Discussion:
Metal Detectors
(too old to reply)
Buzz and Woody
2004-04-16 18:45:31 UTC
Permalink
from the orlando sentinel

http://tinyurl.com/2kg2y
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-16 19:28:15 UTC
Permalink
John Pike, a security and aerospace analyst with
globalsecurity.org in Arlington, Va., said it will be
difficult for Disney to effectively balance security
measures that often go along with metal detectors --
such as requiring people to take off their shoes --
with the desire not to inconvenience its guests.
"Their dilemma is that either they are going to make
spending a day at the park as annoying as flying an
airplane or it [the security measure] is going to be
ineffective," Pike said.
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting into
an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate the time
wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
--
- RODNEY
Raoul
2004-04-17 00:02:48 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 14:28:15 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by Rodney T. Grill
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting into
an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate the time
wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
The last time I was at WDW, 11/01, the security people were bending
over backwards to be fast and courteous while checking bags going into
MK. Have things changed/deteriorated? Airport security OTOH seem to be
as much about creating the perception of security as making things
safer.
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-17 01:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raoul
The last time I was at WDW, 11/01, the security people were bending
over backwards to be fast and courteous while checking bags going into
MK. Have things changed/deteriorated? Airport security OTOH seem to be
as much about creating the perception of security as making things
safer.
And WDW is not? Make no mistake, the bag checks at the gate aren't
going to deter anyone that's serious about hurting someone, and forcing
people through metal detectors is going to result in a lot of lost
business for them - there's no way they can make it as effective as the
airport screening is (that's not to say that the airport screening is
particularly effective) and maintain a reasonable guest flow, and they
will effectively be giving the finger to those people who *legally*
carry the means to protect themselves under Florida's reciprocity laws
regarding concealed carry of weapons. Disney may have a company policy
forbidding weapons, but it's still perfectly legal for a CCW permit
holder to carry at any of the parks (with the possible exception of
WWoS) until such time as Disney explicitly confronts them and asks them
to surrender the weapon or leave the premises, which is exactly what
they're going to have to start doing. I think there are a lot of CCW
holders whose business Disney is going to lose for the illusion of safety.

For my part, if they conduct the trials and determine that they're going
to start using the detectors full-time I'm turning my ID in.

Steve
weidwall
2004-04-18 20:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
they
will effectively be giving the finger to those people who *legally*
carry the means to protect themselves under Florida's reciprocity laws
regarding concealed carry of weapons. Disney may have a company policy
forbidding weapons, but it's still perfectly legal for a CCW permit
holder to carry at any of the parks (with the possible exception of
WWoS) until such time as Disney explicitly confronts them and asks them
to surrender the weapon or leave the premises, which is exactly what
they're going to have to start doing. I think there are a lot of CCW
holders whose business Disney is going to lose for the illusion of safety.
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.

Ruth Ann
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-18 21:20:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
Post by Steve Preskitt
they
will effectively be giving the finger to those people who *legally*
carry the means to protect themselves under Florida's reciprocity laws
regarding concealed carry of weapons. Disney may have a company policy
forbidding weapons, but it's still perfectly legal for a CCW permit
holder to carry at any of the parks (with the possible exception of
WWoS) until such time as Disney explicitly confronts them and asks them
to surrender the weapon or leave the premises, which is exactly what
they're going to have to start doing. I think there are a lot of CCW
holders whose business Disney is going to lose for the illusion of safety.
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.
Ruth Ann
I've carried a few times at WDW. But mostly when we had a stop in
Miami and didn't have a secure place to store the gun.
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-19 03:00:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.
Neither does Disney, but that doesn't change the fact that it's legal to
carry there with the proper permit.

Steve
CaptRon
2004-04-19 12:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by weidwall
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.
Neither does Disney, but that doesn't change the fact that it's legal to
carry there with the proper permit.
Esp since Disney doesnt have the entrances posted with the proper legal
signage saying "no weapons allowed"

Security does provide safe locked storage for weapons though.

Besides, Id rather have someone carrying then to leave their weapon in the
car!

dainerra
Doc
2004-04-20 10:09:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by CaptRon
Esp since Disney doesnt have the entrances posted with the proper legal
signage saying "no weapons allowed"
I would imagine such signs would certainly turn people off, since it
implies "ohmigod, they've got a weapons/gangs/whatever problem
here..."

I know that they have armed, bulletproof vest wearing security at DL,
as I had an encounter with them many years ago due to some idiots I
was in the company of at the time.
red1028
2004-04-19 12:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Coming from the UK I perhaps don't understand your gun laws, but with Disney
being private property, doesn't Disney have overall say with rules on
carrying weapons in their parks, whether or not the individual can legally
do so?

Personally, I think extra security is good common sense. Since September
11th I've always said that WDW is an easy soft target, and as hard as it is
to get into the USA (I agree with the finger printing and mug shots for
everyone and wish Britain was the same, I've got nothing to hide), you've
got to assume there are countless 'sleeper' terrorist cells in your country
waiting to do the unthinkable. I'm visiting Orlando in October for 3 weeks.
I can't wait, and if it takes an extra 20 minutes each day to get into the
parks then fine. Prevention is better than cure. The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.

Rich
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by weidwall
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.
Neither does Disney, but that doesn't change the fact that it's legal to
carry there with the proper permit.
Steve
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-19 14:22:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by red1028
Coming from the UK I perhaps don't understand your gun laws, but with Disney
being private property, doesn't Disney have overall say with rules on
carrying weapons in their parks, whether or not the individual can legally
do so?
A person with a concealed weapon permit is *legally* allowed to carry a gun
anywhere except for certain restricted areas such as schools, airports and
government buildings. A private property owner (such as Disney) can
prohibit weapons, but their ability to enforce the rule is limited to
removing an offender from their property and possibly a civil lawsuit (but
that would be stretching it).
Post by red1028
Personally, I think extra security is good common sense. Since September
11th I've always said that WDW is an easy soft target, and as hard as it is
to get into the USA (I agree with the finger printing and mug shots for
everyone and wish Britain was the same, I've got nothing to hide), you've
got to assume there are countless 'sleeper' terrorist cells in your country
waiting to do the unthinkable. I'm visiting Orlando in October for 3 weeks.
I can't wait, and if it takes an extra 20 minutes each day to get into the
parks then fine. Prevention is better than cure. The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.
I agree that WDW would be an attractive target for terrorism, but the
likelihood the assault coming through the front gates is small. I would
suspect an attach against WDW to come in the form of bioterrorism (i.e.
contaminate the water supply) or a massive act of war such as a missile.
Even a coordinated effort of hundreds of terrorists sneaking guns into the
parks would not do much physical damage. Of course the psychological damage
could be high, but I also believe the terrorists learned that such damage is
very ineffective in hurting this proud country. In fact, I could see people
flocking to WDW in droves to reinforce our patriotism should anything like
that ever happen.
--
- RODNEY
Denise near Disney
2004-04-19 15:10:46 UTC
Permalink
<< I would
suspect an attach against WDW to come in the form of bioterrorism (i.e.
contaminate the water supply) or a massive act of war such as a missile.
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
Remember also that the bag checks start at the parks. Even if they were 100%
thorough, you still have the transportation system, hotels, most of Disney
property not under any kind of real security whatsoever.


Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Doc
2004-04-20 10:04:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
<< I would
suspect an attach against WDW to come in the form of bioterrorism (i.e.
contaminate the water supply) or a massive act of war such as a missile.
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
Remember also that the bag checks start at the parks. Even if they were 100%
thorough, you still have the transportation system, hotels, most of Disney
property not under any kind of real security whatsoever.
Yup. Unfortunately, the way things are, Disney is a sitting duck, and
they know it. The gate bag checks are a joke.

I've always said that they would have to start doing airport-style
checks *as a minimum* to make their security effort worth anything.
They don't have the amount of traffic that a large airport does, I
think that metal detectors would be a step in the right direction if
they're implemented correctly and intelligently. It would have to be
done at the places you mentioned as well as the park entrance, along
with various other measures.

Would it stop every possible terrorist act? Nope, but they'd have to
try a lot harder. As it is now, any brainless fool could hit them.
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-19 21:30:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:22:32 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by red1028
Coming from the UK I perhaps don't understand your gun laws, but with
Disney
Post by red1028
being private property, doesn't Disney have overall say with rules on
carrying weapons in their parks, whether or not the individual can legally
do so?
A person with a concealed weapon permit is *legally* allowed to carry a gun
anywhere except for certain restricted areas such as schools, airports and
government buildings. A private property owner (such as Disney) can
prohibit weapons, but their ability to enforce the rule is limited to
removing an offender from their property and possibly a civil lawsuit (but
that would be stretching it).
They are required to post certain specific signs at all entrances.

In Texas (at least) there is an opinion that banning carry imposes a
greater liability of protection.
Post by red1028
Personally, I think extra security is good common sense. Since September
11th I've always said that WDW is an easy soft target, and as hard as it
is
Post by red1028
to get into the USA (I agree with the finger printing and mug shots for
everyone and wish Britain was the same, I've got nothing to hide), you've
got to assume there are countless 'sleeper' terrorist cells in your
country
Post by red1028
waiting to do the unthinkable. I'm visiting Orlando in October for 3
weeks.
Post by red1028
I can't wait, and if it takes an extra 20 minutes each day to get into the
parks then fine. Prevention is better than cure. The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.
I agree that WDW would be an attractive target for terrorism, but the
likelihood the assault coming through the front gates is small. I would
suspect an attach against WDW to come in the form of bioterrorism (i.e.
contaminate the water supply) or a massive act of war such as a missile.
Even a coordinated effort of hundreds of terrorists sneaking guns into the
parks would not do much physical damage. Of course the psychological damage
could be high, but I also believe the terrorists learned that such damage is
very ineffective in hurting this proud country. In fact, I could see people
flocking to WDW in droves to reinforce our patriotism should anything like
that ever happen.
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Charlie Foxtrot
2004-04-20 08:24:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:22:32 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by Rodney T. Grill
I agree that WDW would be an attractive target for terrorism, but the
likelihood the assault coming through the front gates is small. I would
suspect an attach against WDW to come in the form of bioterrorism (i.e.
contaminate the water supply) or a massive act of war such as a missile.
Even a coordinated effort of hundreds of terrorists sneaking guns into the
parks would not do much physical damage. Of course the psychological damage
could be high, but I also believe the terrorists learned that such damage is
very ineffective in hurting this proud country. In fact, I could see people
flocking to WDW in droves to reinforce our patriotism should anything like
that ever happen.
In some strange, paralel dimension, you just gave Big Evil Disney a
new marketing strategy. ;)

Foxtrot
Denise near Disney
2004-04-19 15:29:50 UTC
Permalink
<< The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
I feel safer knowing that there are those who carry concealed weapons. I don't
own one, I'm not sure I could take the life of someone else even if my own was
in danger. But those I do know who own guns are extremely responsible (I've
gotten to learn to shoot some) and it doesn't bother me at all that guests can
carry legally in the parks (I am sure there are plenty of off-duty policemen
who visit each day as well).

At a credit union I belong to, they had a hold-up and then a few days later a
sign went up "no guns allowed". Better would have been "no robbers allowed".
The guns didn't hold up the place, the guys with them did.


Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
agnes
2004-04-19 15:46:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
<< The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
I feel safer knowing that there are those who carry concealed weapons. I don't
own one, I'm not sure I could take the life of someone else even if my own was
in danger. But those I do know who own guns are extremely responsible (I've
gotten to learn to shoot some)
When I first read the above comment, it sounded like you had learned to
gun-owners... ;-)
Post by Denise near Disney
and it doesn't bother me at all that guests can
carry legally in the parks (I am sure there are plenty of off-duty policemen
who visit each day as well).
At a credit union I belong to, they had a hold-up and then a few days later a
sign went up "no guns allowed". Better would have been "no robbers allowed".
The guns didn't hold up the place, the guys with them did.
Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
agnes
*just reply here please - thanks :)
agnes
2004-04-19 15:50:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by agnes
Post by Denise near Disney
<< The thought of people
carrying concealed weapons in such a magical place is alarming and just
taints the image for me.
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
I feel safer knowing that there are those who carry concealed weapons. I don't
own one, I'm not sure I could take the life of someone else even if my own was
in danger. But those I do know who own guns are extremely responsible (I've
gotten to learn to shoot some)
When I first read the above comment, it sounded like you had learned to
gun-owners... ;-)
Oops.. that'll teach me to hit send before I proof...my preceding post
should have read...

"When I first read Denise's above comment, it sounded like she had
learned to *shoot* gun-owners... ;-) "
Post by agnes
Post by Denise near Disney
and it doesn't bother me at all that guests can
carry legally in the parks (I am sure there are plenty of off-duty policemen
who visit each day as well).
At a credit union I belong to, they had a hold-up and then a few days later a
sign went up "no guns allowed". Better would have been "no robbers allowed".
The guns didn't hold up the place, the guys with them did.
Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
agnes
*just reply here please - thanks :)
Denise near Disney
2004-04-19 17:09:01 UTC
Permalink
<< "When I first read Denise's above comment, it sounded like she had
learned to *shoot* gun-owners... ;-) >><BR><BR>

No, I haven't learned to do that :) I have enough problems with paper targets
further than 10 feet away!






Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-20 19:51:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
I feel safer knowing that there are those who carry concealed weapons.
Denise, you and I are polar opposites on this issue. I feel much less safe
knowing about the amount of concealed weopons that are leagally out there. If I
were in a situation of being attacked the last thing I'd want is some person
who's packing a gun to do a "wild west" save the day thing. I'd be as likely to
be shot in such a situation as would the perpetrator.


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Denise near Disney
2004-04-20 21:06:31 UTC
Permalink
<< If I
were in a situation of being attacked the last thing I'd want is some person
who's packing a gun to do a "wild west" save the day thing. >><BR><BR>

Dave - we are on the same side of issues a lot, it's okay to disagree. :)

Those who I know who do own guns have such a healthy respect for the weapons -
I couldn't see them ever shooting in a wild-west type way. I don't know that
I'd ever carry, partially because I'm not sure I could use it on someone (even
if my life was in jeopardy) - but also because I'm not sure that I'd be
discerning enough to know when to use it, and if I didn't have a steady hand,
others could get hurt. It really is a responsibility, and those who I know who
own guns don't take that lightly.


Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-21 04:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
Dave - we are on the same side of issues a lot, it's okay to disagree. :)
Even if we never were on the same side, I feel we respect each other. So a
difference of oppinion is always met with respect. That's nice.
Post by Denise near Disney
Those who I know who do own guns have such a healthy respect for the weapons
-I couldn't see them ever shooting in a wild-west type way.
I respect that. But it's the ones that do go "wild west" that scare me. It's
happened here in DFW a couple of times. It's been in the news a couple of
times. There have been incidents in the news where people who legally carry a
weopon have shot another person over traffic accidents. I had someone on the
freeway who was displeased with my driving wave a pistol threateninly at me.
These types of people really scare the hell out of me that they are allowed to
carry a loaded gun where ever they like.
Post by Denise near Disney
It really is a responsibility, and those who I know whoown guns don't take
that lightly.
I understand that. My parents were gun owners. I grew up around guns. My
parents taught me to shoot when I was young and taught me to respect firearms.
But not everyone is like your friends or my parents. I've seen the way some
people here in Texas drive with an "I can do anything I damn well want."
mentality. (I've seen some driving here in Texas that I've not seen anywhere
else I've traveled or lived.) It scares me to think those same people could be
leagally carrying a gun.



Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Lesa
2004-04-21 10:25:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Denise near Disney
Dave - we are on the same side of issues a lot, it's okay to disagree. :)
Even if we never were on the same side, I feel we respect each other. So a
difference of oppinion is always met with respect. That's nice.
Post by Denise near Disney
Those who I know who do own guns have such a healthy respect for the weapons
-I couldn't see them ever shooting in a wild-west type way.
I respect that. But it's the ones that do go "wild west" that scare me. It's
happened here in DFW a couple of times. It's been in the news a couple of
times. There have been incidents in the news where people who legally carry a
weopon have shot another person over traffic accidents. I had someone on the
freeway who was displeased with my driving wave a pistol threateninly at me.
These types of people really scare the hell out of me that they are allowed to
carry a loaded gun where ever they like.
Dave, you seem to have had some of the same experiences I have with handgun
owners. For these reasons, and many others, I am also very concerned about
the concealed handgun laws.
Denise near Disney
2004-04-21 19:15:19 UTC
Permalink
<< Even if we never were on the same side, I feel we respect each other. So a
difference of oppinion is always met with respect. That's nice. >><BR><BR>

Absolutely, Dave. I totally understand why you feel the way you do as well.

I have never had a traffic situation like you have at this point. I guess I
get more nervous with what people can do with their cars on the road. I have
never had anyone threaten me with a weapon, I have had people do stupid things
that could have gotten me killed (or sat on my bumper because they wanted to
pass, etc.).



Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-21 20:25:05 UTC
Permalink
I havenever had anyone threaten me with a weapon,
Actually it's happened to me more than once. Back in the 1980s in California I
was walking in a park, during the day, and someone leveled a pistol on me from
about 30 feet away. It didn't seem like a robbery because of the distance the
person was from me. It seemed like pure malace. I followed my gut instinct and
ran, thinking a bullet in the back was better than one in the chest. (Maybe
stupid. Maybe smart. I don't know. That's just what I did.) I got home shaking
like a leaf and called the police. They eventually caught the guy. So I guess
this colors my views on the gun situation.
I have had people do stupid thingsthat could have gotten me killed (or sat on
my bumper because they wanted topass, etc.).
Absolutely!!! I feel it's WAY too easy to get a driver's license nowdays. If
it was harder to get a license, and easier to loose, maybe some of these
agressive drivers would think twice before they pull some of the junk they do
when they are on the roads.


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-22 01:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
I respect that. But it's the ones that do go "wild west" that scare me. It's
happened here in DFW a couple of times. It's been in the news a couple of
times. There have been incidents in the news where people who legally carry a
weopon have shot another person over traffic accidents. I had someone on the
freeway who was displeased with my driving wave a pistol threateninly at me.
These types of people really scare the hell out of me that they are allowed to
carry a loaded gun where ever they like.
I can't speak about the situation in Texas, but if the same happened in
Florida, the jerk would likely have been looking at a year in jail for
waving the gun around, and a few other charges on top of that. Most
people that take the time to go through the hassle of getting a CCW are
quite a bit more responsible than that, because they know that getting
into an altercation while armed is the last thing they want to do,
because it's almost guaranteed that some substantial time and money will
be spent dealing with the law if that gun comes out, even in a
completely justified shooting or even if no shots are fired.
Personally, I don't want to have to spend time in jail or pay tons of
money to defend myself because I lost my temper and waved a gun at
someone like an idiot, and I believe most CCWers feel the same way. The
asshat that goes around waving guns at people may find himself on the
wrong end of the barrel someday. Just out of curiosity, did you call
that in?

If it's any consolation, the "wild west" types make me uncomfortable as
well, but not to the point that I feel it's enough to justify disarming
everyone. I believe it's a person's own responsiblity to ensure the
safety of themselves and their loved ones - the courts have ruled time
and again than the police have no responsbility to protect anyone, and
in most situations where deadly force is legitimately used in
self-defense (it happens more than you might think), the police aren't
around to protect anyone anyway.
Post by Dave in Dallas
I understand that. My parents were gun owners. I grew up around guns. My
parents taught me to shoot when I was young and taught me to respect firearms.
Kudos to your responsible parents!
Post by Dave in Dallas
But not everyone is like your friends or my parents. I've seen the way some
people here in Texas drive with an "I can do anything I damn well want."
mentality. (I've seen some driving here in Texas that I've not seen anywhere
else I've traveled or lived.) It scares me to think those same people could be
leagally carrying a gun.
You made an interesting parallel there - there are lots of idiot drivers
that kill thousands and thousands of people each year, but no one
suggests that the general public not be allowed to drive, even though
that would save more lives than any firearm legislation could hope to.
I would venture that people are *much* more dangerous with a car than a
gun, and the statistics would seem to bear that out.

Interesting discussion thus far, and remarkably flame-free. :-)

Steve
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-22 03:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
I can't speak about the situation in Texas, but if the same happened in
Florida, the jerk would likely have been looking at a year in jail for
waving the gun around, and a few other charges on top of that.
It would be the same situation here in Texas. The problem is catching the jerk
in the act. We so seldom see any type of highway patrol, and it's amazing what
people get away with on the highways here.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Personally, I don't want to have to spend time in jail or pay tons of
money to defend myself because I lost my temper and waved a gun at
someone like an idiot, and I believe most CCWers feel the same way.
I don't disagree. As I say, it's the ones that don't approach the situation
with the same logic that scares me.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Just out of curiosity, did you call that in?
Actually, no. And that was our fault for not doing so. We were just so shocked
by seeing that happen we didn't think logically like remembering the license
plate or the make of the car. It really rattled us to where we didn't think
clearly. Later we said "We should have called the police." But by that time it
would have been useless, especially with the sketchy information we would have
given.
Post by Steve Preskitt
If it's any consolation, the "wild west" types make me uncomfortable as
well, <snip>
Of course. I realize that.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Kudos to your responsible parents!
They were good folks. Unfortuately, as an adult, my father and I had a few
"discussions" as to why I wouldn't have a gun in my house. He thought I needed
it for protection living in the LA area.
Post by Steve Preskitt
You made an interesting parallel there - there are lots of idiot drivers
that kill thousands and thousands of people each year, but no one
suggests that the general public not be allowed to drive, <snip>
Well, as I've said in this thread, I suggest that the standards for the
privalage of driving should be a lot higher. If someone doesn't meet those
standards, it's their problem. Not the problem of those sharing the road with
them.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I would venture that people are *much* more dangerous with a car than a
gun, and the statistics would seem to bear that out.
I very much agree.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Interesting discussion thus far, and remarkably flame-free. :-)
I think more often than not we stay civil on this board. As long as people
discuss and listen to what's being said on the other side of the conversation,
we don't usually go into flame mode. It's when someone acts like they have all
the answers that gets people pissed off.


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-21 06:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Denise near Disney
I feel safer knowing that there are those who carry concealed weapons.
Denise, you and I are polar opposites on this issue. I feel much less safe
knowing about the amount of concealed weopons that are leagally out there. If I
were in a situation of being attacked the last thing I'd want is some person
who's packing a gun to do a "wild west" save the day thing. I'd be as likely to
be shot in such a situation as would the perpetrator.
Dave, when the CHL passed in Tejas, many opponents bemoaned about (and
this is a quote) "the rivers of blood filling our streets". There
have been a total of four incidents of CHL holders fireing on another
person. Only two trials and only one conviction (and he was guilty as
sin, it was a bad shooting from the start).

Although I usually compete with a completely different gun than I
carry, I spend a lot of time quickly accquireing a sight picture and
assessing the situation for shoot/don't shoot. I don't take iffy
shots and I don't shoot no-shoots. Most of the people I shoot with
have CHLs and have the same attitude. Makes sense on the range, makes
sense on the street.

I carry a solid gun, I use a round that doesn't overpenetrate and I
carry in a location that is both not readily identifiable and easy for
me to reach but hard for someone else to get to.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Dave, Dallas, TX
"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-21 18:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, when the CHL passed in Tejas, many opponents bemoaned about (and
this is a quote) "the rivers of blood filling our streets". There
have been a total of four incidents of CHL holders fireing on another
person.
Sure. But you know, to me, that's four too many. And if I remember correctly
weren't a couple of those in Dallas?

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with people owning firearms and use them
for sport. But I just don't see the need to carry one in public or to have one
in your car when driving. IMHO.


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-21 19:11:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, when the CHL passed in Tejas, many opponents bemoaned about (and
this is a quote) "the rivers of blood filling our streets". There
have been a total of four incidents of CHL holders fireing on another
person.
Sure. But you know, to me, that's four too many. And if I remember correctly
weren't a couple of those in Dallas?
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with people owning firearms and use them
for sport. But I just don't see the need to carry one in public or to have one
in your car when driving. IMHO.
Dave, I won't argue with you, as your beliefs are your's and no one
has the right to dis them. However, my personal belief is that I have
an absolute right to defend myself and that I don't depend on the
police to protect me.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Dave, Dallas, TX
"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-21 20:16:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, I won't argue with you, as your beliefs are your's and no one
has the right to dis them.
Back atcha! And I'm not trying to argue. This is just a discussion. An
exchange of ideal. If I seemed argumentative I appologise as that was not my
intention.




Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Beverly in Massachusetts
2004-04-22 01:42:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, I won't argue with you, as your beliefs are your's and no one
has the right to dis them.
Back atcha! And I'm not trying to argue. This is just a discussion. An
exchange of ideal. If I seemed argumentative I appologise as that was not my
intention.
I'm sorry, I know I'm really just a lurker (gathering info for an up coming
trip from the best place on Earth to find out about the happiest place on
Earth), but this is just way too civil for usenet.

You're both acting like civilized human beings even though you disagree.
I don't know if I can handle it.
I'm so torn between "cool, adults" and "ach, my eyes!" that I don't
know what to do.


Bev
--
Beverly LaMarr MIT Center for Space Research
617 258 8153 37-582b, 70 Vassar Street
***@space.mit.edu Cambridge, MA 02139
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-22 03:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, I won't argue with you, as your beliefs are your's and no one
has the right to dis them.
Back atcha! And I'm not trying to argue. This is just a discussion. An
exchange of ideal. If I seemed argumentative I appologise as that was not my
intention.
I'm sorry, I know I'm really just a lurker (gathering info for an up coming
trip from the best place on Earth to find out about the happiest place on
Earth), but this is just way too civil for usenet.
My main concern is that others might see us as arguing, instead of
having an intellectual discourse.
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
You're both acting like civilized human beings even though you disagree.
I don't know if I can handle it.
I'm so torn between "cool, adults" and "ach, my eyes!" that I don't
know what to do.
Argh, somebody thinks I'm an adult. How will I ever enjoy Disney if
I'm all growed up?
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
Bev
--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-22 03:41:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
I'm sorry, I know I'm really just a lurker (gathering info for an up coming
trip from the best place on Earth to find out about the happiest place on
Earth), but this is just way too civil for usenet.
Quick everyone, check for pods in the closet! Don't go to sleep! <G>
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
You're both acting like civilized human beings even though you disagree.
I find politely discussing hot button topics to be fun. I've really enjoyed
this thread. I'll admit it's made me think about a few things I've not
considered before. Is it going to change my thinking? Probably not. But at
least I understand a bit better the other side of the issue.
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
I don't know if I can handle it.
I'm so torn between "cool, adults" and "ach, my eyes!" that I don't
know what to do.
LOL!!!!


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Paragon
2004-04-22 11:20:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
I'm sorry, I know I'm really just a lurker (gathering info for an up coming
trip from the best place on Earth to find out about the happiest place on
Earth), but this is just way too civil for usenet.
Quick everyone, check for pods in the closet! Don't go to sleep! <G>
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
You're both acting like civilized human beings even though you disagree.
I find politely discussing hot button topics to be fun. I've really enjoyed
this thread. I'll admit it's made me think about a few things I've not
considered before. Is it going to change my thinking? Probably not. But at
least I understand a bit better the other side of the issue.
Post by Beverly in Massachusetts
I don't know if I can handle it.
I'm so torn between "cool, adults" and "ach, my eyes!" that I don't
know what to do.
LOL!!!!
Dave, Dallas, TX
"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Okay---just so this fits in with the group and everyone's sanity can be
preserved: "Dave obviously is not at all patriotic and should be deported
for his lack of support for the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Steve is obviously supporting terrorism, and Dillon is a terrorist. Denise
is just a wuss."

Is that enough flaming to satisfy the bloodthirsty? :P
Beverly in Massachusetts
2004-04-22 14:31:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paragon
Okay---just so this fits in with the group and everyone's sanity can be
preserved: "Dave obviously is not at all patriotic and should be deported
for his lack of support for the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Steve is obviously supporting terrorism, and Dillon is a terrorist. Denise
is just a wuss."
Is that enough flaming to satisfy the bloodthirsty? :P
Well, noone got called a Nazi, but I guess it's good enough for me.

Thanks. My world view is preserved.


Bev

Benjamin Geiger
2004-04-21 22:24:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Dillon Pyron
Dave, when the CHL passed in Tejas, many opponents bemoaned about (and
this is a quote) "the rivers of blood filling our streets". There
have been a total of four incidents of CHL holders fireing on another
person.
Sure. But you know, to me, that's four too many.
I think the point being made is, the criminals are going to have weapons
anyway. The horse has already bolted; it's too late to lock the barn
door. Besides, out of the hundreds of thousands (that's a SWAG but it's
reasonable) of concealed-carry permit holders, only four have fired on
anyone. (Mr. Pyron never said whether that number included legitimate
self-defense usage, though.)

If a criminal needs a weapon, he'll get one, whether that be a gun, a
knife, a baseball bat, a brick, et cetera. Concealed-carry permits allow
the average law-abiding citizen to stand up successfully to the criminals.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with people owning firearms and use them
for sport. But I just don't see the need to carry one in public or to have one
in your car when driving. IMHO.
Au contraire. That's when they're needed the most.

As I said before, if a criminal wants a weapon, he'll find a way to
acquire one. However, he'll likely think twice about attacking you if he
thinks there's a good chance you're carrying.

(And before you label me a "gun nut"... I don't even own a gun.)
--
Benjamin Geiger My real email address isn't a _spamtrap.
WDW 4/6/03 - 4/6/04: Anytime I want! Hooray being local!
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-21 23:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Benjamin Geiger
I think the point being made is, the criminals are going to have weapons
anyway.
I agree completely. My point was not regarding criminals, but the "loose
cannon" (Pun intended) that is legally carring a firearm. I'm more afraid of
the person who is legally carrying a pistol and reacts irresponsibly.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Besides, out of the hundreds of thousands (that's a SWAG but it's
reasonable) of concealed-carry permit holders, only four have fired on
anyone.
And again, that's my point. To me, that's four too many for my way of thinking.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
(Mr. Pyron never said whether that number included legitimate
self-defense usage, though.)
True. But I seem to remember hearing on the local news a few years ago of
people acting irresponsibly here in Texas. So if two were self defense and two
were fools, the fools still scare me to death.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Concealed-carry permits allow
the average law-abiding citizen to stand up successfully to the criminals.
See, here is where I don't see the situation as do you, and some other people.
I don't see this as a matter of self defense, as much as I see it as a matter
of a possibly tradegy waiting to happen. Unforseen things happen. Bystanders
can get in the way. Misjudgements can be made. What may seem like self defense
at the immediate moment may be misjudged and have tragic consequenses.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
But I just don't see the need to carry one in public or to have one
Post by Dave in Dallas
in your car when driving. IMHO.
Au contraire. That's when they're needed the most.
Again, we are polar opposites here. As I said I had someone wave a pistol at me
on the freeway when he didn't agree with my way of driving. That's a pretty
damn scary thing to have happen to you. Trust me.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
As I said before, if a criminal wants a weapon, he'll find a way to
acquire one. However, he'll likely think twice about attacking you if he
thinks there's a good chance you're carrying.
I'm really not sure about that. I've not seen any statistics if the threat of
conceled weopons deter crime or not. Maybe they do. I've just not seen the
statistics.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
(And before you label me a "gun nut"... I don't even own a gun.)
I wasn't going to jump to that conclusion. As I said in an earlier post, I was
raised by gun enthusiasts. If my parents had been younger when the permit to
carry was available, they probably would have. And I would never have
considered my parents "gun nuts". I just happen to see the situation from a
different perspective. That's all. But the last thing I'm going to do is call
someone with opposing view a "gun nut".


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Benjamin Geiger
2004-04-21 23:20:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
I think the point being made is, the criminals are going to have weapons
anyway.
I agree completely. My point was not regarding criminals, but the "loose
cannon" (Pun intended) that is legally carring a firearm. I'm more
afraid of the person who is legally carrying a pistol and reacts
irresponsibly.
I understand your concern, but think it's unfounded. I'm more afraid of
people who are legally driving vehicles and react irresponsibly, which
happens every day.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Besides, out of the hundreds of thousands (that's a SWAG but it's
reasonable) of concealed-carry permit holders, only four have fired on
anyone.
And again, that's my point. To me, that's four too many for my way of thinking.
But how many lives have been saved by legally concealed weapons? I'd
venture to guess that it's many more than four...

As I said in another fork of this thread, all security is a trade. By
allowing concealed weapons, you get a much lower crime rate, at the cost
of the occasional idiot, and so far, the idiots have been few and far
between (unlike every other aspect of life), almost negligibly so.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
(Mr. Pyron never said whether that number included legitimate
self-defense usage, though.)
True. But I seem to remember hearing on the local news a few years ago
of people acting irresponsibly here in Texas. So if two were self
defense and two were fools, the fools still scare me to death.
That's two, out of hundreds of thousands of licensees. Compare that to
the staggering number of crimes committed with illegal guns. The fools
(and criminals) will have their guns anyway. I'm not saying that
*everybody* should carry a weapon... only that a large percentage should,
so the average mugger will think twice about holding someone up.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Concealed-carry permits allow
the average law-abiding citizen to stand up successfully to the criminals.
See, here is where I don't see the situation as do you, and some other
people. I don't see this as a matter of self defense, as much as I see
it as a matter of a possibly tradegy waiting to happen. Unforseen things
happen. Bystanders can get in the way. Misjudgements can be made. What
may seem like self defense at the immediate moment may be misjudged and
have tragic consequenses.
The same can be said about cars, or bricks, or baseball bats...
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
But I just don't see the need to carry one in public or to have one
Post by Dave in Dallas
in your car when driving. IMHO.
Au contraire. That's when they're needed the most.
Again, we are polar opposites here. As I said I had someone wave a
pistol at me on the freeway when he didn't agree with my way of
driving. That's a pretty damn scary thing to have happen to you. Trust
me.
Hmm. I see your point, but I still think the benefits outweigh the risks
by a substantial margin. Besides, by pulling the gun the idiot committed
a felony...
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
As I said before, if a criminal wants a weapon, he'll find a way to
acquire one. However, he'll likely think twice about attacking you if
he thinks there's a good chance you're carrying.
I'm really not sure about that. I've not seen any statistics if the
threat of conceled weopons deter crime or not. Maybe they do. I've just
not seen the statistics.
I suggest you read "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America", by Gary
Kleck. It's absolutely full of statistics. (It focuses quite a bit on
Florida, since Kleck is a professor at FSU.)

A reviewer at Amazon suggests "The Great Gun Debate" as an alternative;
supposedly it's easier to read and costs less. I've never read it,
though, so I can't confirm or deny that.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Benjamin Geiger
(And before you label me a "gun nut"... I don't even own a gun.)
I wasn't going to jump to that conclusion. As I said in an earlier post,
I was raised by gun enthusiasts. If my parents had been younger when the
permit to carry was available, they probably would have. And I would
never have considered my parents "gun nuts". I just happen to see the
situation from a different perspective. That's all. But the last thing
I'm going to do is call someone with opposing view a "gun nut".
Thank you. They tend to be the first words out of the mouths of most
people who disagree with me.
--
Benjamin Geiger My real email address isn't a _spamtrap.
WDW 4/6/03 - 4/6/04: Anytime I want! Hooray being local!
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-22 00:03:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Benjamin Geiger
I understand your concern, but think it's unfounded. I'm more afraid of
people who are legally driving vehicles and react irresponsibly, which
happens every day.
Absolutely no arguement about irresponsible drivers, as I said in a post to
Dennise. I think it's WAY to easy to get a driver's license. And WAY too easy
to keep it if you act irresponsibly. But that arguement sort of is weak to me.
Sort of a "two wrongs" type of argument.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
But how many lives have been saved by legally concealed weapons? I'd
venture to guess that it's many more than four...
If I were to see some hard statistics, I might change my mind. But I'm not
aware of any black and white statistics to this fact. I'm not arguing one way
or the other here. I've just not seen the statistics that support that claim.
At this point, it's supposition to me.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
As I said in another fork of this thread, all security is a trade. By
allowing concealed weapons, you get a much lower crime rate, at the cost
of the occasional idiot, and so far, the idiots have been few and far
between (unlike every other aspect of life), almost negligibly so.
OK, here is where we are having the conflict. You believe it's a deterant to
crime, and I haven't had this fact proven to me. If I had the proof, and I'm
open to reading the facts on the situation, I'd be willing to give you this
point. But I've just not seen any facts that support this claim that it's a
deterant to crime. Maybe this info is out there, and I'm just not aware of it.
But I honestly think this is a case of a false sense of security.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
That's two, out of hundreds of thousands of licensees.
I'm not arguing that the vast majority of people who carry a handgun are
responsible. I'm just really scared of those who aren't. That's all.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Compare that to
the staggering number of crimes committed with illegal guns.
That's not really the point. Crime is crime, and there is no defense of it.
What I'm trying to get at is that I'm scared of the person who perpetrates a
tragedy by accident. The person who accidentally leaves a gun where a child can
get to it. Who misjudges a situation they think might be a case of self
defense.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
I'm not saying that
*everybody* should carry a weapon... only that a large percentage should,
so the average mugger will think twice about holding someone up.
I honestly don't think the average mugger is going to think about that. I was
mugged in my own quiet neighborhood in the early evening after it was OK to
carry a concealed weopon in Texas. It sure didn't stop those punks that I might
have had a handgun on me.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
The same can be said about cars, or bricks, or baseball bats...
But, as the old arguement goes, those things weren't created with the one sole
purpose of injuring another living thing.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Hmm. I see your point, but I still think the benefits outweigh the risks
by a substantial margin.
Sure. We see things differently. So be it.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Besides, by pulling the gun the idiot committed
a felony...
He sure did. And he got away with it scott free. And as we all know, this isn't
an uncommon occurance. I'm not saying that it's happening all the time. But
still, it happens.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
I suggest you read "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America", by Gary
Kleck. It's absolutely full of statistics. (It focuses quite a bit on
Florida, since Kleck is a professor at FSU.)
I'll see if I can find it. Thanks. Is it considered an unbiased work?
Post by Benjamin Geiger
A reviewer at Amazon suggests "The Great Gun Debate" as an alternative;
supposedly it's easier to read and costs less.
I'll see if our library has either book. Thanks.
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Thank you. They tend to be the first words out of the mouths of most
people who disagree with me.
Nah! Not at all. You have an opposing point of view, but that doesn't mean I'm
going to call you names. (There is another I might, and you know of whom I
speak, but not you. <G>)


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-22 02:33:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
If I were to see some hard statistics, I might change my mind. But I'm not
aware of any black and white statistics to this fact. I'm not arguing one way
or the other here. I've just not seen the statistics that support that claim.
At this point, it's supposition to me.
I'll see what I can dig up for you, and Ben quoted the Kleck study. By
their very nature, those situations where a firearm prevents a crime
generally go unreported, such as Dillon's situation with the kids in
Miami. Neither he nor his family came to any harm, which is the
ultimate goal of any CCWer. It's always best not to shoot if you can
avoid it, and most times the deterrent effect is acheived without the
need for any violence.
Post by Dave in Dallas
I'm not arguing that the vast majority of people who carry a handgun are
responsible. I'm just really scared of those who aren't. That's all.
As I said in a previous message, I am too. However, I'm not willing to
preclude responsible people from carrying just because there are some
people that can't handle it. Such is the nature of human beings - there
are always going to be those who represent the shallow end of the
intellectual swimming pool, and as I get older, I find more and more
that's something I really can't change and thus I just have to deal with it.
Post by Dave in Dallas
That's not really the point. Crime is crime, and there is no defense of it.
What I'm trying to get at is that I'm scared of the person who perpetrates a
tragedy by accident. The person who accidentally leaves a gun where a child can
get to it. Who misjudges a situation they think might be a case of self
defense.
My take - The parent that leaves a gun out where kids can get to it is
no less a criminal and should be locked up. I'd say the same about
parents who don't buckle their kids up in the car. Either displays a
profound lack of parenting ability and differs only in the means by
which that responsibility is displayed.

For the individual who shoots when not justified? People *do* make
mistakes, but is this any worse than Grandpa taking the Buick for a
drive into the local farmer's market? I guarantee you the accidental
shooter will do more jail time for having caused less harm to society.
I fully agree that an unjustified shooting is tragic, but certainly no
less tragic than the abused wife who is unable to protect herself from
the abusive husband that's on his third restraining order.

I guess the point is that we don't live in Utopia, and thus everything
we do as people has to be subject to compromise. Most states' firearm
laws represent just such a compromise, but it's also up to the
government to enforce them. Remember the statistics a few years ago
touting how many felons were stopped from buying guns because of the
Brady Act? Well, how many of those felons went to jail for attempting to
buy a gun? After all, that in and of itself was a federal felony, yet
it was enforced by practically no one.
Post by Dave in Dallas
But, as the old arguement goes, those things weren't created with the one sole
purpose of injuring another living thing.
I think we're coming to the crux of the argument, which is the sanctity
of life. Please don't misunderstand me, I hold life very dear, and will
try to get out of a life-threatening situation without violence if
possible. If that's not possible, it becomes a relative situation - the
lives of myself and my loved ones take precedence over the life of the
guy posing the threat. I believe that there are a lot of people out
there that would rather die themselves than cause harm to another,
regardless of whether it's justified or not. I'm not one of those
people, and I don't understand the morality of why one would effectively
ask a police officer to sacrifice himself (with the attendant sacrifice
the officer's family would make) in order to protect them when they were
unwilling to do it themselves. Dave, I'm not suggesting that's where
you're coming from, so please don't take it as an inflammatory remark,
but for those that feel that way I just don't get it.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Sure. We see things differently. So be it.
Such is the basis for reasonable argument. :-)
Post by Dave in Dallas
He sure did. And he got away with it scott free. And as we all know, this isn't
an uncommon occurance. I'm not saying that it's happening all the time. But
still, it happens.
Why did he get away with it?
Post by Dave in Dallas
Nah! Not at all. You have an opposing point of view, but that doesn't mean I'm
going to call you names. (There is another I might, and you know of whom I
speak, but not you. <G>)
I will, you Disney Lover!!!! [nyah, nyah, nyah]

Steve
Dave in Dallas
2004-04-22 04:23:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
Such is the nature of human beings - there
are always going to be those who represent the shallow end of the
intellectual swimming pool, and as I get older, I find more and more
that's something I really can't change and thus I just have to deal with it.
Very true.
Post by Steve Preskitt
My take - The parent that leaves a gun out where kids can get to it is
no less a criminal and should be locked up.
Well, true. But that does no good to the kid who accedentally kills themself or
another child. As I said, as a child my parents taught me to handle guns. I
knew where they were in the house and they were never locked up. And you know
what kept me away from them? The fact that I hated them, and only handled them
because my parents wanted me to learn to handle them. But I sometimes wonder
what might have happened if I hadn't found them abhorant. After all I was a kid
who got into lots of other stuff in the house I knew I shouldn't have. I used
Dads power tools without supervision. I sometimes wonder if I left them alone
because I was carefully taught to leave them alone, or if it was just because I
really didn't want anything to do with them in the first place.
Post by Steve Preskitt
People *do* make
mistakes, but is this any worse than Grandpa taking the Buick for a
drive into the local farmer's market?
No arguement. Three years ago, while I was in the process of taking legal
charge of my mother due to her advanced age, she went to the store, hit the gas
pedal instead of the brake and crashed into a tree. Seriously enough to
eventually cause her death. I often have nightmares (Literally) of what might
have happened if another car or a pedistrian had been involved.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I fully agree that an unjustified shooting is tragic, but certainly no
less tragic than the abused wife who is unable to protect herself from
the abusive husband that's on his third restraining order.
OK, here is another place where I differ with you. Spousal abuse is unspeakably
horrible. But I'm not sure a woman with a gun is the answer. I think we need to
change the legal system so the women (Or in some cases, men.) have quicker
access to protection and safe houses. But that's a whole other issue we don't
need to get into in this thread.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I guess the point is that we don't live in Utopia, and thus everything
we do as people has to be subject to compromise.
Very true. But optimist that I am, I do believe things are much closer to
Utopia than they were 100 years ago. Even 50 years ago.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Remember the statistics a few years ago
touting how many felons were stopped from buying guns because of the
Brady Act?
Yeah. But also remember the kids at Colombine bought their weopons at a gun
show without any hassle.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Well, how many of those felons went to jail for attempting to
buy a gun? After all, that in and of itself was a federal felony, yet
it was enforced by practically no one.
I know what you are trying to say, but to me your arguement is saying we need
stronger regulation on the ability to obtain firearms. Not on making it easier
for people to obtain firearms to defend themselves from those who obtain guns
illegally.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I think we're coming to the crux of the argument, which is the sanctity
of life.
No arguement.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Please don't misunderstand me, I hold life very dear, and will
try to get out of a life-threatening situation without violence if
possible. If that's not possible, it becomes a relative situation - the
lives of myself and my loved ones take precedence over the life of the
guy posing the threat.
And I think this is coming down to a basic philosophy of how you and I would
deal with that situation. For me, I cannot think of agressing on another person
in any way. With a gun. With my fists. (Never in my life, even as a kid in
school, have I been in a fist fight.) As in the case of when I had a gun
pointed at me in a public park, I ran like hell and then called the police. I'm
not saying my way of dealing with the situation was the only solution. But for
ME and me alone, it was the only solution. I could never even consider pointing
a pistol back at another human being. So I guess that's the basis of why I have
a very difficult time seeing the other side of this issue. It's just not in my
nature to even consider a gun for self defense. No matter what. And as such
it's very difficult for me to project myself into the shoes of someone who can.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I believe that there are a lot of people out
there that would rather die themselves than cause harm to another,
regardless of whether it's justified or not.
Yep. I'm one of those people.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I'm not one of those
people, and I don't understand the morality of why one would effectively
ask a police officer to sacrifice himself (with the attendant sacrifice
the officer's family would make) in order to protect them when they were
unwilling to do it themselves.
Because it's the profession they have trained for and are skilled to handle.
It's the talent they have chosen for themselves. The same as I don't do my own
taxes. I can't add, so I go to a trained professional to do my taxes for me. I
go to my doctor to heal me when I'm sick or injured because they are trained
and have the skill to do so. I have my talents. A police person has theirs. And
defending the community from criminals is not a talent or skill I possess. And
frankly, I really don't believe the average man on the street posesses, either.
Even after going through the training to carry a concieled handgun.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Dave, I'm not suggesting that's where
you're coming from, so please don't take it as an inflammatory remark,
but for those that feel that way I just don't get it.
No worry. I didn't. And please I hope you know I'm not trying to be inflamatory
either. Just two people having a dialogue. And unlike you, regarding those who
do feel the need to deal with the situation on their own, it's an issue I don't
get.
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by Dave in Dallas
Sure. We see things differently. So be it.
Such is the basis for reasonable argument. :-)
And cool discussions. :-)
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by Dave in Dallas
He sure did. And he got away with it scott free. And as we all know, this
isn't
Post by Dave in Dallas
an uncommon occurance.
Why did he get away with it?
Because I didn't think fast enough to get the proper information to the police.
I was in shock and unable to give any description of what the vehicle was like,
the license plate or what the man looked like. It was very sureal and I guess
my mind didn't really accept that it was happening until it was too late.
Post by Steve Preskitt
I will, you Disney Lover!!!! [nyah, nyah, nyah]
Who you callin' a "Disney Lover" you WDW fan, you! <G>


Dave, Dallas, TX

"When all think alike, no one thinks very much."
Albert Einstein
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-22 05:51:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Steve Preskitt
Remember the statistics a few years ago
touting how many felons were stopped from buying guns because of the
Brady Act?
Yeah. But also remember the kids at Colombine bought their weopons at a gun
show without any hassle.
Yes, after having had 15 encounters with law enforcement in the two
years prior to Columbine in which nothing was done, including a search
warrant for Eric Harris' home that was drafted but never served. In
addition, law enforcement's inaction was cited in the state attorney
general's report as contributing to the number of kids that died,
because the local sheriff apparently was more concerned with "minimizing
police casualities" than saving the kids inside.

The point is, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were going to kill someone,
whether it be with guns or pipe bombs or some other means, and the kids
at Columbine found out that expecting the police to protect them was a
gamble they would lose and pay for with their lives. It's tragic for
sure, but I believe it's not about the guns, it's about the failure of
our society to adequately deal with the criminal element.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Steve Preskitt
Well, how many of those felons went to jail for attempting to
buy a gun? After all, that in and of itself was a federal felony, yet
it was enforced by practically no one.
I know what you are trying to say, but to me your arguement is saying we need
stronger regulation on the ability to obtain firearms.
Not in the least. We already have more than enough legislation in place
for that, but it doesn't do any good if the laws in place aren't
enforced. If we experience a spate of convenience-store robberies,
should we not focus our efforts in putting the thieves in jail rather
than making it *more* illegal to rob a store? Criminals by definition
don't obey the law, so more laws don't make the first bit of difference
to them.
Post by Dave in Dallas
And I think this is coming down to a basic philosophy of how you and I would
deal with that situation. For me, I cannot think of agressing on another person
in any way. With a gun. With my fists. (Never in my life, even as a kid in
school, have I been in a fist fight.) As in the case of when I had a gun
pointed at me in a public park, I ran like hell and then called the police. I'm
not saying my way of dealing with the situation was the only solution. But for
ME and me alone, it was the only solution. I could never even consider pointing
a pistol back at another human being. So I guess that's the basis of why I have
a very difficult time seeing the other side of this issue. It's just not in my
nature to even consider a gun for self defense. No matter what. And as such
it's very difficult for me to project myself into the shoes of someone who can.
Fair enough. People are different, and I don't support requiring gun
ownership (ala Kennesaw, GA) for that reason. Someone that is not
mentally/emotionally prepared to pull the trigger in defense of self is
a danger to themselves and others with a gun in hand. This isn't to be
critical, just an observation that some people can do it and some people
can't, just like some people can paint and some people can't. No big
deal, and I admire someone that understands and respects their
limitations. More people should be so honest with themselves.
Post by Dave in Dallas
Post by Steve Preskitt
I'm not one of those
people, and I don't understand the morality of why one would effectively
ask a police officer to sacrifice himself (with the attendant sacrifice
the officer's family would make) in order to protect them when they were
unwilling to do it themselves.
Because it's the profession they have trained for and are skilled to handle.
I'm guessing you don't know how badly a lot of cops shoot. :-) I have a
good friend who is a police officer in Virginia Beach, and it's still a
sore spot with him that he failed the academy his first time through
because of his (lack of) shooting skills. He isn't that much better now.
:-) I respect the fact that he's a trained law enforcement officer, but
frankly I'd rather he not try to protect me. The majority of cops (at
least, the ones I know and talk to) don't take the time at the range to
stay proficient like they should, even with all the free ammo they can use.
Post by Dave in Dallas
It's the talent they have chosen for themselves. The same as I don't do my own
taxes. I can't add, so I go to a trained professional to do my taxes for me. I
go to my doctor to heal me when I'm sick or injured because they are trained
and have the skill to do so.
I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but the tax consultant and
doctor are generally available whenever you need them, on your terms. A
police officer is not.


I have my talents. A police person has theirs. And
Post by Dave in Dallas
defending the community from criminals is not a talent or skill I possess. And
frankly, I really don't believe the average man on the street posesses, either.
Even after going through the training to carry a concieled handgun.
I don't believe I possess the skill to defend the community from
criminals, but that's not my job and not something I want to do anyway -
I'm not Rambo, I mostly just need to worry about protecting myself.
Again, please remember that "defending the community" isn't a legally
enforceable duty of any law enforcement agency in the United States.
Their job is to arrest suspected lawbreakers and ensure their appearance
in court, not to protect anyone.
Post by Dave in Dallas
No worry. I didn't. And please I hope you know I'm not trying to be inflamatory
either. Just two people having a dialogue. And unlike you, regarding those who
do feel the need to deal with the situation on their own, it's an issue I don't
get.
Not a problem - I haven't perceived anything you've written to be
inflammatory or rude. We see things differently, and I don't think
either of us is expecting or even trying to change the other's mind. :-)
Post by Dave in Dallas
Who you callin' a "Disney Lover" you WDW fan, you! <G>
:-P

Steve
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-22 13:22:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
We already have more than enough legislation in place
for that, but it doesn't do any good if the laws in place aren't
enforced. If we experience a spate of convenience-store robberies,
should we not focus our efforts in putting the thieves in jail rather
than making it *more* illegal to rob a store? Criminals by definition
don't obey the law, so more laws don't make the first bit of difference
to them.
I've been saying this for years. We don't need more laws, we need more
enforcement of the ones we have. A good example of this fallacious
lawmaking is in the "war on drugs". We now have increased penalties for
selling drugs within a 2-mile radius of a school. To the average voter,
that sounds like our legislators are trying to protect our children from
pushers. In reality, it's pretty difficult to be more that two miles from a
school, so almost every person arrested fro a drug offense has the "school
zone" charge tacked on. Of course for various reasons (not all of them
reasonable), 80% of drug-related arrests end in dismissals of the charges.
--
- RODNEY
Sandi Femino
2004-04-19 16:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by weidwall
At the risk of starting a flame war - there are "a lot" of CCW holders
coming into the parks with guns at the present time??! Yikes! I believe the
entire Six Flags chain does not allow weapons into its parks, whether you
have a concealed carry permit or not. Cedar Point doesn't allow weapons,
either.
Neither does Disney, but that doesn't change the fact that it's legal to
carry there with the proper permit.
This concerns me too, Ruth Ann.

Steve,
Even if it is legal, doesn't Dis have the right to NOT allow it in their
parks?
--
Sandi
Carol Kennedy
2004-04-19 22:07:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sandi Femino
Even if it is legal, doesn't Dis have the right to NOT allow it in their
parks?
It depends on how the law is written. In Minnesota, a business that wants to
ban firearms must post a sign of a certain size at a certain height within a
certain distance of *every* entrance to the business, whether used by the
public or not. The wording is specified, and the letters must be of a
certain size in a particular specified font.

Then, if someone enters carrying a weapon, a representative of the business
must ask the person to leave. If the person refuses, the business can call
the police; if the person is still there when the police arrive, the person
will be issued a ticket--for which the fine is $25--and told to leave. If
the person does leave when asked to do so, he or she has committed no
violation.

--
Carol Kennedy, TDC Pollo Grande, Speaker of Inadequate Spanish, and
Translator without Portfolio
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-19 22:44:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sandi Femino
Steve,
Even if it is legal, doesn't Dis have the right to NOT allow it in their
parks?
IANAL, etc.

Sure, just like any property owner. If Disney chooses to enforce a
weapons ban, they can ask anyone carrying a weapon to leave. If they
refuse, then it's trespassing. Beyond that, there's not a whole lot
they can do - I've not seen anything in Florida law that says one has to
respect a posted "no weapons" sign. However, the licensed CCW holders
*aren't* the people Disney needs to worry about, and I think that Disney
may end up losing some business that they really don't have to just to
provide people with an illusion of safety. Heaven help them (from both
a legal and moral standpoint) if something were to happen at the parks
that might have been mitigated had someone been able to take action.
(Killeen, TX, anyone?)

Steve
Denise near Disney
2004-04-17 02:19:48 UTC
Permalink
<< The last time I was at WDW, 11/01, the security people were bending
over backwards to be fast and courteous while checking bags going into
MK. Have things changed/deteriorated? >><BR><BR>

Most of the security people at Disney barely even look in the bags. Normally I
open mine, and they give a cursory look. Anyone who WANTS to bring something
in could just stick it in their pocket - or really, in their bags as the
checking is usually minimal.

I don't even know how you do that kind of checking on thousands of people
through a fairly small entranceway. And those with concealed weapons permits -
will they be allowed to bring the guns in?

Will the next step be to only have plastic silverware at the restaurants?

There is no way to foolproof everything. And between pins and belts and coins
and barettes and keys and such, EVERYBODY will set the detector off.






Denise
Down 49 pounds and counting. :)
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-17 21:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
<< The last time I was at WDW, 11/01, the security people were bending
over backwards to be fast and courteous while checking bags going into
MK. Have things changed/deteriorated? >><BR><BR>
Most of the security people at Disney barely even look in the bags. Normally I
open mine, and they give a cursory look. Anyone who WANTS to bring something
in could just stick it in their pocket - or really, in their bags as the
checking is usually minimal.
At Indy, for both the 500 and the USGP (don't know about the Brickyard
but I guess it's the same) they do pretty through checks of anything
coming in. Of course, all they're really looking for are glass
containers.
Post by Denise near Disney
I don't even know how you do that kind of checking on thousands of people
through a fairly small entranceway. And those with concealed weapons permits -
will they be allowed to bring the guns in?
Will the next step be to only have plastic silverware at the restaurants?
There is no way to foolproof everything. And between pins and belts and coins
and barettes and keys and such, EVERYBODY will set the detector off.
I can see two hour waits to get in. Might as well ask everyone to
come in nude. Save a lot of problems and make the crowds smaller.
Post by Denise near Disney
Denise
Down 49 pounds and counting. :)
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-17 03:45:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raoul
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 14:28:15 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by Rodney T. Grill
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting into
an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate the time
wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
The last time I was at WDW, 11/01, the security people were bending
over backwards to be fast and courteous while checking bags going into
MK. Have things changed/deteriorated? Airport security OTOH seem to be
as much about creating the perception of security as making things
safer.
Airport "security" is all about perception. They have essentially
shut the barn door after the horses have left. No intelligent person
thinks the next terrorist attack will be another airliner hijacking.
Homeland Security may, but I stand by my statement.
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-19 13:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
Airport "security" is all about perception. They have essentially
shut the barn door after the horses have left. No intelligent person
thinks the next terrorist attack will be another airliner hijacking.
Homeland Security may, but I stand by my statement.
I have to laugh about that statement because it's exactly the way I feel.
It seems that our security measures are always reactive instead of
proactive. Terrorists used airplanes as weapons, so we throw billions into
increasing airport security. A guy hid a bomb in his shoe, so now everyone
has to have their shoes inspected before boarding a flight. Who knows what
part of our lives will be the next thing to come under scrutiny? I can tell
you that Homeland Security does not know, but I am sure the terrorists do.
--
- RODNEY
phase90
2004-04-17 02:47:49 UTC
Permalink
I say make middle-eastern men between 17 and 34 go
through extreme security screening! Because I am a racist / bigot?
Because this is the group that has proven they like to blow things up
over the last 20 years. Sure you've got your Unabomber and Tim McVeigh -
who I'm sure the govt. knows had help from middle-eastern terrorists - they
got
rid of him pretty quick so he can't sing about accomplices. Other than that
it is all middle-eastern men who have been brainwashed by exteme religious
fanatacism.
I'm sure Disney will do a cavity search on an elderly
wheel chair bound woman before the common-sense thing to do above. Say
goodbye to early entry if this happens. No more annual passes for me. You
won't
get into the park before 10:00 unless you do a sleepover.


annual passholder
Post by Rodney T. Grill
John Pike, a security and aerospace analyst with
globalsecurity.org in Arlington, Va., said it will be
difficult for Disney to effectively balance security
measures that often go along with metal detectors --
such as requiring people to take off their shoes --
with the desire not to inconvenience its guests.
"Their dilemma is that either they are going to make
spending a day at the park as annoying as flying an
airplane or it [the security measure] is going to be
ineffective," Pike said.
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting into
an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate the time
wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
--
- RODNEY
Dirk
2004-04-18 03:04:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rodney T. Grill
John Pike, a security and aerospace analyst with
globalsecurity.org in Arlington, Va., said it will be
difficult for Disney to effectively balance security
measures that often go along with metal detectors --
such as requiring people to take off their shoes --
with the desire not to inconvenience its guests.
"Their dilemma is that either they are going to make
spending a day at the park as annoying as flying an
airplane or it [the security measure] is going to be
ineffective," Pike said.
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting
into an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate
the time wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
I was at Six Flags Marineland near San Francisco todaay and was surprised to
see they have metal detectors. At opening, the wait wasn't bad at all - but
they had several in operation and good staffing at each one. Since it was
"only" a Six Flags - I didn't bring my camera so I just pulled my keys out
and walked through. No problems. No waiting.

However, with the attendance at WDW, there is great potential for backlogs
unless Disney is really willing to pay for a lot of new equipment and CMs to
staff them.

Dirk
weidwall
2004-04-18 16:36:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dirk
I was at Six Flags Marineland near San Francisco todaay and was surprised to
see they have metal detectors.
They've had metal detectors at Six Flags New England (MA) and Great
Adventure (NJ) for quite awhile - I think pre 9/11 in the case of Great
Adventure, because they'd had some weapon incidents there. I haven't been to
Great Adventure recently enough to comment, but the detectors didn't seem to
slow the lines down that much at the one in MA.

I'm sure more SF parks have metal detectors, but these are the two I've been
to.

Ruth Ann
Aksco33
2004-04-19 03:31:11 UTC
Permalink
Kennywood Park has metal detectors but they had them long before 9/11.
srusso100
2004-04-19 13:09:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
Post by Dillon Pyron
Airport "security" is all about perception. They have essentially
shut the barn door after the horses have left. No intelligent
person
Post by Dillon Pyron
thinks the next terrorist attack will be another airliner
hijacking.
Post by Dillon Pyron
Homeland Security may, but I stand by my statement.
I have to laugh about that statement because it's exactly the way I
feel.
It seems that our security measures are always reactive instead of
proactive. Terrorists used airplanes as weapons, so we throw
billions into
increasing airport security. A guy hid a bomb in his shoe, so now
everyone
has to have their shoes inspected before boarding a flight. Who
knows what
part of our lives will be the next thing to come under scrutiny? I
can tell
you that Homeland Security does not know, but I am sure the
terrorists do.
--
- RODNEY *
Precisely. I've been dumb-struck at the responses to the August 2001
PDB. They had increased terrorist chatter, statements about "something
very, very, very big", known terrorists in the US attending flight
training for commercial aircraft, knowledge that OBL wanted to attack
within the US, and comments about potential "hijackings". But no one
expected an aircraft to be used as a missle nor did they have a
specific date, so there was nothing that could have been done.


--
srusso100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
srusso100's Profile: http://www.florida-travels.com/forum/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=364
View this thread: http://www.florida-travels.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=8336
Ted Ansley
2004-04-19 03:39:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
Post by Dirk
I was at Six Flags Marineland near San Francisco todaay and was surprised
to
Post by Dirk
see they have metal detectors.
They've had metal detectors at Six Flags New England (MA) and Great
Adventure (NJ) for quite awhile - I think pre 9/11 in the case of Great
Adventure, because they'd had some weapon incidents there. I haven't been to
Great Adventure recently enough to comment, but the detectors didn't seem to
slow the lines down that much at the one in MA.
I'm sure more SF parks have metal detectors, but these are the two I've been
to.
Ruth Ann
The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
though.



--------------------------
Ted Ansley
***@usa.com
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-19 13:59:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Ansley
The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
though.
Our local amusement park, Visionland, has had metal detectors and bag checks
since it opened in 1998. I've only been there once and the lines were not
bad, but then again, there were fewer people in the park than are in one
land on a slow day at MK.
--
- RODNEY
Doctor Don
2004-04-19 18:00:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Ansley
Post by weidwall
Post by Dirk
I was at Six Flags Marineland near San Francisco todaay and was surprised
to
Post by weidwall
Post by Dirk
see they have metal detectors.
They've had metal detectors at Six Flags New England (MA) and Great
Adventure (NJ) for quite awhile - I think pre 9/11 in the case of Great
Adventure, because they'd had some weapon incidents there. I haven't been to
Great Adventure recently enough to comment, but the detectors didn't seem to
slow the lines down that much at the one in MA.
I'm sure more SF parks have metal detectors, but these are the two I've been
to.
Ruth Ann
The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
though.
--------------------------
Ted Ansley
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
Six Flags Great America has them, too. Not only for patrons, but for
employees as well. I've worked there seasonally and after the
detectors there is a person with a wand -- one for every 2 or 3 MDs --
to scan anybody who sets one off. Having worked there in the "old
days" and having heard from other employees that they saw, from the
stage, guns in waistbands in the audience, and having seen gang
scuffles break out, I am GLAD to have them and have no boof with them
at all. I have never seen significant backup as a result of the use
of the MDs or wands. If this slight inconvenience is enough to keep
you away, just as well; one less complaint waiting to happen. Reminds
me of the idiots you see on "Airline" who are totally clueless on how
to travel in this day and age.

As for concealed weapons, I believe that since it is private property,
Disney can set its own policy, which I would hazard a guess would be a
NO.

"No secure place to store the gun" -- so you bring it into a theme
park. Duh.



Doctor Don
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-19 18:30:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Don
If this slight inconvenience is enough to keep
you away, just as well; one less complaint waiting to happen.
The bag searches at WDW are not enough to keep me away. "Airport style"
security would be. The difference in WDW security and airport security is
that at WDW, they are only looking for guests who appear suspicious while at
the airport, every passenger is assumed to be a terrorist.
Post by Doctor Don
Reminds
me of the idiots you see on "Airline" who are totally clueless on how
to travel in this day and age.
Even those of us seasoned travelers who fly very regularly come across some
odd situations that are not of our making. I always remove every piece of
metal that's not surgically attached to my body (i.e. a few filling in my
teeth and a small pin in my left wrist). So, when I beep and the idiot
screener asks me to go back out and remove all the metal from my pockets, I
get a little upset. Especially when I tell them I have yet they don't
believe me. Then I get detained for an extra 10 or 20 minutes for the
"extra, thorough" search that is completed by a guy that just a few weeks
ago was asking the all-important question, "Do you want fries with that?"
This is what I fear about increasing the level of security at WDW.
Post by Doctor Don
As for concealed weapons, I believe that since it is private property,
Disney can set its own policy, which I would hazard a guess would be a
NO.
Actually, I believe it already is. The issue is that they don;t enforce the
rule by not searching persons, only bags.
Post by Doctor Don
"No secure place to store the gun" -- so you bring it into a theme
park. Duh.
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it was
totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a trained,
licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to possibly be
stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
--
- RODNEY
weidwall
2004-04-19 20:25:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Then I get detained for an extra 10 or 20 minutes for the
"extra, thorough" search that is completed by a guy that just a few weeks
ago was asking the all-important question, "Do you want fries with that?"
This is what I fear about increasing the level of security at WDW.
I have not seen this at Six Flags and I doubt it will happen at WDW. There
are various degrees of "strictness" that can be employed when someone sets
off a metal detector, and I don't think Disney will go the airport route.

Ruth Ann
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-19 21:16:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Then I get detained for an extra 10 or 20 minutes for the
"extra, thorough" search that is completed by a guy that just a few weeks
ago was asking the all-important question, "Do you want fries with that?"
This is what I fear about increasing the level of security at WDW.
I have not seen this at Six Flags and I doubt it will happen at WDW.
There
Post by weidwall
are various degrees of "strictness" that can be employed when someone sets
off a metal detector, and I don't think Disney will go the airport route.
Let's hope not, but if they do install metal detectors, they will have to do
*something* with the guests that beep. It may not be quite as thorough as
the airport, but at a minimum guests will need to empty their pockets and
then be scanned with a wand. Also, what will they do with guest's bags
while they are walking through the MD? Maybe the security CM could be
searching the bag and pushing it along the existing table as the guest is in
the MD? The problem with this is it will significantly slow things down.
Instead of one CM being able to scan two lines of guests with the guests
opening their own bags, now the CM will handle only one line and will likely
have to handle the bags while the guest is being scanned in the MD. I just
see it as being a big bottle neck, and they still have done nothing to
screen out a potential terrorist hiding explosive in their shoes,stroller or
ECV.
--
- RODNEY
Paul
2004-04-20 01:05:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rodney T. Grill
[...]
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it
was totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a
trained, licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to
possibly be stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
Maybe the government will fix this by starting a program to train and
license criminals... After all, who could do it better?
--
Paul in NH (PSS) -- lose the bad example to mail
Charlie Foxtrot
2004-04-20 08:36:04 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:30:12 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by Rodney T. Grill
The bag searches at WDW are not enough to keep me away. "Airport style"
security would be. The difference in WDW security and airport security is
that at WDW, they are only looking for guests who appear suspicious while at
the airport, every passenger is assumed to be a terrorist.
Even those of us seasoned travelers who fly very regularly come across some
odd situations that are not of our making. I always remove every piece of
metal that's not surgically attached to my body (i.e. a few filling in my
teeth and a small pin in my left wrist). So, when I beep and the idiot
screener asks me to go back out and remove all the metal from my pockets, I
get a little upset. Especially when I tell them I have yet they don't
believe me. Then I get detained for an extra 10 or 20 minutes for the
"extra, thorough" search that is completed by a guy that just a few weeks
ago was asking the all-important question, "Do you want fries with that?"
This is what I fear about increasing the level of security at WDW.
Actually, I believe it already is. The issue is that they don;t enforce the
rule by not searching persons, only bags.
Well, hopefully, your fears will not pan out. According to a piece on
Screamscape (Yes, Derek, we know... We know... Screamscape is
unreliable and filled with silly rumors such as the transformation of
AE into Stitch Encounter, which we know will never happen...)

Anyhow, according to a piece on Screamscape, the metal detector plan
is to use them on "random" guests. I take that to mean, basically,
they plan to do a little profiling. In other words, those guests who
seem suspicious to the bag searchers who let Old Mama Foxtrot and I
blow right past them just might send our mid-eastern counterparts over
to the metal detector - at random, of course!

Foxtrot
Acertaingirl
2004-04-20 16:00:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charlie Foxtrot
I take that to mean, basically,
they plan to do a little profiling. In other words, those guests who
seem suspicious to the bag searchers who let Old Mama Foxtrot and I
blow right past them just might send our mid-eastern counterparts over
to the metal detector - at random, of course!<<

Oh please - I'm a middle aged white woman with curly red hair and I always get
stopped :) My theory is it's safer to stop me than an actual terrorist since
I'm no threat.

Andrea...must be the hair....
agnes
2004-04-20 16:56:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charlie Foxtrot
Post by Charlie Foxtrot
I take that to mean, basically,
they plan to do a little profiling. In other words, those guests who
seem suspicious to the bag searchers who let Old Mama Foxtrot and I
blow right past them just might send our mid-eastern counterparts over
to the metal detector - at random, of course!<<
Oh please - I'm a middle aged white woman with curly red hair and I always get
stopped :) My theory is it's safer to stop me than an actual terrorist since
I'm no threat.
Andrea...must be the hair....
My mother is in her early 80's, a DAR if she was interested in joining...
she *always* gets the full treatment.

agnes
*just reply here please - thanks
Doctor Don
2004-04-20 15:05:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Post by Doctor Don
If this slight inconvenience is enough to keep
you away, just as well; one less complaint waiting to happen.
The bag searches at WDW are not enough to keep me away. "Airport style"
security would be. The difference in WDW security and airport security is
that at WDW, they are only looking for guests who appear suspicious while at
the airport, every passenger is assumed to be a terrorist.
Agreed. Part of the difference being that the theme park is not
carrying thousands of gallons of jet fuel moving at hundreds of MPH,
flying through the air. If it is on par with 6F, you'll hardly notice
the difference bewteen the current bag check and the new method.
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Post by Doctor Don
Reminds
me of the idiots you see on "Airline" who are totally clueless on how
to travel in this day and age.
Even those of us seasoned travelers who fly very regularly come across some
odd situations that are not of our making. I always remove every piece of
metal that's not surgically attached to my body (i.e. a few filling in my
teeth and a small pin in my left wrist). So, when I beep and the idiot
screener asks me to go back out and remove all the metal from my pockets, I
get a little upset. Especially when I tell them I have yet they don't
believe me. Then I get detained for an extra 10 or 20 minutes for the
"extra, thorough" search that is completed by a guy that just a few weeks
ago was asking the all-important question, "Do you want fries with that?"
This is what I fear about increasing the level of security at WDW.
Sometimes the bird of happiness poops on us; just the luck of the
draw. Unfortunately, the demand has outstripped the supply for
well-trained, common-sense security people, and you occasionally get
one of the dips, but that's true in all walks of life (although banks
seem to have more than their fair share).
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Post by Doctor Don
As for concealed weapons, I believe that since it is private property,
Disney can set its own policy, which I would hazard a guess would be a
NO.
Actually, I believe it already is. The issue is that they don;t enforce the
rule by not searching persons, only bags.
Post by Doctor Don
"No secure place to store the gun" -- so you bring it into a theme
park. Duh.
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it was
totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a trained,
licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to possibly be
stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
Not when it falls out on Space Mountain, hits the ground and goes off
randomly in a room full of metal and people.

How about going to guest relations, or the first security guy you see,
and saying "I have a CCP card and i don't want to leave it in my car,
and I don't want to carry it in to the park. Do you have a secure
place for it until I can pick it up on my way out?" Also, if you're
travelling with it, shouldn't you have established a secure place for
it in transit? A gun safe in the trunk? Trigger locks? Something?

Doctor Don
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-20 16:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Don
Post by Rodney T. Grill
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it was
totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a trained,
licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to possibly be
stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
Not when it falls out on Space Mountain, hits the ground and goes off
randomly in a room full of metal and people.
No modern firearm will "go off randomly" when dropped. And no
responsible person will carry in a manner that they might lose the
gun. a) gun retention is a prime rule of carry (lose the gun, lose
the advantage) and b) it's felony.
Post by Doctor Don
How about going to guest relations, or the first security guy you see,
and saying "I have a CCP card and i don't want to leave it in my car,
and I don't want to carry it in to the park. Do you have a secure
place for it until I can pick it up on my way out?" Also, if you're
travelling with it, shouldn't you have established a secure place for
it in transit? A gun safe in the trunk? Trigger locks? Something?
The real problem is the drawing part. Most security folks (most cops,
in fact) are very wary of that. And if you do it in public without
"just cause", it's felony.

As far as trigger locks go, they can be broken, given time, such as
once the gun is stolen. I agree that a securely mounted safe is an
option.
Post by Doctor Don
Doctor Don
Just as an aside, in Texas police are considered "on duty" 24x7. As
such, they can carry anywhere at anytime. Wonder how 6F handles that.
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-20 18:58:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
The real problem is the drawing part. Most security folks (most cops,
in fact) are very wary of that. And if you do it in public without
"just cause", it's felony.
Unless you are a police officer. In that case, you can pull your gun on
whomever you please.
Post by Dillon Pyron
Just as an aside, in Texas police are considered "on duty" 24x7. As
such, they can carry anywhere at anytime. Wonder how 6F handles that.
I believe they can be prohibited from carrying their guns onto private
property unless they are there under warrant or hot pursuit. However, I
feel certain few private property owners would make an issue about it for
fear of what might happen (or not happen) the next time they need the
services of the police.
--
- RODNEY
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-20 23:11:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
No modern firearm will "go off randomly" when dropped.
Yup. I'll give anyone here $1000 if they can get a Glock to do that. :-)

Steve
Lesa
2004-04-21 10:30:05 UTC
Permalink
On 20 Apr 2004 08:05:16 -0700,
No modern firearm will "go off randomly" when dropped. And no
responsible person will carry in a manner that they might lose the
gun. a) gun retention is a prime rule of carry (lose the gun, lose
the advantage) and b) it's felony.
Unfortunatley not all gun owners are responsbile -- I personally know of a
few who are not. "Respsonbility" is not of the the required answers on a
gun permit.
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-20 18:46:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Don
Agreed. Part of the difference being that the theme park is not
carrying thousands of gallons of jet fuel moving at hundreds of MPH,
flying through the air. If it is on par with 6F, you'll hardly notice
the difference bewteen the current bag check and the new method.
I would hope so. My last visit to 6F's was before they had any sort of
security. My experience with our local amusement park was that it was
creating delays upwards of 30 minutes and the crowds there are nothing
compared to the gates at WDW on an average day.

My whole argument against it is that it will do nothing to improve security.
If a real criminals want to sneak weapons into WDW, they can just hide them
in their bags. Now, if they add X-ray scanners for bags, then they might
catch all but the most adept and serious criminals, but then again, with all
the film going into WDW, that would be a disaster. The security they have
is primarily to make the most timid and uneducated (in the sense of
knowledge about security) guests feel more at ease. Adding metal detectors
might increase that level slightly, but my guess is that what they have is
already doing *that* job well.
Post by Doctor Don
Sometimes the bird of happiness poops on us; just the luck of the
draw. Unfortunately, the demand has outstripped the supply for
well-trained, common-sense security people, and you occasionally get
one of the dips, but that's true in all walks of life (although banks
seem to have more than their fair share).
Actually, even before 9/11 and Osama's threats prior to that, airport
security personnel were about on par with the night guards at The Salvation
Army. Of course it is now worse with the increased demand. If the TSA
wants to get serious about this, they will hire employees at an appropriate
level, just as the FBI, CIA, and even local police departments do.
Post by Doctor Don
Post by Rodney T. Grill
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it was
totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a trained,
licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to possibly be
stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
Not when it falls out on Space Mountain, hits the ground and goes off
randomly in a room full of metal and people.
I realize that not every legitimate gun owner follows all the rules of
safety, but a vast majority do. In the case of a properly carried weapon,
it would be more likely that a passenger on Space Mt. would be injured by a
falling meteor than the accidental discharge of a dropped gun.
Post by Doctor Don
How about going to guest relations, or the first security guy you see,
and saying "I have a CCP card and i don't want to leave it in my car,
and I don't want to carry it in to the park. Do you have a secure
place for it until I can pick it up on my way out?"
I am guessing that Disney would not want to bear the responsibility of
holding a guests weapon. in fact, many hotels will not store weapons in
their safes, while they will store other expensive items.
Post by Doctor Don
Also, if you're
travelling with it, shouldn't you have established a secure place for
it in transit? A gun safe in the trunk? Trigger locks? Something?
Yes, I agree with you there. Guns really have no purpose being inside the
WDW theme parks. I would expect a responsible gun owner to plan accordingly
so that it would not be carried into the parks. It does not bother me that
there might be some licensed guns being carried by responsible guests in the
parks, but then again, there is jut no reason for it so it should be
avoided.
--
- RODNEY
Denise near Disney
2004-04-20 20:49:47 UTC
Permalink
<< In the case of a properly carried weapon,
it would be more likely that a passenger on Space Mt. would be injured by a
falling meteor than the accidental discharge of a dropped gun. >><BR><BR>

Or a falling backpack...or video camera, or anything else. The thing that DOES
bother me is that if I go on Rock and Roller Coaster, or Space Mountain, that
there isn't storage (or adequate storage, I'm not sure that there even is any)
for a backpack and such.

<< Guns really have no purpose being inside the
WDW theme parks >><BR><BR>

If someone has a concealed permit, than I'm not sure that one place is any
better or worse to carry it. It's taking responsibility for your own security
and not expecting someone else to do it for you.
I'd guess that someone used to carrying a gun would feel uncomfortable leaving
it for a week while on vacation. And it wouldn't do much good in a safe at the
hotel.

In any event, it will be interesting to see what happens. I don't see metal
detectors as making me feel any safer than the cursory bag checks. After
9/11, at least security would feel around the bags and such for anything
unusual. They barely even touch mine anymore. And then there was the
security guard at Disneyland two years ago who took an Always pad out of my bag
and held it up in the air and asked me what it was. Did it look like a weapon
of mass destruction?




Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-21 06:08:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
<< In the case of a properly carried weapon,
it would be more likely that a passenger on Space Mt. would be injured by a
falling meteor than the accidental discharge of a dropped gun. >><BR><BR>
Or a falling backpack...or video camera, or anything else. The thing that DOES
bother me is that if I go on Rock and Roller Coaster, or Space Mountain, that
there isn't storage (or adequate storage, I'm not sure that there even is any)
for a backpack and such.
<< Guns really have no purpose being inside the
WDW theme parks >><BR><BR>
If someone has a concealed permit, than I'm not sure that one place is any
better or worse to carry it. It's taking responsibility for your own security
and not expecting someone else to do it for you.
I'd guess that someone used to carrying a gun would feel uncomfortable leaving
it for a week while on vacation. And it wouldn't do much good in a safe at the
hotel.
For me, the whole thing was (this was back in the early 90's) tourists
were getting robbed and carjacked in Miami. We flew into Miami and
made the drive to Key West. While we were in the parking lot of the
rental agency, I observed some "young toughs" looking at us through
the fence. So I carefully removed my gun from it's case, loaded it
and put it in my holster, all in full view of these "youths". Who had
all scattered by the time we left the lot.

Our arrival latter in the trip at WDW caused me a problem. I intended
to store the gun in the safe. No safe, just safe deposit boxes at the
front desk. Where the form I signed said not for the storage of more
than $500 cash, jewelry valued at more than $1000 or firearms. So I
just holstered up and carried at WDW.

I shoot, on average, 300 rounds a week. In competion I will shoot as
much as 500 rounds while moving, selecting targets and no-shoots. I
train as I fight. The average Austin cop spends 2 hours a month
shooting 100 rounds at the range. Shooting bullseyes and silohouites
from fixed distance. The good cops also come out and shoot IPSC with
us, them I trust in a firefight.
Post by Denise near Disney
In any event, it will be interesting to see what happens. I don't see metal
detectors as making me feel any safer than the cursory bag checks. After
9/11, at least security would feel around the bags and such for anything
unusual. They barely even touch mine anymore. And then there was the
security guard at Disneyland two years ago who took an Always pad out of my bag
and held it up in the air and asked me what it was. Did it look like a weapon
of mass destruction?
Did you tell him what it was (in the most intimate details) and
massively destroy his ego? :-)
Post by Denise near Disney
Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.
Denise near Disney
2004-04-21 19:04:26 UTC
Permalink
<< Did you tell him what it was (in the most intimate details) and
massively destroy his ego? :-) >><BR><BR>

I said "it's a pad!" and then went to city hall and said it appeared that the
security needed a diagram like those at the airport get. You know - something
showing the different types of feminine protection (like they do with the
luggage when someone loses a piece at the airport).

That is a great story about Miami - and you shoot a lot! I worry about being
a klutz and doing something by accident, I appreciate guns that actually take a
good squeeze on the trigger to shoot. I've only been shooting twice so far, it
takes getting used to the noise (even while using two different types of ear
protection). I can do okay from 10 feet, I definitely couldn't do a moving
target or anything too far back.






Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-22 01:35:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
<< Did you tell him what it was (in the most intimate details) and
massively destroy his ego? :-) >><BR><BR>
I said "it's a pad!" and then went to city hall and said it appeared that the
security needed a diagram like those at the airport get. You know - something
showing the different types of feminine protection (like they do with the
luggage when someone loses a piece at the airport).
"Weapons of Mass Destruction vs. Weapons of Mess Destruction"

:-)
Denise near Disney
2004-04-22 03:24:17 UTC
Permalink
<< "Weapons of Mass Destruction vs. Weapons of Mess Destruction" >><BR><BR>

Ewwww, Steve...:)


Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-22 13:23:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Preskitt
Post by Denise near Disney
I said "it's a pad!" and then went to city hall and said it appeared that the
security needed a diagram like those at the airport get. You know - something
showing the different types of feminine protection (like they do with the
luggage when someone loses a piece at the airport).
"Weapons of Mass Destruction vs. Weapons of Mess Destruction"
:-)
LOL!
--
- RODNEY
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-21 06:35:27 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 13:46:16 -0500, "Rodney T. Grill"
Post by Rodney T. Grill
Post by Doctor Don
Agreed. Part of the difference being that the theme park is not
carrying thousands of gallons of jet fuel moving at hundreds of MPH,
flying through the air. If it is on par with 6F, you'll hardly notice
the difference bewteen the current bag check and the new method.
I would hope so. My last visit to 6F's was before they had any sort of
security. My experience with our local amusement park was that it was
creating delays upwards of 30 minutes and the crowds there are nothing
compared to the gates at WDW on an average day.
As a terrorist, I would send a large group in with non-weapon metal
attached to the body in various ways. Metal toed boot, big belt
buckles, braces, big honkin chunks of jewelry, etc. Anything to make
the experience painful for the other guests who get stuck behind them.
And to harrass security. Drive people away and hurt the evil Disney
empire.
Post by Rodney T. Grill
My whole argument against it is that it will do nothing to improve security.
If a real criminals want to sneak weapons into WDW, they can just hide them
in their bags. Now, if they add X-ray scanners for bags, then they might
catch all but the most adept and serious criminals, but then again, with all
the film going into WDW, that would be a disaster. The security they have
is primarily to make the most timid and uneducated (in the sense of
knowledge about security) guests feel more at ease. Adding metal detectors
might increase that level slightly, but my guess is that what they have is
already doing *that* job well.
Post by Doctor Don
Sometimes the bird of happiness poops on us; just the luck of the
draw. Unfortunately, the demand has outstripped the supply for
well-trained, common-sense security people, and you occasionally get
one of the dips, but that's true in all walks of life (although banks
seem to have more than their fair share).
Actually, even before 9/11 and Osama's threats prior to that, airport
security personnel were about on par with the night guards at The Salvation
Army. Of course it is now worse with the increased demand. If the TSA
wants to get serious about this, they will hire employees at an appropriate
level, just as the FBI, CIA, and even local police departments do.
Post by Doctor Don
Post by Rodney T. Grill
While I myself would likely never carry a gun into a theme park, if it
was
Post by Doctor Don
Post by Rodney T. Grill
totally unavoidable, then I suppose being in the hands of a trained,
licensed owner would be better than leaving it in the car to possibly be
stolen and then used by an untrained, unlicensed criminal.
Not when it falls out on Space Mountain, hits the ground and goes off
randomly in a room full of metal and people.
I realize that not every legitimate gun owner follows all the rules of
safety, but a vast majority do. In the case of a properly carried weapon,
it would be more likely that a passenger on Space Mt. would be injured by a
falling meteor than the accidental discharge of a dropped gun.
Post by Doctor Don
How about going to guest relations, or the first security guy you see,
and saying "I have a CCP card and i don't want to leave it in my car,
and I don't want to carry it in to the park. Do you have a secure
place for it until I can pick it up on my way out?"
I am guessing that Disney would not want to bear the responsibility of
holding a guests weapon. in fact, many hotels will not store weapons in
their safes, while they will store other expensive items.
Post by Doctor Don
Also, if you're
travelling with it, shouldn't you have established a secure place for
it in transit? A gun safe in the trunk? Trigger locks? Something?
Yes, I agree with you there. Guns really have no purpose being inside the
WDW theme parks. I would expect a responsible gun owner to plan accordingly
so that it would not be carried into the parks. It does not bother me that
there might be some licensed guns being carried by responsible guests in the
parks, but then again, there is jut no reason for it so it should be
avoided.
--
dillon

When I was a kid, I thought the angel's name was Hark
and the horse's name was Bob.
Steve Preskitt
2004-04-20 23:10:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doctor Don
Not when it falls out on Space Mountain, hits the ground and goes off
randomly in a room full of metal and people.
Not very likely - most holsters used for CCW hold the gun quite
securely. What about when one of the bogies on one of the SM cars
breaks and people get hurt? That happens more often people dropping
their guns. In fact, I can't recall ever hearing about an accidental
discharge at WDW.
Post by Doctor Don
How about going to guest relations, or the first security guy you see,
and saying "I have a CCP card and i don't want to leave it in my car,
and I don't want to carry it in to the park. Do you have a secure
place for it until I can pick it up on my way out?"
Also, if you're
travelling with it, shouldn't you have established a secure place for
it in transit? A gun safe in the trunk? Trigger locks? Something?
Yes, a holster, except when travelling by air - in that case, it gets
locked in a hard-sided suitcase until leaving the airport.

Steve
agnes
2004-04-19 19:52:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Ansley
Post by weidwall
Post by Dirk
I was at Six Flags Marineland near San Francisco todaay and was surprised
to
Post by Dirk
see they have metal detectors.
They've had metal detectors at Six Flags New England (MA) and Great
Adventure (NJ) for quite awhile - I think pre 9/11 in the case of Great
Adventure, because they'd had some weapon incidents there. I haven't been to
Great Adventure recently enough to comment, but the detectors didn't seem to
slow the lines down that much at the one in MA.
I'm sure more SF parks have metal detectors, but these are the two I've been
to.
Ruth Ann
The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
though.
--------------------------
Ted Ansley
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
BG/W did not have metal detectors last year & they don't have them this
year either. I shudder to think how long the lines would get, it's bad enough
now with the separate ticket lines and then the security/turnstile entrance
lines.

agnes
*just reply here please - thanks :)
Dave Althoff Jr
2004-04-19 22:23:37 UTC
Permalink
Ted Ansley (***@usa.com) wrote:

: The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
: in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
: in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
: pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
: and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
: in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
: though.

Cedar Fair doesn't use them. Busch Gardens Williamsburg had them, as I
understand it, a couple of years ago for their Halloween event, but the
result was a gigantic [unbroadcastable] and the things were never brought
back.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/X\ _ _ *** Closed for the season. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
agnes
2004-04-20 02:04:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
: The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
: in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
: in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
: pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
: and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
: in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
: though.
Cedar Fair doesn't use them. Busch Gardens Williamsburg had them, as I
understand it, a couple of years ago for their Halloween event, but the
result was a gigantic [unbroadcastable] and the things were never brought
back.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/X\ _ _ *** Closed for the season. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Dave - Could that (unbroadcastable) be intepreted as a "s.n.a.f.u."? ;)

agnes
*just reply here please - thanks
Dave Althoff Jr
2004-04-20 02:25:24 UTC
Permalink
agnes (***@the.end) wrote:
: Dave Althoff Jr wrote:

: > Cedar Fair doesn't use them. Busch Gardens Williamsburg had them, as I
: > understand it, a couple of years ago for their Halloween event, but the
: > result was a gigantic [unbroadcastable] and the things were never brought
: > back.

: Dave - Could that (unbroadcastable) be intepreted as a "s.n.a.f.u."? ;)

As I understand it, that would be a reasonable interpretation, but I was
thinking of a much shorter (yet still unbroadcastable) phrase. Note also
that I base this on a report; I wasn't there. From the sound of it, that
was a Good Thing.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/X\ _ _ *** Closed for the season. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-20 03:23:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by agnes
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
: The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
: in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
: in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
: pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
: and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
: in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
: though.
Cedar Fair doesn't use them. Busch Gardens Williamsburg had them, as I
understand it, a couple of years ago for their Halloween event, but the
result was a gigantic [unbroadcastable] and the things were never brought
back.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/X\ _ _ *** Closed for the season. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Dave - Could that (unbroadcastable) be intepreted as a "s.n.a.f.u."? ;)
More like the name of a certain poster on this NG (Charlie, take a
bow).
Post by agnes
agnes
*just reply here please - thanks
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Charlie Foxtrot
2004-04-20 08:39:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 03:23:46 GMT, Dillon Pyron
Post by Dillon Pyron
Post by agnes
Dave - Could that (unbroadcastable) be intepreted as a "s.n.a.f.u."? ;)
More like the name of a certain poster on this NG (Charlie, take a
bow).
Aw, damn, you beat my post by about five hours!

Foxtrot
Charlie Foxtrot
2004-04-20 08:37:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by agnes
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
: The first two parks that I remember having metal detectors were Kennywood
: in Pittsburgh and Paramount Kings Dominion in VA. Both had them somtime
: in the mid-late 90's before any Six Flags park that I know of. Now it is
: pretty much the standard at large theme parks except for Disney, Universal,
: and Busch parks but I think they all inspect bags. Hmm..maybe Busch Gardens
: in Williamsburg had metal detectors last year, I don't rememeber for sure
: though.
Cedar Fair doesn't use them. Busch Gardens Williamsburg had them, as I
understand it, a couple of years ago for their Halloween event, but the
result was a gigantic [unbroadcastable] and the things were never brought
back.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/X\ _ _ *** Closed for the season. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Dave - Could that (unbroadcastable) be intepreted as a "s.n.a.f.u."? ;)
Or possibly the name of everyone's favorite RADP poster!

Foxtrot
Bruce A Metcalf
2004-04-20 07:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rodney T. Grill
... it will be
difficult for Disney to effectively balance security
measures that often go along with metal detectors ...
with the desire not to inconvenience its guests.
"Their dilemma is that either they are going to make
spending a day at the park as annoying as flying an
airplane or it [the security measure] is going to be
ineffective," Pike said.
If getting into a Disney theme park is as much of a hassle as getting into
an airport, then they will lose my business. I absolutely hate the time
wasted by marginally effective security procedures.
Perhaps we are overreacting to what strikes me as a deliberate news
leak. It may be that the Company has leaked this for the sole purpose
of gauging public reaction.

Another theory which I rather favor is that Disney plans to use the
metal detectors only for special events with a history of trouble,
like Grad Nights and Nights of Joy. At present, Cast Members
(untrained for the occasion) are asked to frisk incoming Grad Night
guests -- a demonstrably inadequate system. Metal detectors would be a
big improvement, and not terribly disruptive.

The lack of shootings and knifings in the park on normal days is
absolutely inadequate to justify such measures.
--
TDC Zazu,
Librarian of the Disney Reverence Shelf
and Protector of All Disney Railroads
mailto:***@figzu.com
Iago & Zazu's Attraction of the Week
http://aotw.figzu.com
weidwall
2004-04-20 11:05:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bruce A Metcalf
Another theory which I rather favor is that Disney plans to use the
metal detectors only for special events with a history of trouble,
like Grad Nights and Nights of Joy.
Grad Nights I can understand, but Nights of Joy is a surprise. A lot of
Christians spoiling for a fight?

Ruth Ann
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-20 16:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
Post by Bruce A Metcalf
Another theory which I rather favor is that Disney plans to use the
metal detectors only for special events with a history of trouble,
like Grad Nights and Nights of Joy.
Grad Nights I can understand, but Nights of Joy is a surprise. A lot of
Christians spoiling for a fight?
Ruth Ann
It's all those radical extremist with hidden agendas :-)
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Denise near Disney
2004-04-20 20:27:49 UTC
Permalink
<< Grad Nights I can understand, but Nights of Joy is a surprise. A lot of
Christians spoiling for a fight? >><BR><BR>

There are tons of teenagers, I haven't seen fighting but I have heard that it
the biggest shoplifting days of the year.

I'd not have metal detectors for those days, but perhaps frisking on the way
out. :)




Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Doctor Don
2004-04-20 20:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by weidwall
Post by Bruce A Metcalf
Another theory which I rather favor is that Disney plans to use the
metal detectors only for special events with a history of trouble,
like Grad Nights and Nights of Joy.
Grad Nights I can understand, but Nights of Joy is a surprise. A lot of
Christians spoiling for a fight?
Ruth Ann
Have you read the gay days posts?

(At least the Southern Baptists won't be flashing their signs.)

;)

Doctor Don

"You don't pray in my school, I won't think in your church."
Reba
2004-04-19 13:45:19 UTC
Permalink
GREAT!!! I'm for anything that may deter a terrorist.
Post by Buzz and Woody
from the orlando sentinel
http://tinyurl.com/2kg2y
Benjamin Geiger
2004-04-20 02:44:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Reba
GREAT!!! I'm for anything that may deter a terrorist.
Well, the only reason terrorists would attack WDW is because it's popular
and people go there. If they closed down WDW, it would deter terrorists
from attacking. Would you support that?

Of course not.

All security is a trade. With metal detectors, you gain confidence that
there are no guns, in return for a longer line and more hassle.

However, guns aren't the primary fear here. Terrorist attacks would
likely be something more visible, such as (as was mentioned earlier)
a missile into one of the weenies, or poisoning the water supply, or a
bomb *anywhere* on property (not just in the parks)...

In effect, you're trading something moderately valuable (convenience and
time) for something relatively worthless (assurance that J. Random Guest
isn't carrying a gun).

Is that a good trade? I think not.
--
Benjamin Geiger My real email address isn't a _spamtrap.
WDW 4/6/03 - 4/6/04: Anytime I want! Hooray being local!
Dillon Pyron
2004-04-20 16:48:57 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:44:15 GMT, Benjamin Geiger
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Post by Reba
GREAT!!! I'm for anything that may deter a terrorist.
Well, the only reason terrorists would attack WDW is because it's popular
and people go there. If they closed down WDW, it would deter terrorists
from attacking. Would you support that?
Of course not.
All security is a trade. With metal detectors, you gain confidence that
there are no guns, in return for a longer line and more hassle.
However, guns aren't the primary fear here. Terrorist attacks would
likely be something more visible, such as (as was mentioned earlier)
a missile into one of the weenies, or poisoning the water supply, or a
bomb *anywhere* on property (not just in the parks)...
In effect, you're trading something moderately valuable (convenience and
time) for something relatively worthless (assurance that J. Random Guest
isn't carrying a gun).
Is that a good trade? I think not.
"Those who would trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither"
Benjamin Franklin
--
dillon

Life is always short, but only you can make it sweet
Denise near Disney
2004-04-20 17:42:12 UTC
Permalink
<< "Those who would trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither"
Post by Denise near Disney
<BR><BR>
I have always loved that quote. :)


Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Rodney T. Grill
2004-04-20 19:00:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dillon Pyron
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 02:44:15 GMT, Benjamin Geiger
Post by Benjamin Geiger
Well, the only reason terrorists would attack WDW is because it's popular
and people go there. If they closed down WDW, it would deter terrorists
from attacking. Would you support that?
Of course not.
All security is a trade. With metal detectors, you gain confidence that
there are no guns, in return for a longer line and more hassle.
However, guns aren't the primary fear here. Terrorist attacks would
likely be something more visible, such as (as was mentioned earlier)
a missile into one of the weenies, or poisoning the water supply, or a
bomb *anywhere* on property (not just in the parks)...
In effect, you're trading something moderately valuable (convenience and
time) for something relatively worthless (assurance that J. Random Guest
isn't carrying a gun).
Is that a good trade? I think not.
"Those who would trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither"
Benjamin Franklin
Ben and Dillon, I applaud you!
--
- RODNEY
Denise near Disney
2004-04-20 17:40:06 UTC
Permalink
<< Is that a good trade? I think not. >><BR><BR>

That was a great post, Ben.

From what I recall, the terrorists on the 9/11 planes didn't have any major
weapons, just the box cutters - an ordinary tool that anyone might have on
their person. I don't feel any safer that there aren't box cutters on planes.
What makes me feel safer is that we aren't as naive anymore to think that we
are exempt from terrorism. The terrorists could have had absolutely nothing
except threats - they didn't need anything else.

IMHO, a bag check and metal detectors give a false sense of security. We
should always be aware that anything can happen anywhere...and be prepared for
that. And heck - if they are going to do bag checks, at least pretend you are
doing a thorough one!






Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
weidwall
2004-04-20 21:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Denise near Disney
From what I recall, the terrorists on the 9/11 planes didn't have any major
weapons, just the box cutters - an ordinary tool that anyone might have on
their person.
A staff statement issued in January by the 9/11 commission says the
following: "Records of purchases by the hijackers and other evidence
indicate that knives with blades of less than four inches long were their
primary weapons of choice. With regard to reports from crew and passengers,
knives were cited on all four flights. The threat of a bomb was reported on
11, 175, and 93. Box cutters were specifically indicated only in one report,
from Flight 77. Staff specifically notes reports from callers aboard at
least two of the hijacked aircraft (Flights 11 and 175) suggesting that
terrorists used Mace or pepper spray aboard the flight."

http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing7/staff_statement_4.pdf

I remember the hearing where this was introduced - it was the one where they
played the tape of a phone call by Betty Ong, a flight attendant from Flight
11, and heard testimony from the person on the ground who took that call.
Gut-wrenching.

Ruth Ann
Denise near Disney
2004-04-21 19:12:08 UTC
Permalink
<< "Records of purchases by the hijackers and other evidence
indicate that knives with blades of less than four inches long were their
primary weapons of choice. >><BR><BR>

Thanks for clarifying. The thing is - what they were carrying weaponwise was
something that could have been overpowered....except maybe then for the mace or
pepper spray. The weapons didn't cause the final outcome, it was those on the
planes not realizing what type of outcome they were headed for. Who would have
imagined it? Now we know better.






Denise
Down 50 pounds and counting. :)
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...