Walt Disney World bans sex offenders from theme parks

[Tonka's Skipper]

Lots of opinions on this topic. Here is a timely story from CNN that addresses the down side of these lists. Warning, long article... http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/01/living/juvenile-sex-offenders-rights/index.html?iref=allsearch

Lot of debate for sure,

If you go back a few pages, there is a good deal of talk about the lists, good and bad,

I think the general line is they need to be revised and changed and that is happening in most states. There have been a some what amounts to minor things, that need to be revised and some names removed. EI a person pissing in a bush and teens with 2 years different ages etc.

WE don't know what standard Disney is using, but knowing their lawyers, its a good bet they are very careful how they apply the system.

The bottom line is still, PR not withstanding, Disney are keeping of predators out and I applaud them!

AKK


AKK

 

[beer dave]

I am amazed that there is 11 pages of debate on on if Disney should let sex offenders in the parks! And the first page is no different from the last page!

Maybe Disney should build a special land for them so they would not be discriminated against. Murderers too. Maybe this is that Dark kingdom everyone is rumoring.

 

[Magic Fanatic]

I am amazed that there is 11 pages of debate on on if Disney should let sex offenders in the parks! And the first page is no different from the last page!

Maybe Disney should build a special land for them so they would not be discriminated against. Murderers too. Maybe this is that Dark kingdom everyone is rumoring.

With all do respect, I believe you are misrepresenting the discussion. I believe I can speak for everyone and say no one wants known sexual predators intermingling with our kids. The debate has been around the accuracy of the lists (that have many flaws) that will be used to make the determination. Personally, seeing 11pages of debate without it all turning into name calling is nice to see.

 

[dadddio]

I stated quite clearly and politely that is was my opinion, based a\on the facts., and as you have pointed out repeatedly when your not agreed with, everyone has a opinion and mine is based on a common sense understanding of the facts. The truthiness is because the facts support my opinion in a solid way.

In short everyone may draw there own opinion from the facts.

AKK

You just did it again. You opinion is based on a common sense understanding of the facts. Therefore, anyone that you disagree with doesn't have common sense. It's these types of digs that you continue to make that makes for a big argumentative thread, rather than a calm discussion of the issue.

Those that you keep arguing with are actually using common sense. They also don't disagree with the concept of forbidding sexual predators from Disney parks. It's just that this policy neither forbids sexual predators from the parks nor does it target only sexual predators. The only thing it does is create a group of people that cannot purchases APs.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

You just did it again. You opinion is based in a common sense understanding if the facts. Therefore, anyone that you disagree with doesn't have common sense. It's these types I digs that you continue to make that makes for a bi argumentative thread, rather than a calm discussion of the issue.

Those that you keep arguing with are actually using common sense. They also don't disagree with the concept of forbidding sexual predators from Disney parks. It's just that this policy neither forbids sexual predators from the parks nor does it target only sexual predators. The only thing it does is create a group of people that cannot purchases APs.

1. Sorry your not happy with my opinion, but I disagree with your logic and I will continue to present my views in my own way and everyone can do the same. I do question any other opinion, otherwise I would be agreeing with it. I consider that common sense.


I do find it a bit odd that the folks that keep telling me they have a right to their opinion, expressed their way do not permit me the same.

2. I never once said they didn't disagree with keeping predators out of the parks, in fact I have repeated stated no one....NO ONE.... has said to stop the policy! Some have said Disney needs to be careful with it. That is common sense to me.

3. Seems they have stopped at least 75........and Please show where anyone who was prevented form entering was not a predator and/or has publicly stated he had not committed the crime?

4. I totally disagree with your last line, there is no evidence to that....if so, please show me.......In addition to AP, registered guests, 3rd party tickets, and any ID'd by Disney as being a predator.


No where have I said its 100%. However that doesn't mean to just not do anything........you start with the best you have and move forward.

AKK

 

[dadddio]

3. Seems they have stopped at least 75........and Please show where anyone who was prevented form entering was not a predator and/or has publicly stated he had not committed the crime?

Show me that the 75 were sexual predators. Heck, we can't show that ANY of the 75 were sexual predators.

4. I totally disagree with your last line, there is no evidence to that....if so, please show me.......In addition to AP, registered guests, 3rd party tickets, and any ID'd by Disney as being a predator.

Disney isn't IDing these people as predators. They are people on a 'sex offender' list. That is not the same thing and we shouldn't believe that it is the same thing. Further, every one of these 75 people could easily buy tickets from Disney or any other vendor and enter the parks. They just can't buy APs.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Show me that the 75 were sexual predators. Heck, we can't show that ANY of the 75 were sexual predators.

As fact, many times we don't know the standards Disney is using in using the list, as to who on the list is considered threats. Since all on the lists have been CONVICED of sex or abuse crimes, all 75 are predators by the law. I have already agreed the list needs to be reviewed and improved to take off the minor, nor dangerous ones like 2 teens with 2 years age difference. So if they are a threat is the only question.

Disney isn't IDing these people as predators. They are people on a 'sex offender' list. That is not the same thing and we shouldn't believe that it is the same thing. Further, every one of these 75 people could easily buy tickets from Disney or any other vendor and enter the parks. They just can't buy APs.

All true, but the 3rd party sales require a ID, resort registration and Disney sales require Id as well, At least they did the last time I brought Tickets.


As stated before, its not 100%,and yes some can get in, but does that mean just throw our hands in the air and not do anything? Due to the general heinous nature of these crimes , I applaud each and every predator that Disney keeps out. When someone's name is taken off and /or he is not a threat, then I will hold the gate open for them.

Until that time these convicted person have a problem with the States and the courts, not us or Disney.

AKK

 

[Magic Fanatic]

I have been following this thread and while i respect your opinions, you are are now making statements that are simply not accurate. All third party sellers do not require identification. I bought 4 Five Day Park Hoppers last summer and paid with a Visa gift card and never presented identification. And yes, this was a legitimate third party provider.

 

[Magic Fanatic]

All true, but the 3rd party sales require a ID, resort registration and Disney sales require Id as well, At least they did the last time I brought Tickets.

As stated before, its not 100%,and yes some can get in, but does that mean just throw our hands in the air and not do anything? Due to the general heinous nature of these crimes , I applaud each and every predator that Disney keeps out. When someone's name is taken off and /or he is not a threat, then I will hold the gate open for them.

Until that time these convicted person have a problem with the States and the courts, not us or Disney.

AKK

I have been following this thread and while I respect your opinions, you are are now making statements that are simply not accurate. All third party sellers do not require identification. I bought 4 Five Day Park Hoppers last summer and paid with a Visa gift card and never presented identification. And yes, this was a legitimate third party provider.

You also raise another point when you mention convicted persons having problems with states and courts. This made me think about the shear number of international visitors to Disney parks. Are these visitors slipping through the cracks with this new rule? After all, there are no international predator lists that I am aware of. Is this policy or one like it in place for, say, Disneyland Paris?

Again, I will say it again, I am all for keeping true threats of any kind out of public places, but this smells of "cover your butt" publicity.

Tonka, I think we are in agreement on the idea of what Disney wishes to accomplish, but this rule does little to truly eliminate the identified problem.

 

[dadddio]

Since all on the lists have been CONVICED of sex or abuse crimes, all 75 are predators by the law.

That simply isn't accurate as many people have explained throughout this thread.

All true, but the 3rd party sales require a ID, resort registration and Disney sales require Id as well, At least they did the last time I brought Tickets.

Nope. Money talks when buying tickets. Walk up to the window with a handful of cash and you'll walk away with tickets.

 

[CatelynnMarie]

Excellent idea imo. One less thing to be anxious about

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

That simply isn't accurate as many people have explained throughout this thread.


Show me anyone who has not be convicted of a sex/abuse crime on the list!. In fact I just took the time to go back 8 pages and did not see any post of anyone saying there were people on the list that were not convicted..............some with minor offenses that maybe sure not be on the list, that will not repeat..................YES!.....and I have repeated said I agree with that.

Nope. Money talks when buying tickets. Walk up to the window with a handful of cash and you'll walk away with tickets.

As stated above I was going by my experiences and what some others on here have reported. If they can buy tickets without ID,I stand corrected, but is still does not change the need for the problem.


AKK

 

[dadddio]

Show me anyone who has not be convicted of a sex/abuse crime on the list!. In fact I just took the time to go back 8 pages and did not see any post of anyone saying there were people on the list that were not convicted..............some with minor offenses that maybe sure not be on the list, that will not repeat..................YES!.....and I have repeated said I agree with that.

everyone was convicted, but not everyone on the list is or was a sexual predator which was the position that you had taken.

As stated above I was going by my experiences and what some others on here have reported. If they can buy tickets without ID,I stand corrected, but is still does not change the need for the problem.

no one has argued that sexual predators should not be excluded from WDW. The problem with the policy as it was presented is that it doesn't really exclude anyone and appears to target some who are not sexual predators. It then leaves the impression that these people have been excluded making the parks somehow safe (or even safer) which simply isn't true.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

everyone was convicted, but not everyone on the list is or was a sexual predator which was the position that you had taken.

You are entitled to that opinion, but the bottom line is until they are deed non repeaters, they are predators, I wont engage in a silly game of semantics, they are by law, and in my opinion based on there convictions sexual and abusive predators.

In fact you asked before if any of the 75 were a threat........I did a little bing work.....the news articles point out that MOST of the people turned away, involved crimes against/molesting kids, so the policy is targeting child predators/molesors, and a perfect group to target. This below 2007 U-Tube video shows a boy who caught and predator at the Swan. If anything this shows that Disney needed to start this program and to increase the policy and not reduce it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Gj36RklMJY


No one has argued that sexual predators should not be excluded from WDW. The problem with the policy as it was presented is that it doesn't really exclude anyone and appears to target some who are not sexual predators. It then leaves the impression that these people have been excluded making the parks somehow safe (or even safer) which simply isn't true.

You are going in circles, first you say predators should be kept out and I never said anyone has that that, you and others kept saying that I said other were saying that.


WHAT IS YOUR BETTER PLAN?? let everyone of the people on the lists in the park until the lists are changed?.....The rights as convicted criminals are more important then the safely of our families?


Now to the bottom line....if a person is convicted of the sexual or abusive crime they ARE predators they are a criminal until they are shown by experts not to be a threat or a repeater.

As I said before, when the names are removed on that basis I will hold the gate open.

Now whether YOU choose to play a game of semantics.....they are the same people and each one just as dangerous as their individual crimes shows.

One predator/child molest kept out and the parks are safer........that is plain Truth

AKK

 

[dadddio]

Please don't reply inside other people's post as it makes replying to you overly onerous. The only thing that agree with your post is that we are going around in circles because you continue to ignore people's valid points if the don't fit your argument. I have no interest in continuing this kind of conversation. You 'win'.

 

[laddysnoop72000]

I agree with this .....my friend is married to a sex offender and the only reason why he is a sex offender is her dad had him put in jail when she was 16...they are now married with a child...so i dont feel all sex offenders should be put in the same class..they are not are child rapist ..

 

[Magic Fanatic]

You are going in circles, first you say predators should be kept out and I never said anyone has that that, you and others kept saying that I said other were saying that.

WHAT IS YOUR BETTER PLAN?? let everyone of the people on the lists in the park until the lists are changed?.....The rights as convicted criminals are more important then the safely of our families?

Now to the bottom line....if a person is convicted of the sexual or abusive crime they ARE predators they are a criminal until they are shown by experts not to be a threat or a repeater.

As I said before, when the names are removed on that basis I will hold the gate open.

Now whether YOU choose to play a game of semantics.....they are the same people and each one just as dangerous as their individual crimes shows.

One predator/child molest kept out and the parks are safer........that is plain Truth

AKK

I am with daddio at this point. You can't have an honest debate of opinions with someone that will not consider the honest opinions of others. I also no longer have the time or energy to discuss this...you win! I'm out.

 

[swimfly]

I do believe WDW is cross-referencing AP/season ticket holders. For the first time in 10 years, I could not have my nickname on my pass but had to include my full legal name. No big deal but it took me back for a minute.

Food for Thought
Why didn't Disney target the cruise line first where proper ID is required of all guests (of legal age)?
What happened that has caused Disney to feel the need to take this step when the databases have been easily accesible for ages? What problem does this solve?

 

[robinb]

Food for Thought
Why didn't Disney target the cruise line first where proper ID is required of all guests (of legal age)?
What happened that has caused Disney to feel the need to take this step when the databases have been easily accesible for ages? What problem does this solve?

I mentioned "Operation Cyber Child" from June of 2012 (http://tbo.com/news/disney-employee-among--arrested-in-polk-child-sex-sting-414503) in a previous post. The new policy went into effect a couple months later. I have no proof the two are related, but I do find the timing of the two events ... interesting.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Please don't reply inside other people's post as it makes replying to you overly onerous. The only thing that agree with your post is that we are going around in circles because you continue to ignore people's valid points if the don't fit your argument. I have no interest in continuing this kind of conversation. You 'win'.

Please don't me how to response as I don't tell you too. I have responded to point after point........lastly the position that we don't know if any that disney refused entry were predators..........now we know from the articles that most rejected from entering the park were child abusers.

This was not about winning....its about our families safety.


AKK