Many struggling cinemas depend on sales of pricey food and drink as ticket revenue mainly goes to film studios. But does banning outside supplies really add up, asks Stuart Heritage
They were responding to a call, which is what they are supposed to do.
What they should do now is have a serious conversation with the cinema chain about wasting police time and fine them. This is not a criminal issue, purely civil.
But we want the police to respond to calls that they receive.
But why 4? Why does the police feel the need to show up in force for two mothers and their gaggle of children? There is "responding" to a call and then there this, sending an implied message of "we are authorized to ruin your life in front of children, so you know you have to cooperate."
Agree. The police can't evaluate a call out properly until they're actually there.
I assume that the cinema called them with a slightly exaggerated description of the situation. All it takes is calling the (women) "belligerent" or similar to imply violence. Hence four officers.
My actual beef is that this business is socialising the cost of enforcing their terms of service by calling the police rather than paying for their own security.
The Guardian article seems to be a bit light on details. It seems they were asked to remove the food or leave and get a refund but refused before getting into a "heated exchange" with staff, then the police were called. Apparently the brought in "a lot of outside food", “Beverages, snacks, hot food, you name it.”
I haven't been to the cinemas for a long time, sneaking in lollies and stuff was a given, but I think it's understandable not to bring in hot foods and meals. Considering they've always had rules about no outside food, getting caught means either getting rid of your food or leaving. I wouldn't verbally abuse staff if I'm the one breaking their rules.