Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Disney Trip Planning Forums > Disney Rumors and News
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-02-2013, 11:40 AM   #136
cm8
Half of the time we're rushing around to get things done last minute or we realize we're running behind so we need to catch up
 
cm8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: DI, SC
Posts: 5,955

Does anyone know if this "database" that Disney is using to "ban" these people are only used for scanning male subjects only? Are they including females in this scan? Females can be predators too
__________________
"Worry looks around, Sorry looks back, Faith looks up."


"I have placed the Lord ever before me. Because He is at my right hand, I will not be shaken." Psalm 16:8



cm8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 11:44 AM   #137
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,714

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jezz1226 View Post
Sorry for singling you out, this post just contained a lot of things I wanted to address from this thread, so I hope you don't take it personal, just a different opinion on some points.

Re: the lists being updated
-In Florida (which is the state I would imagine has the most visitors to WDW) the current status of things is that sexual relations (this includes not having sex, but touching and the like) with anyone under the age of 16 is enough to be on the sex offender list. This applies regardless of the age difference (there are some situations if both of the participants are underage, but there are also circumstances where two underage consenting (well as much as minors can consent) minors undergo actions can be enough to get one or both of them on the list, it gets complicated but I can link statutes/explain further if someone gets really curious). As far as I know there are no serious moves to change this in the near future. So, while you might be right, I'm not sure its as nationwide extensive or as changing as quickly as you seem to be implying.

Re: Getting off the List
-In Florida, there are select circumstances where one can get off the list. If it was for certain enumerated offenses and has been over 25 years since conviction with no new offenses. You can also petition for removal under certain circumstances, although its my understanding that practically speaking thats more difficult then it sounds to actually accomplish.

Re: PR
IMO Disney does not want a sexual offender to commit an offense in their park nor make contact with a victim for future offense in their park. Now, whether they feel this way because they want to be nice and prevent such things for happening or because they don't want to be on the news for allowing such a thing to happen is debatable, probably some combination of both.

Re: My general opinion of things (because everyone is on the edge of their seat waiting for it :P)
Keeping people who are likely to prey on children out of the park is a fantastic thing. Assuming they are just preventing anyone who is on the list from entering regardless of why they are they are on the list is not the correct way to do it IMO. Ideally, I would like to see, more asking for identification to get in the park/obtain tickets, and actual looking into the charges/person's background to determine if they are a threat. Of course, that takes a lot more work/time/money and I don't think they are willing to put in that effort. My concern is that they are preventing lots or all of those that are not a threat by doing it as they are doing it and not doing anything to prevent the actual predators (who if they know about it, and if they are a serious predator I would imagine they know these things) to get around it easily enough. At the same time I'm concerned they are giving parents a false sense of security (although in fairness those parents that are on top of things enough to hear this news prob are the same ones that watch their kids regardless). So overall I'm not sure this is actually doing anything positive *shrugs* but I may be wrong.

Hi there,

No one ever said it would be easy. or 100%.

I don't think the fact Disney has this policy will make any one with common sense any less careful. Lets face it no matter where you are these days you have to be careful.

I have read about the sites in CT, NY and RI.....I am told all the sites are *somewhat* similar.

I do agree as I said before, the state government have to improve the sites......the type of assault, the degree of danger and the likely hood of repeating.

I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything! If it isn't 100% is RP!

If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change?...I good question for thought!~

AKK

PS...everyone opinion adds...whether you agree or not!


AKK

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-02-2013 at 12:32 PM.
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 05-02-2013, 11:49 AM   #138
StitchesGr8Fan
DIS Veteran
 
StitchesGr8Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,823

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post

Hi there,

No one ever said it would be easy. or 100%.

I don't think the fact Disney has this policy will make any one with common sense any less careful. Lets face it no matter were you are these days you have to be careful.

I have read about the sites in CT, NY and RI.....I am told all the sites are *somewhat* similar.

I do agree as I said before, the state government have to improve the sites......the type of assault, the degree of danger and the likely hood of repeating.

I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything! If it isn't 100% is RP!

If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change?...I good question for thought!~

AKK

PS...everyone opinion adds...whether you agree or not!

AKK
I agree. I can't believe that people don't want Disney to so this because they won't be 100% perfect right away. If it stops even one pedophile from getting in then it is worth it in my book.
__________________
'86-offsite, '91-Buena Vista Palace, '92-offsite, '97-offsite, '98-Magic Music Days, '06-ASMu, '07-FtW, '09-ASMu,'10-POR,'12-Poly (Honeymoon!)
'14 - Pop
StitchesGr8Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 11:57 AM   #139
Minnies Boy Toy
Keeping an eye out for Mickey....
 
Minnies Boy Toy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Two hours from the place you're thinking about...
Posts: 53

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything!
I agree that this rationale doesn't really make sense to me either. But I think a balance needs to be struck between identifying the real threats and going overboard with excluding people. If you take that "better safe than sorry" logic to the extreme, almost everyone can be a "threat" by some criterion. Do we stop with criminals? How about excluding kids with stuffy noses because of the threat of infection? Or people with funny sounding last names? Or foreigners?... Legally speaking Disney could decide to refuse entry to any of those categories of people, but I'm glad they don't have a blanket policy for doing so. Excluding those who are definitively identified as sexual predators seems like a good idea to me - but I see a slippery slope developing during the discussion in this thread that I think needs to be guarded against.

The irony here is that generally speaking I consider myself really tough when it comes to punishment of violent crimes, especially when committed against children. Don't even get me started on what I would advocate as appropriate punishment. My concern is that I would not want the fear of "bad things happening" to cause an overreaction where Disney starts making arbitrary judgments about people it thinks "deserve" to be in their parks.

Quote:
If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change? ...I good question for thought!~
Maybe, although you could also ask if your child or family was put on some "list" because they made a mistake in the distant past and could not prove to Disney's satisfaction that they were no longer a threat -- opinions might change in that circumstance as well....
Minnies Boy Toy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 12:26 PM   #140
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,714

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnies Boy Toy View Post
I agree that this rationale doesn't really make sense to me either. But I think a balance needs to be struck between identifying the real threats and going overboard with excluding people. If you take that "better safe than sorry" logic to the extreme, almost everyone can be a "threat" by some criterion. Do we stop with criminals? How about excluding kids with stuffy noses because of the threat of infection? Or people with funny sounding last names? Or foreigners?... Legally speaking Disney could decide to refuse entry to any of those categories of people, but I'm glad they don't have a blanket policy for doing so. Excluding those who are definitively identified as sexual predators seems like a good idea to me - but I see a slippery slope developing during the discussion in this thread that I think needs to be guarded against.

The irony here is that generally speaking I consider myself really tough when it comes to punishment of violent crimes, especially when committed against children. Don't even get me started on what I would advocate as appropriate punishment. My concern is that I would not want the fear of "bad things happening" to cause an overreaction where Disney starts making arbitrary judgments about people it thinks "deserve" to be in their parks.


Ahh........but now your looking at the extremes, however if you read my posts I have repeated said the sites need and are slowly being redone and that the real threat needs to be determined........but for now we have what we have...........and if keeping those 75 predators out to make things safer...........then so be it!



Maybe, although you could also ask if your child or family was put on some "list" because they made a mistake in the distant past and could not prove to Disney's satisfaction that they were no longer a threat -- opinions might change in that circumstance as well....

Good counter point, while I would not be happy about it...............I would understand the reasoning and my fight would be with the laws and in the courts.


I agree a balance is important, the problem is that these crime are so heinous and stick with kids and people their whole lives.......caution must be on the safe of the public. That is why other crimes you do your time and probation and if you make your life right , you move along. We don't let serial killers have the same rights because of the heinous nature of the crime and the threat of repeating
AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 01:36 PM   #141
arthropodtodd
Mouseketeer
 
arthropodtodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: kansas
Posts: 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by cm8 View Post
Does anyone know if this "database" that Disney is using to "ban" these people are only used for scanning male subjects only? Are they including females in this scan? Females can be predators too
Correct! However it is a much smaller and very different population.
__________________
Todd

WL 2004 - Wedding and Honeymoon there; WL - 2006; WL - 2009; CR - 2011; WL - 2012; WL Club Level - 2013; WL - 2014 -Summer; POP & AKL 2014

In the pipe:
2015 - fall Location TBA
2016 - fall Location TBA
arthropodtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 02:00 PM   #142
arthropodtodd
Mouseketeer
 
arthropodtodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: kansas
Posts: 209

Registry

The problem with the registries does not lie with the state employees and the elected officials, except that they fear for their job. The problem lies with the people, us.

A vast majority of Americans want even tougher registries. In conversation they talk say that certain offenders might not belong, but in my experience, that is not reality. I have seen state and local officials get dragged through the mud any time their a problem with an offender living somewhere. They are told they are protecting child molesters and people campaign against them stating that. No one wants to be shown as pro-child molesters and anti child. Judges sentence men (and women) to prison who do not belong there because they do not want to be voted off the bench.

In general I find that we are a lazy society. We follow the sound bites and talking points of our family, political party, religious group, friends, etc. rather than look into a matter ourselves. It is just easier. Those who are even more lazy might just be too apathetic to care one way or another, but they don't want to be anti kid, so hang the child molesters.

Now one other fun fact that I thought about was, if an offender is still on parole, he will have to a get travel permit to leave his state. If he is in a county for more than 3 days he is usually required to alert the authorities of his presence. I do not know if this is true post-parole or not as I do not deal with the registry aspect of things. But if it was true, then Disney could possibly know every time a registered offender is in the county for more than 3 business days and would know to look out for them.

I would wonder if there could be other safe guards and policies that Disney should be looking at. Many colleges and megachurchs require offenders to register with them so that they can give them some guidelines to keep potential minors safe. Telling someone what they can and cannot do sometimes works better than just kicking them out. Perhaps with these new Magicbands they could use those to track people in the parks, particularly any convicted felon. I have always reminded my clients who were placed on GPS, that it was for their own protection more than anything else.

Final thought, for now. Also note that juvenile offenders do not register on public sites in many states, so they would not get blocked, and some of them are worst than they adult males I have dealt with.
__________________
Todd

WL 2004 - Wedding and Honeymoon there; WL - 2006; WL - 2009; CR - 2011; WL - 2012; WL Club Level - 2013; WL - 2014 -Summer; POP & AKL 2014

In the pipe:
2015 - fall Location TBA
2016 - fall Location TBA
arthropodtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 02:27 PM   #143
goofy4tink
Likes little devils
I know I'm getting old...I get it, I really do
Prisoner of Toy Story Mania
 
goofy4tink's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Central Ma
Posts: 48,490
DISboards Moderator

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
Well I knew that Vigilante Justice*, the term that is used when a person has no real facts to support their point of view ..would show up soon!


As to curl your hair..............Sure.....I agree....... I have found that all over the country.........guess what.....some people are stupid! However the point was would this policy make people let down their guard..............NO...........those same drunk people by the pool will be doing that no matter what Disney does!


I don't believe anyone talked of a Disney data base......the states have the data base, Disney need use it like anyone else in the country.


Again this is a start........just because its not perfect, doesn't mean we throw up our hands and say forget the whole thing!........we can't get them all so drop the matter all together!


Following your logic............why bother having drunk driver laws...............since some drunks have not been caught.......lets just not have police looking for them.


As you mentioned before..........don't leave out all the details.............Disney has the names and addresses of AP, resort guests, 3rd party ticket sales, etc....etc , not to mention the state predatory sites.

Repeat........no its not 100%, but no system is 1005.........its a start and a good one.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but calling others vigilantes because they don't agree to not right!

AKK
Don't remember calling anyone a 'vigilante'...just mentioned vigilante justice. When you say your family's safety is more important than someone else's freedom to come and go, just because it happens to be a place where kids are found? Sorry...that seems somewhat vigilante to me.

Evidently you are the only person here that has all the facts and you are the only one that understands how things work. Anyone that doesn't share your opinion? Stupid, ill informed, whatever.
I'm pretty much done with this thread. I care deeply about our children. I have been CORI'ed many times. I attend a church that follows all the safe church procceedures. My schools are all locked and the need to be buzzed in exists. I know what I need to do in order to protect my children. And I will continue to do with with other youngsters. I refuse to depend on someone else, even Disney, to keep me safe. There are plenty of 'bad people' out there, just waiting for a chance to pounce. I really hope and pray this doesn't happen at WDW, or any other park...where kids and their families are trying to have some carefree fun.
That's my position and I stand by it. Not even returning to this thread to check out how it goes. I enjoy a good discussion but this is ridiculous.
goofy4tink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 04:01 PM   #144
spidet1964
Mouseketeer
 
spidet1964's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by cm8 View Post
Does anyone know if this "database" that Disney is using to "ban" these people are only used for scanning male subjects only? Are they including females in this scan? Females can be predators too
The national sex offenders registry list sex
offenders regardless of their gender. Also you no longer get on there for the things some people have mentioned such as public urination. For anyone doubting that this could work. I guarantee it is a good system. The 3rd month ours was in effect we turned away 35 people. Also if a person is over legal age and they have sex with someone under the legal age even by a year it is still a sex offense. If they can't wait that year then they deserve what ever happens to them. There s no room to be leanient here.
__________________






]
spidet1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 04:01 PM   #145
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,714

Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy4tink View Post
Don't remember calling anyone a 'vigilante'...just mentioned vigilante justice. When you say your family's safety is more important than someone else's freedom to come and go, just because it happens to be a place where kids are found? Sorry...that seems somewhat vigilante to me.

Evidently you are the only person here that has all the facts and you are the only one that understands how things work. Anyone that doesn't share your opinion? Stupid, ill informed, whatever.
I'm pretty much done with this thread. I care deeply about our children. I have been CORI'ed many times. I attend a church that follows all the safe church procceedures. My schools are all locked and the need to be buzzed in exists. I know what I need to do in order to protect my children. And I will continue to do with with other youngsters. I refuse to depend on someone else, even Disney, to keep me safe. There are plenty of 'bad people' out there, just waiting for a chance to pounce. I really hope and pray this doesn't happen at WDW, or any other park...where kids and their families are trying to have some carefree fun.
That's my position and I stand by it. Not even returning to this thread to check out how it goes. I enjoy a good discussion but this is ridiculous.

*sounds like vigilante justice* I took it to mean just that anyone who is for keeping the predators away from our families our a vigilante!


I don't know every detail, it fact arthropodtodd has made some excellent points and changed my mind some!


However no need to rehash it all now!

AKK

As I said................the freedom of others after they have committed these types of crime(not counting the minor stuff like teens and peeing in a bush) is 2nd to anyone else safety!
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2013, 11:01 PM   #146
Colleen27
DIS Veteran
 
Colleen27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 16,790

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
If followed the thread, yes I feel sorry for your friend.........The lists are being updated and the things like this one and peeing in bushes and teenagers having sex with 2 years difference, these are being changed.


Since Disney didn't announce this policy themselves, but rather the news did.........how does it become a PR thing?
Those things aren't being changed in my state. If anything there's a push to make these things stronger... Right now I'm aware of petition efforts to create registries of domestic abusers and animal abusers.

Disney doesn't have to hold a press event for something to be a PR move. They can reasonably expect the Orlando press to pick up on their doings, and from there the hotter topics and bigger moves go national.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arthropodtodd View Post
Yes your friend's case is a good example of registries needing more work and making sure if reflects one risk's. Not knowing your friend's case, but having clients with similar details, we would focus less on sexual re-offense and ask the questions about impulsivity, and sexual preoccupation. Why would someone hook up with someone they barely know. Why be involved with someone sexually your barely know. I had a client who dated a girl for 3 months before he found out her real age. When he found out he broke it off, she got angry and called the police.
Well, we were 19/20 and stupid. I think that's all the "why" there was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arthropodtodd View Post
The problem with the registries does not lie with the state employees and the elected officials, except that they fear for their job. The problem lies with the people, us.

A vast majority of Americans want even tougher registries. In conversation they talk say that certain offenders might not belong, but in my experience, that is not reality. I have seen state and local officials get dragged through the mud any time their a problem with an offender living somewhere. They are told they are protecting child molesters and people campaign against them stating that. No one wants to be shown as pro-child molesters and anti child. Judges sentence men (and women) to prison who do not belong there because they do not want to be voted off the bench.

In general I find that we are a lazy society. We follow the sound bites and talking points of our family, political party, religious group, friends, etc. rather than look into a matter ourselves. It is just easier. Those who are even more lazy might just be too apathetic to care one way or another, but they don't want to be anti kid, so hang the child molesters.
__________________
~~**Colleen & Crew**~~
POR 10/05 ~ BC 08/07 ~ WL 01/08 ~ CBR 12/09 ~ POP 03/11 TR/ DR
POP 1/12 TR ~ ASSp 5/12 ~ CSR 3/13 ~ POP 4/13 ~ ASMu 12/13


Colleen27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 08:08 AM   #147
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,714

[QUOTE=Colleen27;48284038]Those things aren't being changed in my state. If anything there's a push to make these things stronger... Right now I'm aware of petition efforts to create registries of domestic abusers and animal abusers.

If that is the case in your state I would suggest you work to get them changed. I would be very surprised if there are no groups or sympathy groups you could work with. Having a registry is not the problem, making the list correct and fair is the important part. I see no problem with a registry for domestic abusers and especially no problem with animal abusers, as they cannot defend themselves.


As I have stated many times, this is not a PR thing for Disney, based on the facts previously stated.
AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 09:18 AM   #148
Pseudacris
Mouseketeer
 
Pseudacris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 81

Quote:
Originally Posted by arthropodtodd View Post
Why I think the thread should be shut down. Sexual assault is a hot topic. Most of the public cannot begin to grasp what goes on in an offender's mind that can allow them to offend particularly against minors. (Sadly, i do. and at times it haunts me.) So we are ready to burn the castle down and the discussion frequently turns into shouting matches because no one ever wants to listen. Read through this thread, people are practically calling each other out or calling each other liars. This is a topic that gets heated quickly like religion or politics because of the strong beliefs on it.
I agree. It's not something you can really have a true debate about because so many people (myself included) have emotional, almost instinctual responses. While, intellectually, I find it interesting to learn about the psyche of violent criminals, practical discussion is different. At that point it's less "slippery slope" and more "I don't want my kids to have to go through what I did, and I don't care if it's not perfect". For those of us who were hurt as children, especially if not protected by other adults (whether by sinister reasons or lack of knowledge), it becomes an almost compulsion to tick off everything on your mental list of things that will prevent your own kids from being hurt.
__________________
Oct 2014 WL?
2013 AKL, 2009 CBR, 2008 CBR, 2004 Off Site, 2003 ASMo
Pseudacris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 10:12 AM   #149
robinb
DIS Veteran
 
robinb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 31,756

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
As I have stated many times, this is not a PR thing for Disney, based on the facts previously stated.
AKK
No, is is your opinion you have stated many times. NOT a fact. You are certainly entitled to that opinion as the rest of us are entitled to ours.

Just because they don't trot out Mickey in front of Cinderella's Castle to announce that they are banning sex offenders doesn't mean that it is not a public relations move. Many of us believe that Disney is doing this to cover their butts in case something happens on Disney property. It lays the foundation for the PR in case something horrible does happen.
__________________
DVC Member since 1997
Walt Disney World 2013 * Disneyland Paris 2012 * Disneyland 2011 * Hong Kong Disneyland 2007 * Tokyo Disneyland 2007
robinb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 12:02 PM   #150
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,714

Quote:
Originally Posted by robinb View Post
No, is is your opinion you have stated many times. NOT a fact. You are certainly entitled to that opinion as the rest of us are entitled to ours.

Just because they don't trot out Mickey in front of Cinderella's Castle to announce that they are banning sex offenders doesn't mean that it is not a public relations move. Many of us believe that Disney is doing this to cover their butts in case something happens on Disney property. It lays the foundation for the PR in case something horrible does happen.
Well of course its my opinion, based on the facts........Just as it your opinion. Where did I ever say you or anyone else was not permitted a opinion???

You can be snarky, but the facts are just that......if they wanted public opinion they would have announced it and let the world know and the vast majority of people praise them for protecting their families from the real predators (which likely does not include everyone on a registry list).

I think you better go back a read the posts, there are some that believe its PR, not many.

Now will it do 2 things at once...............help get out predators from the parks and Disney property......YES, that has been proved. From a purely legal
point of view YES, Disney would look better god forbid anyone is hurt.

IN closing I wish to point out that NOT ONE PERSON has said they wanted Disney to stop the program, whatever their semantics opinion on PR.

AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

You Rated this Thread: