Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by Rumors Rocks, Apr 29, 2013.
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
Sounds like a excellent policy to me. I would hope other parks in the country would do the same.
It doesn't sound like a bad policy but it will be crazy-hard to keep up with it and likely only limits a super small number of them.
I agree, it could never be 100%, but at least the word is going out......your a sex offender..........your not welcome at Disney Parks/venues!
This is interesting. A good policy to make it known. On a related note, we was at DCA a few years ago and saw an interesting looking guy who was staring down some like 10 year old kid, it was creepy. Not saying he was a sex offender at the time, but people like that need not to be at places like this.
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.
Anything that keeps sex offenders out works for me!.
Your list of age difference and hiring a hooker and public urination are few and far between and was in only a few states. Most states are reviewing and changing the list requirements. To the best of my knowledge being accused and found not guilty is wrong.
*Some peoples* opinion whether they are dangerous is not factual or important.
Since sexual predators have been proven to continue to commit their terrible crimes over and over again to compare them to other criminals is the old *apples and Orange* debate.
As I mentioned earlier , nothing is going to be 100%, but any policy that keeps some out is a good one!
Nothing PR about it,
But you are entitled to your opinion........I for one would prefer Disney to do everything possible to keep them out and away from my kids and family in general.
On reflection..............If the whole world chose not to do *something that is a good idea* and would make people overall safer, just because it is not 100% effective or perfect..............or that others things would not also be improved (EI getting other dangerous criminals away from our families).....the entire world would come to a stretching halt!
It is always easy to sit back and mock something as just self serving move or a trick, but it doesn't help anything.
So what you're saying is that Disney shouldn't bother, because it's pointless... Well then... I'll go ahead and say that while you are entitled to your opinion, I am glad you are not in charge of the safety programs at the parks.
You said it shorter and better then I did!
I agree with Lewis. While it may look like a good idea at first blush (who doesn't want to keep pedophiles away from our kids?), I think it ends up to be just more of the same Security Theater.
I think this is an important rule for the parks.
The larger issue of who is registered who might not deserve the particular scarlet letter is wholly different. There are plenty of people who are registered for things that probably should not class them as such.
Disney can't change this, but it's important that they adhere to this type of guideline as they are specifically oriented towards children.
It might not be perfect, but it is a start. Most major changes started with a small change and gained momentum. And if it keeps even 1 pedophile out of the park, isn't that worth it?
Security Theater that, according to the referenced article, has prevented at least 75 sex offenders from entering Disney Parks. Sounds like they're doing a pretty good job at catching what they can with the information that's available to them.
Perhaps we should have Disney take over the TSA?
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.
Bill the Cat? Is that you?
I agree it sounds good but the only people I think it will really keep out are those with annual passes whose names Disney has decided to check out. Next would be resort guests whose names are run through a data base. I don't care so much about all the privacy issues many are concerned with but for those that do it appears this must be how they are finding the registered sex offenders that are entering the park by running names of paid guests through some type of system? Also think that is focusing on a small (but troublesome) group of criminals. Murderers, those with assault records, etc are as troublesome.
I pretty much think if you go to the park with a ticket you paid for on your own there will be no way to to know unless you are extremely suspicious acting or misbehave on property.
Every state in the country has a public online site that anyone or organization can to check.
Very easy to do!
+1 Sexual predators can buy their tickets at the gate, from their local AAA office or from mail order vendors.
This policy gives the appearance of keeping sexual predators out of the parks without really doing it.
People are on the list for misdemeanors committed before the list existed.
I kinda wish they'd at least separate it by the different levels of sexual offense. Someone who is a level 1 for having an SO a year younger than them is clearly different from a level 3 repeat offender.
Separate names with a comma.