Sneaking candy/food into the movie theater. Do you do it? (sell, sale)

[Themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by NJBest

You're insulted that they are trying to stay in business, and they are insulted that you are hurting their business.

I suppose drinks are their most profitable item though.

What I don't get is that why people break the rules in general when there's a legit way to not spend $9 on a box of candy. Just don't eat during the movie. I do it from time to time and it really works. The money stays in my pocket and I'm not breaking any rules.

Originally Posted by NJBest

It's sad that people resort to such unethical behavior.

Why would I care what someone else (Attempts to) says I can or can't do, and what does that have to do with ethics?

[TexasHorseLady]

If you don't think it's unethical to bring food into a restaurant and sit down at their table and eat the food you brought rather than purchasing food from them, then I guess you wouldn't get what it has to do with ethics. Or what going into someone's business and shoplifting has to do with ethics, either. Both are (a) hurting the business and (b) raising prices for other consumers. NJBest gave good advice for those who don't want to pay for what keeps the theatre going; just don't eat during the movie. I assure you, you are not going to die of hunger or thirst in the length of time that it takes to watch a movie. If you are, then you should be in a hospital, not in a movie theatre, anyway.

[Funny how?]

Sneek it in? Absolutly. Usually just candy and a bottle of water, but I have enjoyed chicken fried rice on various occations also!

[NJBest]

Originally Posted by Themanwithnoname

Why would I care what someone else (Attempts to) says I can or can't do, and what does that have to do with ethics?

If you don't understand any of this on your own, then there's not much of a point in trying to explain it to you. You wouldn't be able to comprehend its complexity. It has to do with economics and society if you were curious in getting educated. To harm the society in which you live, is to harm yourself.

TexasHorseLady did such a good job explaining it that I don't have much to add. Thanks TexasHorseLady

[Themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by NJBest

If you don't understand any of this on your own, then there's not much of a point in trying to explain it to you. You wouldn't be able to comprehend its complexity. It has to do with economics and society if you were curious in getting educated. To harm the society in which you live, is to harm yourself.

TexasHorseLady did such a good job explaining it that I don't have much to add. Thanks TexasHorseLady

Methinks you should go sit through the philosophy class I took.

In Short. My Ethics are MY CHOICE.

And as red Butler said:
‪Number One Movie Line Of All Time‬‏ - YouTube


What I was saying... before you go trying to force YOUR version of morality on others...

Check yourself.

And stow the insults about me 'not being able to understanding it's complexity'

It's that your making groundless, baseless 'Truth value statements'
Which are NOT!

Bacause you've 'got my back up a little' lets take it line by line:

If you don't understand any of this on your own, then there's not much of a point in trying to explain it to you.

Is THAT how schools are taught now-a-days? Or is it that you CANNOT defend a PERSONAL moral decision when attempting to enforce it upon others?

You wouldn't be able to comprehend its complexity.

Insult for insult's sake, baseless and groundless, without any merit or supporting evidence.

It has to do with economics and society if you were curious in getting educated.

I have both been schooled in both of the areas you mentioned, run a small business, and lived in society for nearly 3 decades. One does not follow the other no matter how you wish it so.
You were saying?

To harm the society in which you live, is to harm yourself.

IF this were true, then the Jews who resisted the Nazi's were harming themselves (As one example)
I can think of many more less extreme ones.

But question:
Presupposing that I'm not going to pay $9 for a $1 box of milk duds...
How is me bringing in a roll of candy in my pocket hurting them?
If I followed your advice and didn't buy anything it would not hurt them any more OR less... Therefore, under Normative ethics, Applied ethics, and Meta-ethics both courses of action have the SAME ethical standard/value.


I have presenting supporting documentation. (Feel free to look up the intricacies of the various 'types of ethics' I mentioned.)
So, are you going to answer my question, or are you going to sit there and say "It's unethical, and if you disagree with me and ask for an explanation you are too stupid to understand." Again?

[Themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

If you don't think it's unethical to bring food into a restaurant and sit down at their table and eat the food you brought rather than purchasing food from them, then I guess you wouldn't get what it has to do with ethics. Or what going into someone's business and shoplifting has to do with ethics, either. Both are (a) hurting the business and (b) raising prices for other consumers. NJBest gave good advice for those who don't want to pay for what keeps the theatre going; just don't eat during the movie. I assure you, you are not going to die of hunger or thirst in the length of time that it takes to watch a movie. If you are, then you should be in a hospital, not in a movie theatre, anyway.

Please see what I said about NJBest's course of action vs candy from outside.

Both have the SAME effect upon the business.

Due to that and since the Movie theater is NOT a 'Snack theater'... the restaurant comparison does not follow.


But I pretty much do not go to movies except on dates...

I enjoy them better off of netflix. (Watching a 1950's movie right now)

[NJBest]

Originally Posted by Themanwithnoname

Methinks you should go sit through the philosophy class I took.

In Short. My Ethics are MY CHOICE.

What I was saying... before you go trying to force YOUR version of morality on others...

Check yourself.

And stow the insults about me 'not being able to understanding it's complexity'

It's that your making groundless, baseless 'Truth value statements'
Which are NOT!

Bacause you've 'got my back up a little' lets take it line by line:
Is THAT how schools are taught now-a-days? Or is it that you CANNOT defend a PERSONAL moral decision when attempting to enforce it upon others?

Insult for insult's sake, baseless and groundless, without any merit or supporting evidence.

I have both been schooled in both of the areas you mentioned, run a small business, and lived in society for nearly 3 decades. One does not follow the other no matter how you wish it so.
You were saying?

IF this were true, then the Jews who resisted the Nazi's were harming themselves (As one example)
I can think of many more less extreme ones.

But question:
Presupposing that I'm not going to pay $9 for a $1 box of milk duds...
How is me bringing in a roll of candy in my pocket hurting them?
If I followed your advice and didn't buy anything it would not hurt them any more OR less... Therefore, under Normative ethics, Applied ethics, and Meta-ethics both courses of action have the SAME ethical standard/value.


I have presenting supporting documentation. (Feel free to look up the intricacies of the various 'types of ethics' I mentioned.)
So, are you going to answer my question, or are you going to sit there and say "It's unethical, and if you disagree with me and ask for an explanation you are too stupid to understand." Again?

I took philosophy courses at a decent school. Your view of ethics only satisfies one definition. We go on endless about that.

To answer you original question, if you take the simplistic definition of unethical: "not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior", then it is clear that not following a movie theaters rules is unethical. Sneaking food in is not an approved standard.

If you consider social contract theory, then it is generally accepted that if a private place of business has rules, those rules should be followed.

Regarding your question: Anytime you watch a movie in a theater without purchasing food there is hurting their business. They aren't making profit on the movie tickets. I never said that one should buy $9 box of popcorn. I just said that if the movie theater does not allow outside food inside, then one should follow that rule. They can enjoy their $1 box of candy outside the theater.

Do you really think that it's okay to break the rules?

[Themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by NJBest

I took philosophy courses at a decent school.

There you go again!

Originally Posted by NJBest

Your view of ethics only satisfies one definition. We go on endless about that.

So yours is the right one hummmm?

Originally Posted by NJBest

To answer you original question, if you take the simplistic definition of unethical: "not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior"

It is YOUR OPINION that that is 'The Simplistic defination, to say nothing of the OPINION that it is a correct one.
MY POINT: Is that while that may be the case FOR YOU... it does NOT stand that that is the case for others. (This disagreement is well known by those who study the subject, it is curious that you claim knowledge but ignore, or are ignorant of that aspect)

Also... WHO approves it? it is obviously not the moviegoers... or there would be no point of contention.

Originally Posted by NJBest

then it is clear that not following a movie theaters rules is unethical.

No, it is not.
That is my point.

Continue to make your assumptions if you wish. But you are Not BACKING IT UP.

Originally Posted by NJBest

Sneaking food in is not an approved standard.

WHO's Approval? It is clear that it is approved by many here (Society at large)
See my point?

Originally Posted by NJBest

If you consider social contract theory, then it is generally accepted that if a private place of business has rules, those rules should be followed.

Ah, yes... THEORY.

Otherwise:
Tell me... Where does the American Revolution fall into your consideration of 'Social contract theory'
As I recall one of the earliest uses were to argue with someone as to why they should stay in jail and accept the death penalty.

A tool for controlling the masses.
And sorry, "Generally accepted" does NOT WORK when the consideration si a PERSONAL ethical perspective.
"So tell me, if everyone else is jumping off a bridge...."

Originally Posted by NJBest

Regarding your question: Anytime you watch a movie in a theater without purchasing food there is hurting their business.

SO, you buy EVERYTIME?
So, if you DO buy every time... why do you not BUY MORE so as to avoid hurting their business.
And no... you did NOT answer my question above. You made a simple, non-related statement to my observation that not buying, was not buying, no matter the mechanism. And nether hurt the business any more or less.

Originally Posted by NJBest

They aren't making profit on the movie tickets.

Incorrect, I've done a Business Continuity plan for a movie theater. It might interest you to know that they DO make money off the ticket sales. And the longer the run, the larger the % they get to keep.

Cokes and Popcorn DO provide the largest % of profit however.

Originally Posted by NJBest

I never said that one should buy $9 box of popcorn.

You CONTINUE to ether intentionally or accidently misquote what I said... Please correct this if we are to have any hope of getting anything but a nonsensical statement from you.

Originally Posted by NJBest

I just said that if the movie theater does not allow outside food inside, then one should follow that rule. They can enjoy their $1 box of candy outside the theater.

YOU SAY... THAT's MY POINT!

WHY does what "You say" have ANY BEARING on ANYONE ELSE?
-And if you remember your philosophy classes... it doesn't unless you are in a position to enforce it.
I have a rule... By reading my posts you should pay me $1,000 per word.
Since you have already done so. Please follow your own ethics and send my my money.

-just like you do not care about that (If you do I will apologize as soon as the check clears)
I don't care about their preferences.

Originally Posted by NJBest

Do you really think that it's okay to break the rules?

Only under 2 circumstances:
1. There is no validity to the rule/rulemaker (As in this case.... they have no hold over me)
2. You are perpared to suffer the consequences. (Like that speeding ticket I am going to pay shortly.)

I resumed my speed as soon as I was away from the cop. I do not agree with the Speed limits, and am willing to follow the 'deal' with the 'guys with more force than me (Whichis all it is) to 'pay the penalty' if I do not follow their arbitrary rules.

Morality is a personal decision.

[LauraC]

Originally Posted by MonkeyKid

Do you sneak in your own candy/food? either because you don't agree with paying exorbitant prices or maybe just because the theater doesn't sell anything you like.

.

I hear the government is going to have a Healthy Nanny Czar and agency that will scan you as you enter a movie theater and frisk you for sugar, salt and fats. People who refuse will be arrested...or strip searched and probed. They will only sell apples, carrot sticks and soy milk at the concession stands. But don't worry about it. The light bulbs will be so dim no one will be embarrassed.

[manderly6]

It is amazing the lengths some people will go to to make their behavior seem OK. Lets break it down to the absolute basics. If you are "sneaking" in the food you are obviously doing something wrong and you know it. Hence the "sneaking". If it was an acceptable thing to do you wouldn't need to "sneak" anything.