Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

...to wonder why a small baby was at a film premiere??

126 replies

Igetknockeddownbutgetupagain · 21/07/2012 19:00

The shooting at the Batman premiere in Denver is terrible news and I have just been watching a report about it on the news (hark at me getting up on the day's events).

On screen appears a young guy, early to mid twenties, standing next to his partner, talking about how he'd been holding his baby in the cinema screen...

Why? I am dumbfounded. How did they get in, with a baby? I just can't wrap my brain around it!

OP posts:
HugeFurryWishingStool · 21/07/2012 19:02

Wow

holyshow · 21/07/2012 19:03

Yes, that's the real issue you want to be worrying about here.

workshy · 21/07/2012 19:03

YABU for focusing on the fact that a baby was at the cinema rather than some nutter has just sprayed a cinema full of people with bullets

it's irrelevant

BartletForAmerica · 21/07/2012 19:04

Small babies are very portable.

Socknickingpixie · 21/07/2012 19:04

it is perfectly legal to take a baby/ child into any film with a rating of 12A or under.
what rating is the film?

civilfawlty · 21/07/2012 19:05

Why can't a baby be taken to the movies?

DesperatelySeekingSedatives · 21/07/2012 19:05

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

allthenicknamesarebloodytaken · 21/07/2012 19:06

What they all said. Get this thread deleted, it's beyond insensitive.

But just fwiw, I have a 5 month old and apart from the noise issue could easily have taken him to the cinema up till just a few weeks ago, he'd just have slept in the sling/ bfed, no problem at all. Completely different to taking in an older baby/ toddler.

valiumredhead · 21/07/2012 19:06

Dh mentioned something along the same lines - wasn't the showing at midnight?

Sirzy · 21/07/2012 19:06

Why wouldn't they get in with a baby?

Does it really matter?

gordyslovesheep · 21/07/2012 19:07

yabu - people DIED

hellhasnofurylikeahungrywoman · 21/07/2012 19:07

Why shouldn't the baby be there? Maybe the parents couldn't get a babysitter, maybe they didn't want to, maybe mum is breastfeeding so wanted her baby with her, who knows, the whole point is anyone should be able to go to the flicks without fear of being massacred as they watch a film.

valiumredhead · 21/07/2012 19:07

Not really but then 95% of threads on MN don't matter really either.

LightbulbSoup · 21/07/2012 19:07

Don't judge the parents about this. Just don't. They and everyone else who was there must have been utterly petrified and will be coming to terms with this for a long time. They don't need this kind of crap.

gordyslovesheep · 21/07/2012 19:08

and maybe the mother was BF the baby - hence taking it with her

wherearemysocks · 21/07/2012 19:09

That did stand out to me too. Babies can go to the cinema of course, but it was a mid-night showing, there were also 'young children' there too according to the reports.

Of course the story is about the maniac who did this, but you can still notice the details

Kayano · 21/07/2012 19:09

I've wondered this too, there was a six month old and a six year old at a midnight showing

Don't see why we can't wonder about that as well as obviously being shocked at the murders. It is quite strange to take a baby to a regular showing... ESP at midnight.

I thought it was ridiculous too OP

poorbuthappy · 21/07/2012 19:09

Sorry must have missed the bit of the OP where it was said everyone deserved it etc etc.
Hang on I'll read it again.

Really? No one else thought a 3 month old baby at a midnight showing of a film is maybe unusual?

Sassybeast · 21/07/2012 19:10

Yeah that's a much more pressing issue than the deaths of 12 people and yet another mass shooting spree.

Kayano · 21/07/2012 19:11

Op isn't denying people died, nor is she saying it wasn't a tragic even, but my god people, she can notice the details... Mums net is full of random 'is that unreasonable' wonderings

Kayano · 21/07/2012 19:12

I'm totally ConfusedHmm at the random outrage on this thread

Do not get it at all

Original poster
Igetknockeddownbutgetupagain · 21/07/2012 19:13

Taking my irrelevant thoughts elsewhere.

But for the record, I have thought very deeply about the shooting, and many awful occurrences such as these, for reasons I won't go into.

So I won't worry about your comments at all.

OP posts:
fuckityfuckfuckfuck · 21/07/2012 19:14

I think people are missing the point. Yes, the whole thing is tragic, beyond awful. But if an OP had come here to say they'd just returned from a midnight screening of a film (midnight screening suggesting one that was immensely popular and had probably been booked for weeks if not months) for a 15 (I think) rated film that had babies and preschoolers present, there would be a whole thread of disbleieving replies, and don't kid yourselves otherwise.

Kayano · 21/07/2012 19:14

Agreed fickity

Kveta · 21/07/2012 19:14

now is not the time to wonder about why young children were at a midnight showing.

however, the couple in question do sound like dingbats of the highest order - he apparently put the 4 month old on the ground of the cinema and legged it, leaving his girlfriend, baby, and 4 year old behind - story here

regardless of that though, victim blaming of any kind is pointless at the moment.

the whole thing is utterly horrendous :(