line cutting

[Wadecool]

That is one of the most frustrating things about the whole incident - its only the idea of someone blocking him from us if we got separated for some random reason that was beyond our control - which is extremely unlikely in the first place - and most people wouldn't have any issues helping a family resolve. The guy in my instance would not have been one of those people - he was simply a "you're not getting through" kinda guy. There are people like that at Disney. It was markedly upsetting, as anyone can see.

In reality we're a pretty pacifist household. We wouldn't be cutting in line in the first place. We're the ones that let people past as it generally doesn't bother us or has even happened that much anyway.

I would absolutely do anything I could to help you as a parent get reunited with your small child
as I'm sure anyone else here would. I won't however let someone just come pushing past, like
"d-r", who after intentionally separating himself from his family by not entering the line with them, decides that now whoever blocks his path while he is cutting in line is in the wrong and will be going to jail. To openly threaten & call out and invite other people here to meet up and fight? That person definitely needs some anger management.

 

[Wadecool]

That is one of the most frustrating things about the whole incident - its only the idea of someone blocking him from us if we got separated for some random reason that was beyond our control - which is extremely unlikely in the first place - and most people wouldn't have any issues helping a family resolve. The guy in my instance would not have been one of those people - he was simply a "you're not getting through" kinda guy. There are people like that at Disney. It was markedly upsetting, as anyone can see.

In reality we're a pretty pacifist household. We wouldn't be cutting in line in the first place. We're the ones that let people past as it generally doesn't bother us or has even happened that much anyway.

Sorry, duplicate post.

 

[d-r]

I said I wouldn't reply to this thread again, and I hate to go back on that, but Melissa told me some of the things that were said here and it is obvious to me that I was not clear. That's my fault. I never made a physical threat to anyone. I meant that I would go around anyone trying to physically block me from my three-year-old or my seven-year-old child. That someone would have to physically stop me from getting to my children. My point was that they would be arrested for physically trying to stop me. I am sorry that I was not clear - I found it egregious and shocking that someone would try to physically block me from my child. My understanding is that since I wrote my last reply that others clarified that they would not try to physically block someone from their child, so I must have misunderstood what those posters meant by physically blocking others from getting to their children. But I never said I would physically harm anyone. I said that someone trying to physically prevent me from getting to my children would go to jail. I thought that two posters were challenging that notion - that they thought they had the right to physically block me from my child, and that they would not go to jail because they had this right. To me that seemed like such a bizarre response to such a hypothetical situation that would likely never happen in the fist place. And so I replied that they could try it and see what happened - my intention with that statement was that I was meant they would see that they would end up in jail if they actually tried it. And I am confident that would be the case, because I believe that physically blocking access to someone from their children would be considered a terroristic threat. I did not mean to imply physical violence. However, I was less than clear, and that was my fault. I apologize for being unclear and for giving that impression. I do not want or intend to physically threaten anyone.

 

[Mama Who]

And I am confident that would be the case, because I believe that physically blocking access to someone from their children would be considered a terroristic threat.

Oh my word. I have stayed out of this thread up to here but this was just a little too much.

A terrorist threat is, "If you try to get by me I'll blow up your house." The simple act of preventing passage, however rude, mean spirited or what have you does not constitute a terrorist threat. You are mistaken in your interpretation of the law on this specific point.

 

[Wadecool]

I said I wouldn't reply to this thread again, and I hate to go back on that, but Melissa told me some of the things that were said here and it is obvious to me that I was not clear. That's my fault. I never made a physical threat to anyone. I meant that I would go around anyone trying to physically block me from my three-year-old or my seven-year-old child. That someone would have to physically stop me from getting to my children. My point was that they would be arrested for physically trying to stop me. I am sorry that I was not clear - I found it egregious and shocking that someone would try to physically block me from my child. My understanding is that since I wrote my last reply that others clarified that they would not try to physically block someone from their child, so I must have misunderstood what those posters meant by physically blocking others from getting to their children. But I never said I would physically harm anyone. I said that someone trying to physically prevent me from getting to my children would go to jail. I thought that two posters were challenging that notion - that they
thought they had the right to physically block me from my child, and that they would not go to jail because they had this right. To me that seemed like such a bizarre response to such a hypothetical situation that would likely never happen in the fist place.
And so I replied that they could try it and see what happened - my intention with that statement was that I was meant they would see that they would end up in jail if they actually tried it. And I am confident that would be the case, because I believe that physically blocking access to someone from their children would be considered a terroristic threat. I did not mean to imply
physical violence. However, I was less than clear, and that was my fault. I apologize for being unclear and for giving that impression. I do not want or intend to physically threaten anyone.

Sorry partner but you can't just put that genie back into the bottle. You said what you did and it's out there now, threats and all. Just because you repeat over and over that you didn't mean to threaten violence, it doesn't just magically go away. You didn't just imply physical violence, you gave out specific dates for us to meet up with you. It doesn't get any more intentional than that. In the scenario YOU described, where you just demand that people let you by on your say so, sorry that is still not going to work and you still aren't going to get by. Just because YOU decided to make the choice to go off and separate yourself from your family, you don't get to come along later and cry foul at anyone who dares stand in your way. And again, if I'm standing still, and you push me to get past, YOU are the aggressor and if law enforcement is brought in, they'll tell you the same thing. The situation that Melissa described is totally different. She would surely get a pass from most reasonable people, you probably would not.

 

[KellyNY]

I said I wouldn't reply to this thread again, and I hate to go back on that, but Melissa told me some of the things that were said here and it is obvious to me that I was not clear. That's my fault. I never made a physical threat to anyone. I meant that I would go around anyone trying to physically block me from my three-year-old or my seven-year-old child. That someone would have to physically stop me from getting to my children. My point was that they would be arrested for physically trying to stop me. I am sorry that I was not clear - I found it egregious and shocking that someone would try to physically block me from my child. My understanding is that since I wrote my last reply that others clarified that they would not try to physically block someone from their child, so I must have misunderstood what those posters meant by physically blocking others from getting to their children. But I never said I would physically harm anyone. I said that someone trying to physically prevent me from getting to my children would go to jail. I thought that two posters were challenging that notion - that they thought they had the right to physically block me from my child, and that they would not go to jail because they had this right. To me that seemed like such a bizarre response to such a hypothetical situation that would likely never happen in the fist place. And so I replied that they could try it and see what happened - my intention with that statement was that I was meant they would see that they would end up in jail if they actually tried it. And I am confident that would be the case, because I believe that physically blocking access to someone from their children would be considered a terroristic threat. I did not mean to imply physical violence. However, I was less than clear, and that was my fault. I apologize for being unclear and for giving that impression. I do not want or intend to physically threaten anyone.

So when people were saying they will just stand there filling all the space and so not letting you to pass and not ever touching you, you were responding without reading their posts?

 

[Hannathy]

Sorry partner but you can't just put that genie back into the bottle. You said what you did and it's out there now, threats and all. Just because you repeat over and over that you didn't mean to threaten violence, it doesn't just magically go away. You didn't just imply physical violence, you gave out specific dates for us to meet up with you. It doesn't get any more intentional than that. In the scenario YOU described, where you just demand that people let you by on your say so, sorry that is still not going to work and you still aren't going to get by. Just because YOU decided to make the choice to go off and separate yourself from your family, you don't get to come along later and cry foul at anyone who dares stand in your way. And again, if I'm standing still, and you push me to get past, YOU are the aggressor and if law enforcement is brought in, they'll tell you the same thing. The situation that Melissa described is totally different. She would surely get a pass from most reasonable people, you probably would not.

 

[Momtomouselover]

Oh man guys just let it go.. There is obviously a fuzzy line about certain types of cutting (rejoining with a child in tow) and then there is out right cutting. There is also a fuzzy line about how far or IF you should block a *suspected* line cutter. I think this thread and many others have definitely beat this to death.

The d-r guy is trying to apologize and recognize that he may have overstated his position. It is hard to read tone or if you feel passionate about something or an event (like the whole Pooh ride scenario with Melissa) it is easier to miss specific words or take things out of context. In the same vein I don't think or at least I hope that 99.9% of people would not truly act violently ( a *true* hip check for instance) towards another guest over line cutting or suspected cutting.

Wow! I must be bored to have read a good part of this thread this late on a Sunday night. Good night all and hopefully we can all find a happy middle ground.

 

[Wadecool]

Oh man guys just let it go.. There is obviously a fuzzy line about certain types of cutting (rejoining with a child in tow) and then there is out right cutting. There is also a fuzzy line about how far or IF you should block a *suspected* line cutter. I think this thread and many others have definitely beat this to death.

The d-r guy is trying to apologize and recognize that he may have overstated his position. It is hard to read tone or if you feel passionate about something or an event (like the whole Pooh ride scenario with Melissa) it is easier to miss specific words or take things out of context. In the same vein I don't think or at least I hope that 99.9% of people would not truly act violently ( a *true* hip check for instance) towards another guest over line cutting or suspected cutting.

Wow! I must be bored to have read a good part of this thread this late on a
Sunday night. Good night all and hopefully we can all find a happy middle
ground.

Sorry, but there are certain lines that should not be crossed and "d-r" crossed one and not just
by a little bit. There was nothing fuzzy about what he said. It was actually very clear, though
misguided. His apology, which was self serving INMO, doesn't just make his comments ok.

 

[Momtomouselover]

Sorry, but there are certain lines that should not be crossed and "d-r" crossed one and not just
by a little bit. There was nothing fuzzy about what he said. It was actually very clear, though
misguided. His apology, which was self serving INMO, doesn't just make his comments ok.

I get it and I do think "d-r" crossed the line a bit but I think he did it in defense of his wife Melissa and in misunderstanding what you and another poster were saying. I think he thought erroneously that you guys were threatening him and/or his wife or saying that it was alright to block her the way she and her child were blocked at Pooh. He then set up some sort of hypothetical situation about being separated from a child (say one slipped under the bar or something odd like that) and thought you guys were saying he would not be let by to regroup with this child in this scenario. Not a very likely scenario, and I think he got carried away in overstating his position. My guess is that he knows that what he said was not ok and thus that is why he is apologizing.

I suppose it is none of my business and I don't know any of you guys. I just was surprised to see how far this thread has gone. Ok, this time I really must go to bed.

Night all.

 

[Wadecool]

I get it and I do think "d-r" crossed the line a bit but I think he did it in defense of his wife Melissa and in misunderstanding what you and another poster were saying. I think he thought erroneously that you guys were threatening him and/or his wife or saying that it was alright to block her the way she and her child were blocked at Pooh. He then set up some sort of hypothetical situation about being separated from a child (say one slipped under the bar or something odd like that) and thought you guys were saying he would not be let by to regroup with this child in this scenario. Not a very likely scenario, and I think he got carried away in overstating his position. My guess is that he knows that what he said was not ok and thus that is why he is apologizing.

I suppose it is none of my business and I don't know any of you guys. I just was surprised to see how far this thread has gone. Ok, this time I really must go to bed.

Night all.

He didn't just cross the line a little bit, he went WAY across. D-r was crystal clear about what he was saying and absolutely threatened other people here and even left a well documented trail. Again, the genie does not just go back into the bottle on his half hearted apology. That apology was more likely meant to avoid getting banned from here, which he certainly should be. I don't presume to guess who's married to who around here because it doesn't make a difference. He described an entirely different scenario than Melissa and his intent was clearly different as well. We are all big boys and girls after all, and are responsible for our own actions, even d-r.

 

[tony609]

I like how someone metioned that if they were blocked from their child/party that the person keeping them from their destination would be arrested???? As long as their not touching you physically etc...you more than likely cannot have them arrested, sure they are being a butt , but is it an arrestable offense, proabably not.

 

[jamieintx]

Line cutting sucks. Never been to WDW, but it happens everywhere. Yes, it makes me furious, but I have to remember that my actions are constantly being evaluated by my children. It's NOT right to get in someone's face and be ugly and intimidating. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm not saying you can't confront or try to stop it, but it CAN be done the right way.

And...it doesn't matter what the reason...if a man got in my face in a threatening way or blocked me from getting to my children, my husband would rush to my aide and defense QUICKLY. Does that mean he'd start throwing punches? No, but he has every right to stand up for and defend his family, which he will do. I think that's all d-r is trying to say.

 

[KellyNY]

I get it and I do think "d-r" crossed the line a bit but I think he did it in defense of his wife Melissa and in misunderstanding what you and another poster were saying. I think he thought erroneously that you guys were threatening him and/or his wife or saying that it was alright to block her the way she and her child were blocked at Pooh. He then set up some sort of hypothetical situation about being separated from a child (say one slipped under the bar or something odd like that) and thought you guys were saying he would not be let by to regroup with this child in this scenario. Not a very likely scenario, and I think he got carried away in overstating his position. My guess is that he knows that what he said was not ok and thus that is why he is apologizing.

I suppose it is none of my business and I don't know any of you guys. I just was surprised to see how far this thread has gone. Ok, this time I really must go to bed.

Night all.

Sorry, not buying that. He was clearly understanding what he is responding to, it is clear from his posts, so what with this "misunderstanding" card. I do not buy fake apologies, sorry but it did not work.

 

[Wadecool]

Line cutting sucks. Never been to WDW, but it happens everywhere. Yes, it makes me furious, but I have to remember that my actions are constantly being evaluated by my children. It's NOT right to get in someone's face and be ugly and intimidating. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm not saying you can't confront or try to stop it, but it CAN be done the right way.

And...it doesn't matter what the reason...if a man got in my face in a threatening way or blocked me from getting to my children, my husband would rush to my aide and defense QUICKLY. Does that mean he'd start throwing punches? No, but he has every right to stand up for and defend his family, which he will do. I think that's all d-r is trying to say.

What d-r was saying (he didn't try, he said it) was that if I or anyone else stand in his way, he
will use physical violence to move me, period. He also openly gave you, me, and everyone else
the dates of his next trip for the sole purpose to challenge myself and another poster to a fight.
Sorry, but he doesn't get that one back. You may want to go back and read this guys posts
again. In the scene he set up where he just pushes through the line, if I stand my ground and
refuse to let him pass, what is ugly or intimidating about that? I'm just standing there. He is the one who trying to force himself into a space I am currently occupying. If my child learns anything, it will be that some people don't believe the rules apply to them. The intent of d-r
could not have been more clear, that's the thing about forums, you leave a written record of your
responses, for all to see.

 

[goofy4prez]

I didn't just come back from vacation and post about it. It's been nine months since I came back from vacation and someone else started a thread about line cutting today and I just put my two cents in. It's a discussion board!!




Just like the people who always quote what Walt would want or do in a given situation!

I'll bet that Walt would not be pleased and would not want line jumping.

Were either one of you guys wearing jorts in the pooh line early in the morning last summer?

Wadecool. Heck yes that is a threat. Of course it is. You physically threaten my family you will go to jail. That is a threat, a promise. I mean really? is that what you are want to argue? Really? That saying you would go to jail is a threat. OK I'm full of threats then - physically threaten my family and you will go to jail. There. Threat made. I don't know how to be more specific.

Hannathy. Look. I'm going to leave this thread without reading anymore of this bs, and I'll even take my dis ban after however many years here if the moderators want to give me one for saying my mind. But you do not, you do not, you do not have any right whatsoever to physically threaten or block someone.

Either one of you. You are not in charge of the line. You do not know how someone might have gotten separated. You do not know if someone's child got separated or lost or whatever. You are not in charge of making these decisions. If you tried to physically separate me from my children I would explain the situation to you verbally. Now, I'm sure that any normal person at that point would let me get to my child. That's just common decency. If yo did not you would have to physically *try* and stop me from getting to my child. At which point you would be the aggressor, you'd be going to jail. You do not have some "right" to physically intimidate people. You don't. Really? You are going to try to physically prevent someone from getting to their three year-old? What the heck is wrong with you? I'm sorry but that is just nuts to me. Yes, You would have to physically stop me from getting to my child.

Either one of you. I'll be at walt disney world May 26-June 26. If you'll be there any time during that, pm me, I'll send you my cell phone number and you can call me at disney world and we'll get together and you try to separate me from my family and we'll see what happens - if that doesn't work out we'll be back in the fall and for the holidays, we are there often enough I'm sure we can find some time I'm sure. Just let me know. Please.

Hannathy. You telling my wife that it is OK for someone to physically intimidate her because she does what the cast member says. That "we do that in the city" = listen, here in the country we let women and children go by if they need to go by. It is common decency. Grown men who threaten women and put their hands in their face isn't acceptable here. And if I'd been there I'd have had words with that guy.

I think I can accurately describe what is wrong with you here. I believe the testosterone that should be located about 1 foot below your waistline has moved about a foot above your neck and is having some serious effects on your mental capacity.... Sorry dude, as much as I may or may not agree with you, this has to be one of the most (if not the most) pathetic and threatening post I have ever seen here on the DIS.

 

[Hannathy]

What d-r was saying (he didn't try, he said it) was that if I or anyone else stand in his way, he will use physical violence to move me, period. He also openly gave you, me, and everyone else the dates of his next trip for the sole purpose to challenge myself and another poster to a fight. Sorry, but he doesn't get that one back. You may want to go back and read this guys nonsense again. In the scene he set up where he just pushes through the line, if I stand my ground and refuse to let him pass, what is ugly or intimidating about that? I'm just standing there. The intent of d-r could not have been more clear, that's the thing about forums, you leave a written record of your responses, for all to see.

I agree and with KellyNY I don't buy fake apologies either.

 

[goofy4prez]

And...it doesn't matter what the reason...if a man got in my face in a threatening way or blocked me from getting to my children, my husband would rush to my aide and defense QUICKLY. Does that mean he'd start throwing punches? No, but he has every right to stand up for and defend his family, which he will do. I think that's all d-r is trying to say.

I don't disagree with you here. As a man myself, if my wife or my daughter is being physically threatened or harmed, I would do anything necessary to protect them from being harmed or being harmed any further. I would have no problem with dr if this was what he was saying.

But in no way would I go onto a public forum as d-r did, state the days I'm going to be in WDW and challange anyone to meet me and see what I will do to you if you choose to do so, and then finish the statement with a "please." This is hardly a threat to his family. Instead it is a threat by d-r that has nothing to do with defending his family. This is exactly what d-r did.. Not cool.

 

[Wadecool]

I don't disagree with you here. As a man myself, if my wife or my daughter is being physically threatened or harmed, I would do anything necessary to protect them from being harmed or being harmed any further. I would have no problem with dr if this was what he was saying.

But in no way would I go onto a public forum as d-r did, state the days I'm going to be in WDW and challange anyone to meet me and see what I will do to you if you choose to do so, and then finish the statement with a "please." This is exactly what d-r did.. Not cool.

The please at the end really let's everyone know that this was a well thought out threat. "Oops, I didn't mean it that way" isn't going to cut it after the "please".

 

[Yoshi]

sadly I do remember. Before the accountants and the lawyers took over.

It is funny but this is one area that even Six Flags seems to care about more and has signs posted warning people.

Unfortunately, getting them to enforce it is just as bad as Disney at least at my local Six Flags. I have seen cutters reported twice to security in the last year at Six Flags and they didn't get in trouble because security didn't see it. A few years ago, someone was actually punched multiple times by a line cutter when they refused to let the line cutter pass at the same Six Flags.

Another park near me has security guards in line on raised platforms monitoring the line looking for line cutters. I know Disney won't do that but it would be great if they did.