What level of security would you accept?

[Avalon_Fields]

I'd be entirely happy with whatever measured security the festival deemed necessary.

I prefer to travel through airports that look to have more rigorous security checks than some where they are obviously lacking (For example Bangalore some years ago, where the British Airways special security was a stand alone scanner in the middle of the concourse, anyone could simply walk around it).

Like I presume most, I now go through up to 3 security checks to enter a premiership football stadium. Not a problem!

Reasonable security where large numbers of people congregate I welcome.

[shoptildrop]

13 minutes ago, devonhammer said:

Was the attacker at the MEN arena even past security? 

 

Nope it was outside the arena that leads to train station- no security checks at train station and even if was just would have pushed it to outer entrance and would have had same effect if gone off 

[Tartan_Glasto]

If someone is determined to hurt people, then they will hurt people. They will find a way regardless of security unfortunately. As others have said, all we can do is carry on with our lives.

[Avalon_Fields]

1 minute ago, shoptildrop said:

Nope it was outside the arena that leads to train station- no security checks at train station and even if was just would have pushed it to outer entrance and would have had same effect if gone off 

I'm not sure that's correct, the concourse would have been rammed, anything further removed from the stadium would likely be less crowded, therefore likely reduced victim numbers...as they now do at football with security courdons before you reach the entrance gates.

[chatty]

Theres no way to assure of 100% safety, not just at Glastonbury but anywhere in life. 

Sick people have be causing atrocities since pretty much the beginning of humanity. Terrorism has always and always will exist, unfortunately violence seems to be natural to humans and weve never learnt from past mistakes (as a generalisation). 

Safeguards can be put up but people will adapt to create new threats. The only thing you can do is crack on with life and dont give the scum the benefot of holding you back. You can go to extremes to protect yourself but that comes at a price of giving up your freedoms. 

You just have to be vigilante but keep on going. I understand the dilema is exemplified when kids are involved so its understandable you do more to protect them but for any adults id hold two fingers up high at the scum bags and tell them to fuck right off. 

[storm]

33 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

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

This

[mr gumby]

I'm going to Glasto this year with my wife, our son, my sister in law, and her 2 children. I have absolutely no intention of changing that plan.

I am always on the lookout for potential dangers with regards to my son, as his dad it's my job. Hot pans and electrical sockets at home, busy roads and uneven pavements when we walk into town, suspicious characters hanging around playgrounds etc. To be honest, a deliberate attack is pretty low on the list of potential hazards I'm looking out for. If I were to decide not to take him to Glastonbury, not only would it be a small victory for these cowards, it would also break his heart, as he's been looking forward to it for months. So he will still be there with us, and for as many years ahead as he wants to go (tickets allowing).

[shuttlep]

for starters if they wanted to get in they would have to get tickets, and we all know how hard that is.

 

in all seriousness as someone else said it could happen at any place people gather train stations , football matches, gigs. they would all be easier targets than Glastonbury 

 

 

[40 Days]

I think Glastonbury is less prone to attack mainly because of the registration process and, jokes aside, how difficult it is to get tickets - but the perimeter and perhaps even the main festival site has to be considered a target now.

Would fully back metal detectors, airport-style screening and bag/body searches to the campsite and main arena given events last night and what we have seen across Europe in the last few years.

[merago]

Yeah, I think the key is - Glastonbury itself is definitely not a soft target.  Any large congregation of people outside, so the queues, as mentioned, could be, but you also have to factor in all of the traffic regulations and sheer police presence leading up to and the surroundings of, the festival.  I think that might be quite off-putting too.  Hypothetically, I'm sure we can all think of ways of getting in to the festival, but in reality would you take the risk when softer targets are available (even another festival for example)?

[merago]

Just now, 40 Days said:

I think Glastonbury is less prone to attack mainly because of the registration process and, jokes aside, how difficult it is to get tickets - but the perimeter and perhaps even the main festival site has to be considered a target now.

Would fully back metal detectors, airport-style screening and bag/body searches to the campsite and main arena given events last night and what we have seen across Europe in the last few years.

I actually attended a (much smaller) festival in France last year that had metal detectors on entry, so it can be done, but I think Glasto volumes of people might just be too much.

[Cath-T]

I went to the Joshua fight recently, and believe me the security at Glastonbury is MUCH tighter than it was at Wembley that night - I was surprised how relaxed they were in all honesty based on the amount of people attending and watching it on TV around the world... I think we have less to worry about at Glastonbur than anywhere else as the logistics of it would be a nightmare - not saying it won't happen but I'm less worried going there than anywhere else.....

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, Gnomicide said:

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

Yep, I get anxious about getting cancer or dying in a car crash, which have way higher odds, so if I'm able to put that to one side and crack on with things, to be honest terrorist attack is not very hard to do likewise. 

[waterfalls212434]

this kind of thing sad to say can happen anywhere, it happened at a concert this time, next time could be at a theme park, or in a crowded city centre, you cant live in fear or these assholes win the day.

Im going to see iron maiden tommorow at the cardiff arena, id be lying if I said last night didnt shake me up about that(and no doubt maiden as well....they only played Manchester arena themselves last week) but then again anything could happen anywhere! We simply cant let these morons dictate our lives. I will be there headbanging my arse off along with thousands of other maiden fans tommorow and I just hope the band pause the set at some point so we can remember and at the same time raise a middle finger salute to any assholes like this who would kill innocent people .......especially children!

Edited May 23, 2017 by waterfalls212434

[Bradders]

The point isn't really whether someone could attack Glastonbury, but more why would they pick Glastonbury over other far easier targets.

[Gnomicide]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Yep, I get anxious about getting cancer or dying in a car crash, which have way higher odds, so if I'm able to put that to one side and crack on with things, to be honest terrorist attack is not very hard to do likewise. 

That's a really good way of putting it. I'll use that one for the Mrs, she does panic about this stuff.

[Hugh Jass]

21 minutes ago, shuttlep said:

for starters if they wanted to get in they would have to get tickets, and we all know how hard that is.

I've got a mental image now of an Isis fighter in a cave with his little balaclava on mashing F5.

[Mr.Tease]

1 minute ago, Gnomicide said:

That's a really good way of putting it. I'll use that one for the Mrs, she does panic about this stuff.

I think people don't realise their ability to sooth themselves in the face of anxiety - we manage to deal with a lot of stuff almost automatically. Some things you change your behaviour to avoid (eg quitting smoking), some are too important to give up (glastonbury!). It's fine to be scared about terrorism, but it's important not to lose sight of your ability to deal with that. 

I think it's also worth sometimes exploring what it is about a terrorist attack that particularly scares someone more than other ways of dying, and maybe what they need to feel a bit safer. 

[billum]

Just now, Mr.Tease said:

I think people don't realise their ability to sooth themselves in the face of anxiety - we manage to deal with a lot of stuff almost automatically. Some things you change your behaviour to avoid (eg quitting smoking), some are too important to give up (glastonbury!). It's fine to be scared about terrorism, but it's important not to lose sight of your ability to deal with that. 

I think it's also worth sometimes exploring what it is about a terrorist attack that particularly scares someone more than other ways of dying, and maybe what they need to feel a bit safer. 

Really good post, thank you Mr T! Feel the fear but do it anyway! 

[Davet84]

The death count cause by falling from a ladder is still higher than from a terrorist attack. If people are still using ladders then I think you can still take your kids safely to Glastonbury to put it in perspective

 

You are also 3x more likely to accidently die by being hit by an inanimate object

Just as likely to accidently drown in a lake

twice as likely to inhale your own stomach contents and drown (not sure how but that's what it says on the national statistics site)

etc etc

[Mr.Tease]

2 minutes ago, Davet84 said:

The death count cause by falling from a ladder is still higher than from a terrorist attack. If people are still using ladders then I think you can still take your kids safely to Glastonbury to put it in perspective

 

You are also 3x more likely to accidently die by being hit by an inanimate object

Just as likely to accidently drown in a lake

twice as likely to inhale your own stomach contents and drown (not sure how but that's what it says on the national statistics site)

etc etc

And I guess that's why I'm always interested in what it is about a certain thing that heightens someone's anxiety more so than things that are more likely to happen but don't seem to bother them. 

[Hugh Jass]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

And I guess that's why I'm always interested in what it is about a certain thing that heightens someone's anxiety more so than things that are more likely to happen but don't seem to bother them. 

I suspect it's because a terrorist incident is random, unprovoked and almost impossible to legislate or prepare for. It can happen anywhere at any time. You can choose to avoid ladders and lakes.

[uscore]

This discussion shows how terrorism targets itself at how bad humans are at evaluating risks.  The tiny chance of an incident at glastonbury, which others have pointed out would be very difficult to achieve with tickets, searches, etc, scares people far more than the very real every day danger of being in or near motor cars. Or even the long term risk of breathing in motor car fumes every day.

By targeting this human weakness they want to disrupt us and to scare off and make us change how we live.  If I was planning to take my kids to Glastonbury, this wouldn't stop me.  

 

 

[kalifire]

I concur. Glasto is safer than your bog standard public event, but even so, it's a gathering of people on a mass scale and that's bound to attract the attention of the kind of scum who think they're justified in this kind of action.

I feel comfortable with the security we already have. A robust ticketing process, a fortress fence, police and security all over the place, but who all hold a sensitive enough distance to allow us to get on with having a brilliant time.

[WS_Jack_III]

Does make you think about queuing, once in the festival i'd imagine we're all pretty safe. 

Got to get on with it though, that's precisely the point of these attacks, it's to get you thinking that way, fear to live your life normally.