Walt Disney World bans sex offenders from theme parks

[spidet1964]

This is my job. I work for a major children's hospital and I scan Id's all day. We scan everyone. It's a program called Easy Lobby. There is no reason why Disney couldn't use it. It would expensive to start up due to license fees for each scanner. They could require Names and birthdates for ticket purchase and run them at that time not park entry. It's just a shame these scumbags can't be detected before they're caught and registered.

 

[spidet1964]

T

DID YOU READ THE POST YOU QUOTED? Did you understand what Traveliz posted?

It's impossible to check an online site if you don't know the person's name or address.

Not true you can check just by state

 

[spidet1964]

I'm still waiting for T Skipper's link documenting a FL law requiring photo ID from every guest checking into a room.

I'll retract my previous statement if he will supply documentation regarding any new policy which allows merchants to require photo ID (normal circumstances) as a requirement for customers.

Actually all states riquire it but it's only for the person who's name the room is under

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Then lets get those 8th graders to work at Disney IT!! Disney is always having issues with their site....just look at how many people are always complaining about it.
But, I digress. Sure, there are 75 fewer pedophiles at WDW...but are they true 'pedophiles' or are they people who may have done something much less serious. I just don't feel any safer....and I would still be watching my own children (if they were that young) myself.


You truly can't take only the info that 'proves' your point and ignore all other info!! That merely weakens your point. There are many 'reformed' criminals out there. Pedophiles included. I suppose you would prefer them to have a big ole RP branded on their foreheads that shows they are 'reformed'?

Even if this was a case of Disney PR, it doesn't make one whit of difference to me. And my opinion is just as valid as yours. So, if you go to WDW now and feel safer, then fine. But I truly think it's a false sense of security. And that's worse, by far!!!

Goof, what did I leave out?...........in red I stated people can change!

I also pointed out that there are *degrees* to the crimes and that the sties are being revised and improved.

I never said anyone should be branded

I stated its not perfect. Does that mean we should just do nothing?


Where did I say your opinion is worth more or less then mine?


BUT THE BOTTEM LINE IS, ANY CRIMINAL LOSES HIS OR HERS RIGHTS, WHEN THE SAFELY OF MY FAMILY OR ANYONES FAMILY IS CONCERNED!

When they are proved reformed. I'll open the gate myself! There are just to many repeaters out their and the heinous nature of these crimes does not permit guess work on the part of the alleged experts, as their record proves.



As to false sense of security, I beg to disagree and believe almost all parents and people out there are to smart to be tricked into that. They know they need their guards up!


AKK

 

[dadddio]

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.

I'm not seeing how kicking 75 people out proves that they are doing a good job.

Imagine a hypothetical scenario where 25 of those 75 were the dumpster pee-ers and romeo/juliet teenagers and that 200 other random SOs were let in the gates. Is that 75 still evidence of good performance?

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.

No one is suggesting that they shouldn't bother.

If you read my posts you would have found that nothing is 100%............in this case they have the names and addresses of every annual pass holder and guest at all Disney resorts........some 27,000 plus beds.

There are other facial systems and they can ask for your ID any time.

Could you imagine the firestorm on these boards if it was found that Disney was running facial recognition on their guests? It would make the RFID paranoia pale in comparison.

I used google and what you've been saying isn't true.

I'm waiting for the link regarding FL law requiring photo ID from all guests checking in.

There clearly is no such law since very typically the easiest way to check in is to send one parent to the counter while the other hits the giftshop or food court with the kids.

Good for you AKK re your children & grandchildren. Basically I agree with what Disney is doing. Because there is always a reason something is not 100% full proof but for me I would rather they try even if it just stops a small percentage. My home security system is not 100% intruder proof but it does eliminate say opportunists but ultimately I know if a person really is determined of course they can get in. But I am still willing to guard against the others to lessen my odds!

My issue is not with Disney taking steps to keep identifiable, known sexual predators out of the parks. I get that this is only going to stop a very small percentage of them out and I'm OK with that. My only issue is that their policy seems to also kick out non-predatory offendors simply because they got dumped onto the SO list. That's kind of a bummer.

It is a PR move in the sense that if anything should happen on Disney property, which is has in the past, then they can stay a head of things in the press showing off what they have been doing. It is a preemptive PR move.

It would also serve them well in the event of a lawsuit, I suspect. They would be able to show that they make appropriate efforts to keep out known sexual predators and have security precautions in place to minimize any predatory activities in the parks.

No, not innocent. Those who befriend, marry, date, or defend them..Why would anyone want to know, or get to know a sex offender?

I think that you and others are using 'sex offender' and 'sexual predator' analogously. However, I believe that this misses the point (or skews it, perhaps).

Not true you can check just by state

Absent the person's name or even what state he/she is from, this check is going to be very difficult.

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

I can't believe anybody would want to take the risk on if somebody has reformed. I see the top priority as the innocent children sorry but I do, if that means a few disappointed offenders that really have turned over a new leaf then so be it. Imao only. Basically you blotch your copybook when you offend matey. There are other things you can do I am sure to enjoy yourself. Just not this.

 

[dadddio]

BUT THE BOTTEM LINE IS, ANY CRIMINAL LOSES HIS OR HERS RIGHTS, WHEN THE SAFELY OF MY FAMILY OR ANYONES FAMILY IS CONCERNED!

While I kind of agree with the sentiment of this statement, it kind of depends on how you define 'criminal', 'rights', and 'safety'.

For instance, a person who has served his/her time and is not actively committing a crime is not a criminal.

Also, there isn't anything about going to Disneyland in the Constitution, so none of us have a 'right' to be there. It is private property. The company has a right to ask any one of us to not return for any reason whatsoever or no reason at all. That's there 'right'.

Allowing a non-predatory sexual offender in the park has no effect whatsoever on your family's safety.

 

[dadddio]

I can't believe anybody would want to take the risk on if somebody has reformed. I see the top priority as the innocent children sorry but I do, if that means a few disappointed offenders that really have turned over a new leaf then so be it. Imao only. Basically you blotch your copybook when you offend matey. There are other things you can do I am sure to enjoy yourself. Just not this.

I don't believe that anyone in this thread or anywhere else has taken the position that sexual predators (or those identified as previous sexual predators) should be allowed in the parks.

 

[Minnies Boy Toy]

Thank goodness for this news. I mean, sexual offenders can still get in anonymously by buying a daily ticket, but I'd be really upset if I knew they could get passholder discounts like the rest of us!

 

[robinb]

G
When they are proved reformed. I'll open the gate myself!

You are aware that sex offenders NEVER come off the sex offenders registry, right? Even after they finish their treatment and probation.

 

[Paula Sedley-Burke]

I don't believe that anyone in this thread or anywhere else has taken the position that sexual predators (or those identified as previous sexual predators) should be allowed in the parks.

Thank goodness!

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

You are aware that sex offenders NEVER come off the sex offenders registry, right? Even after they finish their treatment and probation.

That is not totally correct. The list crimes and offenses change and some have been removed.

Not to mention that no one is saying what standard Disney is using in reviewing each case.

But again, their rights ended where the safety of my family and others begin!

If they didn't want to lose their rights they should not have done the crime and/or gotten help!


Robin you can keep trying to defend these people but you have no ground to stand on!




AKK

 

[goofy4tink]

I'm sorry but it reeks of vigilante justice!! Yes, my family's safety is always going to be first and foremost in my mind. And I take care of that, for my own family.
Disagree all you want. But, I spend more time in WDW than the vast majority of people out there. And the things I see there would curl your hair. Parents sitting at pools, drinking heavily..they can barely stand. but, their kids are in the pool. No way are they watching those kids and even if they saw an issue (and were able to recognize it is an issue) there is no way they could help that child. They are counting on lifeguards to do that for them.
Or the parents that seem to think it's a good idea to allow their very young children to wander around the park or the resort by themselves..even if it is with an older sibling. I have overheard them saying...'Oh, it's WDW. They're safe here. It's not as if we were at home in 'whatever city' !'...oh, but it's exactly the same!!

People let their guard down in WDW...look at the stuff left in strollers...Oh, no one is going to steal it, we're in WDW. But, in all reality? You are actually less safe in WDW in regards to certain crime.

So, I don't buy the whole Disney could keep a data base with offenders on it and then cross check with those registering for resort stays. Only the main person on the reservation shows ID. And again, the vast majority of offenders are still not in 'the system'...they haven't been caught yet. Nothing you can do about that.
But, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

 

[Colleen27]

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.

Ditto to all of this.

I have a friend who is on the registry. His crime? He hooked up with a chick in a club. We were regulars back then and we knew they carded so he didn't even think twice about starting a (immature, mostly sexual) relationship with a young woman he met there. Turns out she was 15 and using her older sister's ID to get in. None of us ever would have guessed - this girl passed a police check when we got pulled over and the officer wanted all our IDs to check for curfew violations - but when her parents found out they were FURIOUS... not at their precious little snowflake, but at the "sexual predator" who "led her astray". And they made sure the prosecutor threw the book at him because in our state reasonable belief of a person's age is not an acceptable defense. Seeing what he went through certainly changed the way I view the registry... It would be a far more effective tool if it was limited to predatory offenses, or even if it gave details of the case beyond "criminal sexual conduct in the 2nd degree".

I think this is purely a PR move on Disney's part, not any sort of protection for park guests. The predator who hasn't yet been convicted is still in the parks, along with any foreign predators who aren't on registries in the US, and of course there are all the other classes of creep that aren't subject to registration - non-sexual abusers, thieves, thugs, etc.

 

[robinb]

Robin you can keep trying to defend these people but you have no ground to stand on!

I'm not defending them. Sexual predators are scum. I'm just pointing out that you are saying that once people have reformed you will "open the gates" for them to be in the parks. However, the standard for "reform" that is used for most criminals (not committing crimes and being "off paper") does not apply to sex offenders since their names remain on the registry forever ... even after they are living a clean life and have finished treatment and probation.

 

[Minnies Boy Toy]

I think this is purely a PR move on Disney's part, not any sort of protection for park guests.

I mildly disagree, in that if their procedures are designed to keep the real sexual offender threats (not the statutory rapists or public urinators) out of the parks and they succeed in identifying a few, then it's probably a worthwhile effort.

That said, what bothers me about this thread is that it seems to have become a grandstand for a few people to try to trump each other with how much more they love their families than the rest of us because they despise everyone who's ever committed a crime. As is noted in the article, Disney is a private company and it can make its own decisions about who is allowed into the parks. I'm just glad that some of the people in this thread aren't making those decisions, because I don't think I'd be allowed in - after all, I'm not screaming loud enough about how much of a threat the eeeeeevil boogeymen are to my beloved family.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

I'm sorry but it reeks of vigilante justice!! Yes, my family's safety is always going to be first and foremost in my mind. And I take care of that, for my own family.
Disagree all you want. But, I spend more time in WDW than the vast majority of people out there. And the things I see there would curl your hair. Parents sitting at pools, drinking heavily..they can barely stand. but, their kids are in the pool. No way are they watching those kids and even if they saw an issue (and were able to recognize it is an issue) there is no way they could help that child. They are counting on lifeguards to do that for them.
Or the parents that seem to think it's a good idea to allow their very young children to wander around the park or the resort by themselves..even if it is with an older sibling. I have overheard them saying...'Oh, it's WDW. They're safe here. It's not as if we were at home in 'whatever city' !'...oh, but it's exactly the same!!

People let their guard down in WDW...look at the stuff left in strollers...Oh, no one is going to steal it, we're in WDW. But, in all reality? You are actually less safe in WDW in regards to certain crime.

So, I don't buy the whole Disney could keep a data base with offenders on it and then cross check with those registering for resort stays. Only the main person on the reservation shows ID. And again, the vast majority of offenders are still not in 'the system'...they haven't been caught yet. Nothing you can do about that.
But, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

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

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

I'm not defending them. Sexual predators are scum. I'm just pointing out that you are saying that once people have reformed you will "open the gates" for them to be in the parks. However, the standard for "reform" that is used for most criminals (not committing crimes and being "off paper") does not apply to sex offenders since their names remain on the registry forever ... even after they are living a clean life and have finished treatment and probation.

In which case they need to prove to the powers that be they are no longer a threat.....names can be removed at least in CT.......AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Ditto to all of this.

I have a friend who is on the registry. His crime? He hooked up with a chick in a club. We were regulars back then and we knew they carded so he didn't even think twice about starting a (immature, mostly sexual) relationship with a young woman he met there. Turns out she was 15 and using her older sister's ID to get in. None of us ever would have guessed - this girl passed a police check when we got pulled over and the officer wanted all our IDs to check for curfew violations - but when her parents found out they were FURIOUS... not at their precious little snowflake, but at the "sexual predator" who "led her astray". And they made sure the prosecutor threw the book at him because in our state reasonable belief of a person's age is not an acceptable defense. Seeing what he went through certainly changed the way I view the registry... It would be a far more effective tool if it was limited to predatory offenses, or even if it gave details of the case beyond "criminal sexual conduct in the 2nd degree".

I think this is purely a PR move on Disney's part, not any sort of protection for park guests. The predator who hasn't yet been convicted is still in the parks, along with any foreign predators who aren't on registries in the US, and of course there are all the other classes of creep that aren't subject to registration - non-sexual abusers, thieves, thugs, etc.

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?


Lastly, as I said to goof, who I usually agree with, but not this time, the system is not 100%, no system is!

AKK

 

[arthropodtodd]

I respect your field of work and your opinion Sir.

But the villagers are tired of lawyers and *pros* in the field that by worrying more about the predators and having limited success in keeping to bad guys away from our families and then telling us we should not worry about it!

AKK

The problem is the general public has little accurate information about the offender population. They get their information from TV and Law and Order Special Victims Unit or vigilante websites. We should always worry about predators, but they are the small minority of sexual offenders, and most thankful are civilly committed because they are unable to show that they will not re-offend. And many predators never get caught because they are smart and careful. Many other non-predatory offends can and do succeed in the community if given the chance. These guys are the one you would classify as reformed. (Personally I would rather have a guy succeed in the community instead of dropping the 20K a year to house an inmate. A guy in the community has to pay taxes instead of being a tax burden. As a whole we are seeing a decrease in sexual assaults, which is good.) There is an increase in child pornography sadly.

Now again, I do not have a problem Disney having a policy of not allowing known (to them and the public) offenders in the parks, in fact it is a good policy. And as I have stated previously for many of these offenders they should know better, but they should always think about their risk until the day they die. Back to Disney, I am sure that given past incidents on site they do their best or protect minors. They do not want a black eye here on this subject. There is no best way to do this than you use a blanket policy. What needs to change is the registries themselves. There is talk among some states to remove certain types of offenders (internet, mostly) and some talk of some states allowing offenders to be removed once they can show their low risk via some assessment by guys like me.

Now let me do a quick education. Folks like me assess these guys risk to re-offend. Some smart people all over the world have complied information to develop several different risk assessments. We then use this information to assess and predict likelihood of re-conviction of both sexual offenses and general criminal recidivism. Things we assess are both dynamic (changing) and static (not change) risk factors. So we looking at age, relationship stability, previous criminal and offense history, victim demographics, impulsivity, empathy, sexual preoccupation, sex as coping, hostility towards others, alcohol and drug use, social supports, etc. It is a long list. So we take that information and tell you over 5, 10, or 15 years the likely hood of re-offence. But then we want to factor what the guy actually says or does in group and details of the offense to truly get an accurate picture of an offender's risk.

Many of my client's biggest issues are not related to their risk to re-offend. Their risk issues are good places to live, stable employment, sobriety, healthy and positive supports. Those who work hard in these areas or have access to support in these areas do much better.

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.