbury. I don't think about it at all and will keep going to events as it is much much less risk than many other things we do daily without a care in the world.

[Quark]

From the view of one without kids, and who has never been directly affected by anything like this...

Life has to continue.  There are so many other risks in life, but these attacks are designed to have exactly this effect: to make us question the safety of carrying on with our everyday lives. Doing so is, to me, to concede defeat.

A group of us went to the rugby in Paris last year not long after the Bataclan attack.  Of course the thought crossed my mind that it might be a risk, but damned if I was going to let that decide my actions. So I'll go to Glastonbury, I'll continue to go to gigs, and I'll continue to live my bloody life.

In regards to your kids and their safety, the only way I could begin to look at it is how many other things do you / they do that carry a proportionally equal or greater risk to terror attacks, and whether you'd be applying an equal policy to those.  It's a cold way of boiling it down to percentages and statistics, but if you want to avoid terror winning then it's a place to start.

Whatever you decide to do to protect your kids is the right thing.

[arcade fireman]

Not much more. The whole point of terrorism is to disrupt our way of life. This guy exploded a bomb in the foyer - he probably didn't fancy his chances of getting through into the main event without being seen. The only real equivalent of doing a similar thing at Glasto would be exploding something in one of those packed queues - in which case beefed up security checks may be counter productive if they lead to bigger queues.

Its worth crunching the numbers too. If you were unlucky enough to have been to the one gig in the storied and diverse history of Manchester's live music scene to have been bombed that's one thing. Even then, the fatalities stand at 1 in every 1,000 people who attended. The injuries stand at 1 in every 300 or so. We can't disrupt so much of what we do on those numbers. Of course whatever someone chooses to do with their own kids has to be respected - these decisions are personal more than anything. 

[Nobody Interesting]

10 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Nothing. Could happen any place, any time. Just got to get on with your life.

This in a nut shell.

 

If additional security measures were added to every gate and every bag searched then the queues would be longer - lots of people stuck in one place is the worst thing you could do when trying to be secure.

[squirrelarmy]

I've done a bit of work in security systems and know some of the procedures that could be put in place. The danger at Glastonbury is minimal. It's not an area open to the general public, it has a well publicised and secure fence designed to keep people out.

The danger of someone getting a device in although possible is also unlikely especially now, the risk of detection smuggling a device in is very high even though many of us have got through the barriers without being searched, the fact that there is regular searching means it wouldn't be worth the risk for a terrorist.

Vehicles are very restricted on site, I believe someone already mentioned they all have keycode access. All the vendors will be vetted before being allowed entry, most of them are repeat suppliers. 

The biggest danger to Glastonbury festival goers would be at the bus/train stations in cities across the UK where there may be a large gathering of people but this risk is the same level as the day to day risk in the UK.

As for us festival goers, we will probably see an increased police presence at the major train/bus stations plus possibly more stringent bag checks on the way in. 

 

[ShakeyCrash]

9 minutes ago, PillingerClan said:

Following awful events in Manchester I know everyone is in shock.

My knee-jerk reaction is that I can not take the kids to Glastonbury this year - do I have a right to take a gamble with their lives? Clearly that is a decision that only I can make but my question is what level of security would you accept?

We already have to queue for hours to get through the ticket checking process and there are a few bag checks but not many. Would you be willing to wait longer so that every bag can be checked/ scanned?

and - would that be enough anyway - I am sure a device could be put together from a variety of components all carried to the festival by different people.

What can realistically be done to avoid such terrible events?

 

The drive down is the most dangerous part; the reality is that living life is a risk but what are the other options.

Being a parent your instinct is to protect; I get that but life is for living and not to be afraid. Let's not project the fears we have onto our children. Not an act of defiance; just one to protect the innocence of our babies.

 

 

[The_Amazing_Oblong]

Well, statistically speaking it is more likely that one of your kids is killed by a cow from the farm than a terrorist. Much, much more likely to be killed crossing the road. 

I think you need to think about that and put it in perspective. If you are not prepared to take your kids to Glastonbury in case of a terrorist attack then you really should be against the gamble you take with their lives every single time you let them leave your house.

[Trout Mask Replica]

2 minutes ago, Jon F said:

Whilst never say never, I would imagine inside the festival is relatively safe, with a combination of the difficulties getting tickets and the super wall. 

Yep, T day would be the first non physical hurdle they'd need to contend with. Then the traffic and getting there. Then conditions on the ground and then a couple of hundred thousand people who simply won't stand for that shit. 

A few years ago a couple of guys started a scrap in the middle of the Pyramid field during Bruce Springsteen, they were right next to us and it got a but hairy, the girls got scared and my mate and I pulled them apart. All in that moment whatever drink or substance they'd taken wore off as an enormous crowd booed them and they were sent their separate ways. 

Obviously that doesn't apply to the same kind of troublemakers as terrorists but it was nice to know thousands had our back as we split them up. 

[billum]

True, the terrorists would love to attack a big high profile event with a large concentration of people all in one place, with the added bonus of a festival being a major example of 'runaway Western hedonism', but the evidence of previous attacks shows that they choose easy and soft targets that are open to the general public, so they may well choose a festival, but harsh as it sounds, it's probably not going to be Glastonbury where it's incredibly difficult to get on site.

Even if there were to be danger at Glastonbury, it's the size of a small town, so at any moment you are more than likely to be in a different part of the site to any incident

[Gooner4900]

as you have all stated its difficult to get tickets etc - but that doesn't stop someone joining the line. That is the only way theoretically. so in my opinion there isn't much to be afraid of and we shouldn't be. we can only carry on. in regards to kids. i don't have kids myself but its an amazing place to be and it could be a once in a lifetime opportunity for them.

[sisco]

Sadly these things happen and continue to do so.  If you stop going to places like Glastonbury then I suppose best stop going on Holidays abroad, public transport, any sort of event, theme parks, walking down the street, the underground, into big city's etc...... It can happen anywhere!! 

Easy to say but honestly, the best way is to be aware, be vigilant but don't let it take over your life. 

[GMF]

I was at Werchter last summer and they had full airport style security at the entrance with full scanner and xray machines for all bags. However as someone has highlighted this meant that you had something like 2000 people lining up to go through security with all the risk of a bomb attack or a truck being driven at the queue. Last nights incident happened in an area outwith the venues security checks. 

[PillingerClan]

Some very sensible and considered words - you are all right!

I think I am assured by the suggestion that, although Glastonbury is a high profile event, it would be very difficult to plan an attack.

Good point about the queues too.

Thanks for your reassurance. x

[ooh-ahh]

18 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Nothing. Could happen any place, any time. Just got to get on with your life.

+1

[shoptildrop]

20 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

Nothing. Could happen any place, any time. Just got to get on with your life.

^^^^ this

[mjsell]

You are more likely to be caught up in something on the journey to the festival than at the festival itself. Like has been said, the difficulty in organising such an attack would be astronomical. This isnt me saying it would never happen (obviously I hope it wont), but when you compare the alternatives like the atrocity of last night, then I see far more events/locations with a greater threat level than at Glastonbury.

I'm still surprised there havent been more attacks on things like sporting events (football matches being the main one I think about). But at the end of the day we are always reliant on the quality of the security services, who I'm sure do so much more than we are all aware of to limit the the number of horrors like yesterday.

 

[henry bear]

16 minutes ago, PillingerClan said:

We already have to queue for hours to get through the ticket checking process and there are a few bag checks but not many. Would you be willing to wait longer so that every bag can be checked/ scanned?

and - would that be enough anyway - I am sure a device could be put together from a variety of components all carried to the festival by different people.

I'd imagine inside Glastonbury Festival would be one of the safer places. They tend to go for easy targets in public places rather than events with convoluted ticketing processes. 

I'm taking my son this year and the tragic events of last night haven't made me question this one bit. These twats want us to be terrified, don't give in to them.