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 05-03-2013, 11:45 AM   #151
tjkraz

DVC Owner SSR
 
tjkraz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 12,966

At the end of the day, I don't see why the motivation matters.

With any procedural change, there is going to be cooperation between legal, park operations, park management and even executive leadership in the company. Hard telling which department initiated this change and/or pushed the hardest for it to happen.

Of course parents still need to watch their children. But we're kidding ourselves if we think that we can watch the kids every moment they are in the parks and/or can intervene before anything can happen. (Sorry, folks but you can't protect your 13 year old from being mildly accosted as you're moving through theme park crowds.)

Readers can apply whatever personal "spin" they wish. There's really no value in debating whether the glass is half full or half empty. Personally I really don't care whether this was initiated by park security, legal, public relations or Tom Staggs' worries over his children's safety.

At least 75 known, identified threats have been removed. The parks are safer WITH this policy than WITHOUT. Who really cares about the motivation?!?!
__________________
-- Tim

DVC owner at SSR, BWV and VGC
tjkraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 11:58 AM   #152
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,242

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjkraz View Post
At the end of the day, I don't see why the motivation matters.

With any procedural change, there is going to be cooperation between legal, park operations, park management and even executive leadership in the company. Hard telling which department initiated this change and/or pushed the hardest for it to happen.

Of course parents still need to watch their children. But we're kidding ourselves if we think that we can watch the kids every moment they are in the parks and/or can intervene before anything can happen. (Sorry, folks but you can't protect your 13 year old from being mildly accosted as you're moving through theme park crowds.)

Readers can apply whatever personal "spin" they wish. There's really no value in debating whether the glass is half full or half empty. Personally I really don't care whether this was initiated by park security, legal, public relations or Tom Staggs' worries over his children's safety.

At least 75 known, identified threats have been removed. The parks are safer WITH this policy than WITHOUT. Who really cares about the motivation?!?!

Well Said Tim
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 05-03-2013, 12:49 PM   #153
robinb
DIS Veteran
 
robinb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 30,230

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
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).
First of all, I am not being "snarky". Quite frankly, I am getting tired of your little ad hominem digs at people you don't agree with. There was a whole section of the thread that was removed due to personal attacks.

My point is that there are facts and there are opinions. We all have the same facts, but how we understand and process those facts are different. When you say that your opinion is "based on the facts previously stated" it gives your opinion a sense of, as Stephen Colbert says, "truthiness" while it implies that differing opinions are not based on facts.
__________________
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, 01:52 PM   #154
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 robinb View Post
Just because they don't trot out Mickey in front of Cinderella's Castle to announce that they are banning sex offenders ...
Now that would be worth the price of admission. "Hey Kids, guess what?"

Minnies Boy Toy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 01:57 PM   #155
robinb
DIS Veteran
 
robinb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 30,230

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnies Boy Toy View Post
Now that would be worth the price of admission. "Hey Kids, guess what?"

Kinda gives a whole new spin on your username, doesn't it .
__________________
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, 02:02 PM   #156
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 robinb View Post
Kinda gives a whole new spin on your username, doesn't it .
ROFL! Well, truth be told, Minnie definitely wooed me way back when I was underage. I hope the statute of limitations has run out on that - I'd hate for her to get into trouble.
Minnies Boy Toy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 04:37 PM   #157
Magic Fanatic
Mouseketeer
 
Magic Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 216

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...iref=allsearch
__________________
May 2014 - Disney Fantasy May 2013 - Disney Dream Dec 2012 - Ft Wilderness June 2012 - Wilderness Lodge April 2010 - Wilderness Lodge Dec 2009 - Ft Wilderness May 2009 - Old Key West Aug 2008 - Ft Wilderness Mar 2008 - Disney Magic Dec 2007 - Ft Wilderness Feb 2007 - Animal Kingdom April 2006 - Disney Magic Dec 2005 - Wilderness Lodge Mar 2005 - Wilderness Lodge Dec 2004 - Caribbean Beach Aug 2003 Caribbean Beach June 2002 - Port Orleans Oct 1009 - All Star Music
Magic Fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 05:47 PM   #158
Colleen27
DIS Veteran
 
Colleen27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,949

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
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.
While I think it is a good cause, it isn't one I have the time, energy, or motivation to take up. I oppose registries on philosophical grounds - either a person has served his time, is rehabilitated, and has earned his second chance at freedom or he is still a danger and should not be free in the first place. Creating an in-between status, particularly when it isn't narrowly targeted to identify only those who are high risk to re-offend, is wrong in my opinion and it blows my mind that it has held up to legal scrutiny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
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).
But a big announcement would open the door to a mainstream version of the discussion we're having now, whereas doing it quietly draws applause from those interested enough to follow the issue while going under the radar of those who might object to the move.
__________________
~~**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

Tickerless once more...Kid-free trip on hold until fall 2014
How a Year Off Became a Year of Disney Magic! PTR
My Training Blog - From Fluffy to Fit: A Pooh Sized Runner's Quest to Run Disney
Colleen27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 08:00 AM   #159
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,242

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colleen27 View Post
While I think it is a good cause, it isn't one I have the time, energy, or motivation to take up. I oppose registries on philosophical grounds - either a person has served his time, is rehabilitated, and has earned his second chance at freedom or he is still a danger and should not be free in the first place. Creating an in-between status, particularly when it isn't narrowly targeted to identify only those who are high risk to re-offend, is wrong in my opinion and it blows my mind that it has held up to legal scrutiny.

The problem is just because they did their time doesn't mean they are rehabilitated, it only means they did there time. I don't believe that all the registries are perfect and based I a lot of comments made here, I more strongly feel they need to exist and they need to be revised and made more reasonable and fair.



As for animals abuse................sorry if your going to injure, abuse or neglect a animal, you need your name on the registry to try and keep you form ever o\having another animal under your control.




But a big announcement would open the door to a mainstream version of the discussion we're having now, whereas doing it quietly draws applause from those interested enough to follow the issue while going under the radar of those who might object to the move.
I really don't believe there would be anything but a vast majority of people applauding and in favor of the policy.

Even here with the few that are asking how its being done, NOONE is saying to stop the policy!



The PR issue is really not the point and just a game of semantics, as another poster just recently pointed out.

AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 08:10 AM   #160
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,242

Quote:
Originally Posted by robinb View Post
First of all, I am not being "snarky". Quite frankly, I am getting tired of your little ad hominem digs at people you don't agree with. There was a whole section of the thread that was removed due to personal attacks.


Just because they don't trot out Mickey in front of Cinderella's Castle to announce that they are banning sex offenders *hominem digs*

I my opinion the above is about as snarky as they come, however you are welcome to your opinion.


My point is that there are facts and there are opinions. We all have the same facts, but how we understand and process those facts are different. When you say that your opinion is "based on the facts previously stated" it gives your opinion a sense of, as Stephen Colbert says, "truthiness" while it implies that differing opinions are not based on facts.

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

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-04-2013 at 08:43 AM.
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 08:17 AM   #161
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,242

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Fanatic View Post
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...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

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-04-2013 at 08:44 AM.
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 08:42 AM   #162
beer dave
There are 10 kinds of people in the world-- those who understand the binary numbering system, and those who do not.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: sw FL
Posts: 773

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.
beer dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 09:13 AM   #163
Magic Fanatic
Mouseketeer
 
Magic Fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 216

Quote:
Originally Posted by beer dave View Post
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.
__________________
May 2014 - Disney Fantasy May 2013 - Disney Dream Dec 2012 - Ft Wilderness June 2012 - Wilderness Lodge April 2010 - Wilderness Lodge Dec 2009 - Ft Wilderness May 2009 - Old Key West Aug 2008 - Ft Wilderness Mar 2008 - Disney Magic Dec 2007 - Ft Wilderness Feb 2007 - Animal Kingdom April 2006 - Disney Magic Dec 2005 - Wilderness Lodge Mar 2005 - Wilderness Lodge Dec 2004 - Caribbean Beach Aug 2003 Caribbean Beach June 2002 - Port Orleans Oct 1009 - All Star Music
Magic Fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 02:53 PM   #164
dadddio
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,215

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post

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.

Last edited by dadddio; 05-04-2013 at 03:38 PM.
dadddio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 03:18 PM   #165
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,242

Quote:
Originally Posted by dadddio View Post
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

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-04-2013 at 03:24 PM.
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 08:26 PM.

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

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