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 05-07-2013, 05:02 AM   #196
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,384

[QUOTE=Minnies Boy Toy;48318111]With all due respect, I wasn't mocking sexual crimes against children. I was mocking those who compete with each other in expressing outrage about issues over which people have no fundamental disagreements. Sexual crime against children is a horrifying reality in this world and we all appreciate reasonable efforts to stop it. But when I see people responding to an honest debate about the efficacy of Disney's policies with mantras about. "the safety of my children" as a trump card, I think it is fair to point out that people are often all too willing to expose their children to danger or health risks without objection unless it is something they can get all sanctimonious about. JMO[/QUOT



The heinous nature of sexual crimes is so far reaching and life long lasting, it trumps most other crimes. That is the reason for *the safety of my children or the *safely of my family*. You may not consider it important, but myself and many others here do.

There are of course other issues, but this discussion is about the subject at hand. To use them in the same mocking manner gives a disservice those issues as well.

To present a mocking tirade, trying to be funny is inappropriate and in poor taste.

You last post gives your opinion much more credibility. In fact, except for your opinion of the *safety* comment. We totally agree.

AKK

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-07-2013 at 05:19 AM.
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:01 PM   #197
Adventurelawyer
Back after a looooong break!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewisc View Post
People are on the sex offender list for offenses which include public urination, streaking, having sex with a prostitute, being falsely accused, having sex with a person a person younger then them....One person is on the list for a sex offense at age 18 because he had sex with a girlfriend one year younger then he was.

Some people claim only a fraction of the people on the sex offender list are clearly dangerous to kids and even less are predators.

People who commit other crimes aren't on any list. A person who killed someone (murder, manslaughter whatever) and either served time or was acquitted is welcome in WDW but a person who peed in public 20 years ago, as a teenager, isn't.

Doesn't affect me but it's really a PR move. Sex offenders who didn't get caught, or who cut a better deal and aren't on a list, can still enter WDW. A person who slashed someone with a knife can enter WDW. A person who urinated in public might not.

Not a policy which does much to make us safer.


Umm, yeah. First of all, states are required to register their sex offenders because sexual offense is a crime of recidivism (with crimes agains young children being almost 100% recidivist). That means those offenders will offend again. Most murders don't go out and kill again, while 99.9% of sexual offenders do.

Second, a person can be required to register ONLY AFTER CONVICTION. I capitalize that to emphisize that a jury of their peers have convicted them based upon the evidence.

Third, low risk offenders (eg., public urination and streaking) usually have their registration status limited or are not required to register IF the court found that it was simpley public urination and not a habit of public urination in front of an elementary school. Frankly, I don't want that person around my kid anymore than the guy convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor because he may just be getting up the courage (no pun).

So, I applaud Disney's policy. There are so many kids running around unsupervised or with limited supervision by parents who are clearly distracted (who wouldn't be) that WDW(et al.) are the perfect target for the perviest of the perverts. Since Disney knows this, I am sure one could craft a legal filing for a nice personal injury claim if something were to happen and Disney didn't at least make some attempt to locate, close with, and ban these super creepers.

No child should have to suffer that indignity. Its private property and the mouse is king.
Adventurelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 05-08-2013, 02:44 AM   #198
shiny1278
Earning My Ears
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1

I have been following this thread for a while now; ever since I read the article about sex offenders being turned away.
I have never knowingly been around sex offenders. I have only seen their photos on the database. In fact, only until recently did I even pay attention to the sex offender registry and the laws surrounding it. Mostly because two years ago I was placed on the registry myself.
I was 32 years old, in an AOL chat room for 30 year olds. The chat room is called "Thirties Friends". I was always socializing in chat rooms since 1999 when I first discovered AOL and I was definitely a computer nerd.
While in the chat room a girl advertised herself as wanting to engage in a sexual conversation. So being the computer nerd and horny I messaged her instantaneously. She was very aggressive and requests for photos were made but none were fulfilled. I wasn't about to send out a picture of myself for the world to see, and she wouldn't do it either. We ended up shifting the sexual conversation to something more normal. That is when I found out she was 14 and looking for an older guy. I spoke to her a few more times online, and eventually after two days I never spoke to her again.

A month later I was contacted by a detective in her home state asking me if I spoke to her. I said I did. I answered a few personal questions and that was that.
What had happened was her parents kept a log of everything she does on the computer, and they saved the transcript of our sexual conversation and delivered it to the local police even though the sexual conversation had not happened again since learning her age.

I traveled to the girls home state to turn myself in once I learned that an arrest warrant was issued for me. I was told that these crimes are punished hard, and since I have no proof of my conversations (I don't keep logs) it would be my word against actual proof that I engaged in a sexual conversation with a 14 year old even though it was before I knew her age.
I was left with two options: take it to trial and risk having added charges and at least 1 year in jail, or admit guilt and receive no jail time and just 2 years probation; but have to be placed on the registry.

The reason why one of my options included no jail time was because the detective handling the case against me recommended to the prosecutor that the case be dropped. When the prosecutor refused, he recommended no jail time; to which they agreed. I had also voluntarily been tested by two independent forensic psychologists to ensure that I was "normal" and not someone who is sexually deviant.

When I returned back to Florida; I was told that I was no longer allowed to live in my condo. A condo that I owned outright and had been living there since 2007. Since a law passed in 2005 preventing sex offenders from living within 2500 feet of a school, I was forced to sell my condo and find another place to live. My condo was 2100 feet from a school.
I could not move in with my parents because they lived a block away from a school, my sister lived within 1000 feet of a school, and most of my friends live near a school or a park.
I was told to get a tent and live under the Julia Tuttle Bridge. Luckily, I didn't have to do that as I was able to find suitable housing.

The reason why I am posting this is to illustrate how easy it was to be placed on the registry. I had no criminal history and I lock my car doors in bad areas just like everyone else. I don't rape babies and hide in bushes to molest people. I have never traveled to meet a minor for sex, and I have never attempted to abduct a child, or touch them inappropriately.

I finished my 2 year probation without any problems; not even a traffic ticket.
In terms of recidivism; it annoys me when people say all sex offenders re-offend when I am sitting here as proof that they all don't.

I love Disneyworld, I love the rides, and I love the atmosphere. Disneyworld is not just a place for kids. In fact, they made a commercial probably a decade ago specifically stating it isn't just for kids.
It is troublesome that I could potentially be turned away just because I am on a list. Yet, the drug dealer who sells pot to kids is allowed inside.

*sigh*
shiny1278 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 12:17 PM   #199
arthropodtodd
Mouseketeer
 
arthropodtodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: kansas
Posts: 199

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
Umm, yeah. First of all, states are required to register their sex offenders because sexual offense is a crime of recidivism (with crimes agains young children being almost 100% recidivist). That means those offenders will offend again. Most murders don't go out and kill again, while 99.9% of sexual offenders do.
Got source for that statistic? Yeah, didn't think so. In my work I have had one, just one person, get new charges and given his mental state, very low IQ, that did not surprise me. I have had many a hardcore pedophile in group and they know better than to re-offend. Why? Because a second conviction will prove they are a predator and then will never be released. So while they might have thoughts and urges, they learn to control for that reason alone in my experience.
__________________
Todd

WL 2004 - Wedding and Honeymoon there
WL - 2006
WL - 2009
CR - 2011
WL - 2012
WL Club Level - 2013
WL - 2014

Coming next:
December 2014 - the whole family

In the pipe:
2015
2016
arthropodtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 12:27 PM   #200
arthropodtodd
Mouseketeer
 
arthropodtodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: kansas
Posts: 199

Quote:
Originally Posted by shiny1278 View Post
I have been following this thread for a while now; ever since I read the article about sex offenders being turned away.
I have never knowingly been around sex offenders. I have only seen their photos on the database. In fact, only until recently did I even pay attention to the sex offender registry and the laws surrounding it. Mostly because two years ago I was placed on the registry myself.
I was 32 years old, in an AOL chat room for 30 year olds. The chat room is called "Thirties Friends". I was always socializing in chat rooms since 1999 when I first discovered AOL and I was definitely a computer nerd.
While in the chat room a girl advertised herself as wanting to engage in a sexual conversation. So being the computer nerd and horny I messaged her instantaneously. She was very aggressive and requests for photos were made but none were fulfilled. I wasn't about to send out a picture of myself for the world to see, and she wouldn't do it either. We ended up shifting the sexual conversation to something more normal. That is when I found out she was 14 and looking for an older guy. I spoke to her a few more times online, and eventually after two days I never spoke to her again.

A month later I was contacted by a detective in her home state asking me if I spoke to her. I said I did. I answered a few personal questions and that was that.
What had happened was her parents kept a log of everything she does on the computer, and they saved the transcript of our sexual conversation and delivered it to the local police even though the sexual conversation had not happened again since learning her age.

I traveled to the girls home state to turn myself in once I learned that an arrest warrant was issued for me. I was told that these crimes are punished hard, and since I have no proof of my conversations (I don't keep logs) it would be my word against actual proof that I engaged in a sexual conversation with a 14 year old even though it was before I knew her age.
I was left with two options: take it to trial and risk having added charges and at least 1 year in jail, or admit guilt and receive no jail time and just 2 years probation; but have to be placed on the registry.

The reason why one of my options included no jail time was because the detective handling the case against me recommended to the prosecutor that the case be dropped. When the prosecutor refused, he recommended no jail time; to which they agreed. I had also voluntarily been tested by two independent forensic psychologists to ensure that I was "normal" and not someone who is sexually deviant.

When I returned back to Florida; I was told that I was no longer allowed to live in my condo. A condo that I owned outright and had been living there since 2007. Since a law passed in 2005 preventing sex offenders from living within 2500 feet of a school, I was forced to sell my condo and find another place to live. My condo was 2100 feet from a school.
I could not move in with my parents because they lived a block away from a school, my sister lived within 1000 feet of a school, and most of my friends live near a school or a park.
I was told to get a tent and live under the Julia Tuttle Bridge. Luckily, I didn't have to do that as I was able to find suitable housing.

The reason why I am posting this is to illustrate how easy it was to be placed on the registry. I had no criminal history and I lock my car doors in bad areas just like everyone else. I don't rape babies and hide in bushes to molest people. I have never traveled to meet a minor for sex, and I have never attempted to abduct a child, or touch them inappropriately.

I finished my 2 year probation without any problems; not even a traffic ticket.
In terms of recidivism; it annoys me when people say all sex offenders re-offend when I am sitting here as proof that they all don't.

I love Disneyworld, I love the rides, and I love the atmosphere. Disneyworld is not just a place for kids. In fact, they made a commercial probably a decade ago specifically stating it isn't just for kids.
It is troublesome that I could potentially be turned away just because I am on a list. Yet, the drug dealer who sells pot to kids is allowed inside.

*sigh*
I have had clients like yourself in the past and I have also heard the stories of guys living in tent cities under bridges and swamps in Florida. I believe it is in Iowa where there is a very large tent city next to a rest stop in the interstate. Florida is a bit extreme in handling offenders.

I cannot speak about your case, but in similar cases I did the reports for I recommended probation, and treatment matching your low risk (monthly group ). Too many Judges and prosecutors are always worried more about their jobs and need to appear to be tough on crime. So if her family got vocal a prosecutor would have to file charges just so they don't lose face.

I am not sure about your case, since I do not know Florida rules well or have seen the chat transcript, but in some cases when there is not a physical victim offenders have been able to go back to court after several years and have their records expunged and therefore no longer be required to register.
__________________
Todd

WL 2004 - Wedding and Honeymoon there
WL - 2006
WL - 2009
CR - 2011
WL - 2012
WL Club Level - 2013
WL - 2014

Coming next:
December 2014 - the whole family

In the pipe:
2015
2016
arthropodtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:03 PM   #201
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
The heinous nature of sexual crimes is so far reaching and life long lasting, it trumps most other crimes. That is the reason for *the safety of my children or the *safely of my family*. You may not consider it important, but myself and many others here do.
As I said, there are some people here who have less interest in discussion the efficacy of Disney's policies than winning some sort of "most concerned parent" beauty contest. Repeating "my children's safety" as a mantra adds nothing to the issue at hand. We're all concerned with our childrens' safety.

Quote:
There are of course other issues, but this discussion is about the subject at hand. To use them in the same mocking manner gives a disservice those issues as well. ..To present a mocking tirade, trying to be funny is inappropriate and in poor taste.

You have this habit of appointing yourself the arbiter of what is tasteful or appropriate. Forgive me, but I'll let the mods do that. If I've crossed a line, they will let me know.

Quote:
You last post gives your opinion much more credibility.
Thanks. I yearn for your approval.

Quote:
In fact, except for your opinion of the *safety* comment. We totally agree.

AKK
Of course we do. As I said, no reasonable person is going to be anti-child-safety. The discussion has been about whether Disney's policies are effective (as opposed to ham-fisted), and if so, to what degree. So it may surprise you to know that people can love their children just as much as you do yet still believe that Disney's policies and the manner in which it administers them could be improved so they do not inadvertently exclude people who are no more a risk to our children than you are.
Minnies Boy Toy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:06 PM   #202
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,384

Quote:
Originally Posted by arthropodtodd View Post
I have had clients like yourself in the past and I have also heard the stories of guys living in tent cities under bridges and swamps in Florida. I believe it is in Iowa where there is a very large tent city next to a rest stop in the interstate. Florida is a bit extreme in handling offenders.

I cannot speak about your case, but in similar cases I did the reports for I recommended probation, and treatment matching your low risk (monthly group ). Too many Judges and prosecutors are always worried more about their jobs and need to appear to be tough on crime. So if her family got vocal a prosecutor would have to file charges just so they don't lose face.

I am not sure about your case, since I do not know Florida rules well or have seen the chat transcript, but in some cases when there is not a physical victim offenders have been able to go back to court after several years and have their records expunged and therefore no longer be required to register.

Hi Todd,

I was wondering and your the expert here, given the story facts as presented what would have been his chances if he went to court? Seems this fellow was only guilty of making a bad first choice of chatting.

None of us know what we would have done in his place, until faced with the same choices. But at first look I would have got to court and made a fight of it!

This is one of those things that needs to be changed on the list.


AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:21 PM   #203
druidia
I solemnly swear that I am up to no good.
 
druidia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Exactly 120 miles from the magic (and 147 from the Wonder)!
Posts: 540

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
Umm, yeah. First of all, states are required to register their sex offenders because sexual offense is a crime of recidivism (with crimes agains young children being almost 100% recidivist). That means those offenders will offend again. Most murders don't go out and kill again, while 99.9% of sexual offenders do.
That's what the media tells you to believe, but recidivism numbers do not actually bear this out entirely. Regsitered sexual offenders may go to prison again, but it's not always because of another sex crime. See previous discussion above in the thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
Second, a person can be required to register ONLY AFTER CONVICTION. I capitalize that to emphisize that a jury of their peers have convicted them based upon the evidence.
Wrong. At least in the State of FL, many people have to register as a condition of accepting a plea bargain. A common offer to first time offenders is 5 yrs probation, mandatory counseling and RSO requirement; no jail time. As a lawyer you know that doesn't include a trial by jury or judge. As a lawyer you also know that prosecutors and judges much prefer pleas over trials as it is quicker, easier and saves money. So much for really caring about protecting the public.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
Third, low risk offenders (eg., public urination and streaking) usually have their registration status limited or are not required to register IF the court found that it was simpley public urination and not a habit of public urination in front of an elementary school. Frankly, I don't want that person around my kid anymore than the guy convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor because he may just be getting up the courage (no pun).
Probably true; it's often a discretion call by the prosecutor and/or judge. But if you're referring to "Levels" as they exist in other states, we don't have those in FL. You are either an offender or a predator, which is why it's misleading when those terms are used interchangeably in discussion. Being designated as a predator requires a specific proclamation from the judge in the case and is usually reserved for those offenders who have offended multiple times or are convicted of a particularly heinous crime. Predators as defined by the state are far more rare than offenders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
So, I applaud Disney's policy. There are so many kids running around unsupervised or with limited supervision by parents who are clearly distracted (who wouldn't be) that WDW(et al.) are the perfect target for the perviest of the perverts. Since Disney knows this, I am sure one could craft a legal filing for a nice personal injury claim if something were to happen and Disney didn't at least make some attempt to locate, close with, and ban these super creepers.
Don't disagree here, especially with the distracted parents part. It amazes me how much of that you see when you're there and it's a little scary. I hope that we never act like that but never say never.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adventurelawyer View Post
No child should have to suffer that indignity. Its private property and the mouse is king.
Also don't disagree but the lynch mob mentality associated with this issue can get a little distubring, and when people are just contributing to it with opinions passed as "facts" it doesn't help.
__________________
Disney Couple! Seabreeze Point ~ Epcot ~ French Island ~ April 2005 ~~ And now Mom of Twins!
druidia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:35 PM   #204
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,384

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnies Boy Toy View Post
As I said, there are some people here who have less interest in discussion the efficacy of Disney's policies than winning some sort of "most concerned parent" beauty contest. Repeating "my children's safety" as a mantra adds nothing to the issue at hand. We're all concerned with our childrens' safety.



You have this habit of appointing yourself the arbiter of what is tasteful or appropriate. Forgive me, but I'll let the mods do that. If I've crossed a line, they will let me know.



Thanks. I yearn for your approval.



Of course we do. As I said, no reasonable person is going to be anti-child-safety. The discussion has been about whether Disney's policies are effective (as opposed to ham-fisted), and if so, to what degree. So it may surprise you to know that people can love their children just as much as you do yet still believe that Disney's policies and the manner in which it administers them could be improved so they do not inadvertently exclude people who are no more a risk to our children than you are.

Based on your 2nd post and whether you like it or not, we do agree,

What I objected to was your mocking which was rude and snarky to everyone in this discussion trying to discuss a intense subject with varying opinions.


To compare over weight people, tattoos people, ugly people, even to promote your mocking joke, to sexual offenders was just plain rude and in poor taste.


As to what I feel is tasteful or appropriate is just that my opinion, one that I base on common good taste and facts as available.


AKK

Last edited by Tonka's Skipper; 05-08-2013 at 01:52 PM.
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:40 PM   #205
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,384

[QUOTE=druidia;48336840]That's what the media tells you to believe, but recidivism numbers do not actually bear this out entirely. Regsitered sexual offenders may go to prison again, but it's not always because of another sex crime. See previous discussion above in the thread.



Wrong. At least in the State of FL, many people have to register as a condition of accepting a plea bargain. A common offer to first time offenders is 5 yrs probation, mandatory counseling and RSO requirement; no jail time. As a lawyer you know that doesn't include a trial by jury or judge. As a lawyer you also know that prosecutors and judges much prefer pleas over trials as it is quicker, easier and saves money. So much for really caring about protecting the public.

Probably true; it's often a discretion call by the prosecutor and/or judge. But if you're referring to "Levels" as they exist in other states, we don't have those in FL. You are either an offender or a predator, which is why it's misleading when those terms are used interchangeably in discussion. Being designated as a predator requires a specific proclamation from the judge in the case and is usually reserved for those offenders who have offended multiple times or are convicted of a particularly heinous crime. Predators as defined by the state are far more rare than offenders.




For the most part I agree with your statements, except in red, if you accept a plea bargain or are just pleading guilty and you plead guilty and that is the same as saying your guilty, the same as a conviction.


Maybe a bit of semantics there as well.


AKK
Tonka's Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 02:56 PM   #206
arthropodtodd
Mouseketeer
 
arthropodtodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: kansas
Posts: 199

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
Hi Todd,

I was wondering and your the expert here, given the story facts as presented what would have been his chances if he went to court? Seems this fellow was only guilty of making a bad first choice of chatting.

None of us know what we would have done in his place, until faced with the same choices. But at first look I would have got to court and made a fight of it!

This is one of those things that needs to be changed on the list.


AKK
This would be something I would not be an expert at. Experience tells me that most of the guys I have either assessed or seen in treatment have gone to prison, the number who are just given probation is lower. I also had a very high number of clients who took plea agreements instead of going to court. Why I do not know, I assume because many of these cases are open and shut these days. Their either seems to be DNA or detailed witness reports or not. Guys also will plead to lower or less counts of an offense. One count of Aggravated Indecent Liberties with a minor is less time and 2 or 3 courts. The DA like it because it doesn't tie up the courts, the offender will be placed in treatment, and will have to register. But remember the number of offenders who get a conviction and even jail time is low.

In cases of rape, out of 100 rapes only 46 get reported to police and only 5 of that 46 are convicted and only 3 will do actual time in prison. So things need to be pretty cut and dry to get convicted of an offense.

Take this stat in regards to the 75 kicked out offenders (while the ratios are not the same with child molesters, they are in the same ballpark), this means there were 1500 offenders who walked right through because they were never convicted. I believe the 75 was over 6 months, so that come out to about 8 non-convicted offenders enter the parks daily.

Anyways, with internet offenders engaging in sexually explicit communication is enough for conviction. However, they like to prove that the offender started the sexually explicit talk. When you think about the guys caught on To Catch a Predator, many were released because the undercover victim engaged the sexually explicit talk first, entrapment. Around here the deputies just sit in a chat room with a fake profile waiting to be talked to. They save the entire chat log and bring it to court. One case involved a professor who just chatted the deputy for 11 months harmlessly until he made his move.

The other thing to think about is that many of these offenders are in denial of their offense all the way to prison. They will say they did not do it, and only took the plea because they did not want to risk longer jail time.
__________________
Todd

WL 2004 - Wedding and Honeymoon there
WL - 2006
WL - 2009
CR - 2011
WL - 2012
WL Club Level - 2013
WL - 2014

Coming next:
December 2014 - the whole family

In the pipe:
2015
2016
arthropodtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 11:25 PM   #207
Luvchefmic
DIS Veteran
 
Luvchefmic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 30 minutes from Chef Mickey FL
Posts: 10,566

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
With all due respect..........on what personal experience or course of education do you base your statement on?


How do you now it would not work?..........Do you know how Disney proceeds in this policy?...how many have been kept out?

The term Security theater is cute and snarky but it is not factual or in any way supportive of your statement.


My experience is that the Theater term is used by posters who don't' have the support for there statements and used that is sound *real* and divert folks attention.


JMHO


AKK

AKK
\

THANK you I detest the term and agree with you 10000 % Most people have NO idea the training WDW Security undergoes and would probably be shocked to know what that Dept actually does to make things safer Of course anything can happen anywhere but thank you again for your post

JMHO too
__________________
a story of renewed hope and the power of the Dis:
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=3111056
Luvchefmic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2013, 12:46 PM   #208
tiggspring
DIS Veteran: When I stop talking you'll know I'm dead!
 
tiggspring's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pittsburgh Pa area
Posts: 1,912

Quote:
Originally Posted by shiny1278 View Post
I have been following this thread for a while now; ever since I read the article about sex offenders being turned away.
I have never knowingly been around sex offenders. I have only seen their photos on the database. In fact, only until recently did I even pay attention to the sex offender registry and the laws surrounding it. Mostly because two years ago I was placed on the registry myself.
I was 32 years old, in an AOL chat room for 30 year olds. The chat room is called "Thirties Friends". I was always socializing in chat rooms since 1999 when I first discovered AOL and I was definitely a computer nerd.
While in the chat room a girl advertised herself as wanting to engage in a sexual conversation. So being the computer nerd and horny I messaged her instantaneously. She was very aggressive and requests for photos were made but none were fulfilled. I wasn't about to send out a picture of myself for the world to see, and she wouldn't do it either. We ended up shifting the sexual conversation to something more normal. That is when I found out she was 14 and looking for an older guy. I spoke to her a few more times online, and eventually after two days I never spoke to her again.

A month later I was contacted by a detective in her home state asking me if I spoke to her. I said I did. I answered a few personal questions and that was that.
What had happened was her parents kept a log of everything she does on the computer, and they saved the transcript of our sexual conversation and delivered it to the local police even though the sexual conversation had not happened again since learning her age.

I traveled to the girls home state to turn myself in once I learned that an arrest warrant was issued for me. I was told that these crimes are punished hard, and since I have no proof of my conversations (I don't keep logs) it would be my word against actual proof that I engaged in a sexual conversation with a 14 year old even though it was before I knew her age.
I was left with two options: take it to trial and risk having added charges and at least 1 year in jail, or admit guilt and receive no jail time and just 2 years probation; but have to be placed on the registry.

The reason why one of my options included no jail time was because the detective handling the case against me recommended to the prosecutor that the case be dropped. When the prosecutor refused, he recommended no jail time; to which they agreed. I had also voluntarily been tested by two independent forensic psychologists to ensure that I was "normal" and not someone who is sexually deviant.

When I returned back to Florida; I was told that I was no longer allowed to live in my condo. A condo that I owned outright and had been living there since 2007. Since a law passed in 2005 preventing sex offenders from living within 2500 feet of a school, I was forced to sell my condo and find another place to live. My condo was 2100 feet from a school.
I could not move in with my parents because they lived a block away from a school, my sister lived within 1000 feet of a school, and most of my friends live near a school or a park.
I was told to get a tent and live under the Julia Tuttle Bridge. Luckily, I didn't have to do that as I was able to find suitable housing.

The reason why I am posting this is to illustrate how easy it was to be placed on the registry. I had no criminal history and I lock my car doors in bad areas just like everyone else. I don't rape babies and hide in bushes to molest people. I have never traveled to meet a minor for sex, and I have never attempted to abduct a child, or touch them inappropriately.

I finished my 2 year probation without any problems; not even a traffic ticket.
In terms of recidivism; it annoys me when people say all sex offenders re-offend when I am sitting here as proof that they all don't.

I love Disneyworld, I love the rides, and I love the atmosphere. Disneyworld is not just a place for kids. In fact, they made a commercial probably a decade ago specifically stating it isn't just for kids.
It is troublesome that I could potentially be turned away just because I am on a list. Yet, the drug dealer who sells pot to kids is allowed inside.

*sigh*
IF your story is true I sympathize with you. Under those circumstances you are not a pedophile just listed as one. (you might want to go back to court and try to get your life back. If the girl is and adult now and willing to testify you may have a chance.. minors often get coerced by authorities and parents in these circumstances). I also sympathize with those young men who suddenly find that when they turn 18 there long term High school sweet heart is suddenly a "child" to be avoided if they are under 16 or they risk being listed as an offender. For those of you not in the system this happens ALOT more than you would think and you need to look at the registry very carefully and read between the lines.

THAT BEING SAID, as a mental health worker who specialized in traumatized children and the wife of a forensic social worker that chose to leave working with victims to work with the offenders in hopes to prevent some of these terrible things, pedophiles have NO EFFECTIVE TREATMENT. Slips are part of the addictive process and while that is bad for alcoholics and drug addicts its is DISASTEROUS for children around the pedophile who, with 98 percent certainty, will offend again.

I am thrilled with WDW decision!
__________________
~Bonnie~
MeDHDD 14 DS 12 DD 9Sesi 6 Garfield 5yr Yuki 5yr Yeti 5y

tiggspring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2013, 01:26 PM   #209
dadddio
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,215

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggspring View Post
THAT BEING SAID, as a mental health worker who specialized in traumatized children and the wife of a forensic social worker that chose to leave working with victims to work with the offenders in hopes to prevent some of these terrible things, pedophiles have NO EFFECTIVE TREATMENT. Slips are part of the addictive process and while that is bad for alcoholics and drug addicts its is DISASTEROUS for children around the pedophile who, with 98 percent certainty, will offend again.

I am thrilled with WDW decision!
Not that I want to resurrect thus train wreck, but you might want to read more of this thread as there was an expert on this issue in the thread who refuted your point.
dadddio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2013, 01:35 PM   #210
Tonka's Skipper
DIS Veteran
 
Tonka's Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Connecticut in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 4,384

In order to be 100% correct, arthropodtodd will debate your 98%, but maybe not the rest of your statement.


He will also tell you rapist are known to scare him big time, at least from a repeat view!

You hit it on the head, the terrible trauma theses pedophiles cause to kids!

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 04:26 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: