Has anyone seen this yet?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jim Chandler

Well-Known Member
They do have security dressed like tourists, but they aren't everywhere.

We all need to be responsible for the children in our charge.
But cameras are probably every where!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Enjoy a view of Main Street U.S.A. anytime of the day. But remember, our Virtual Web Cam is NOT live. This is only a simulation of a Walt Disney World web cam. To learn exactly how we have set this up, visit our How It Works page for full details.
http://www.wdwlive.com/web-cam.html
 

luv

Well-Known Member
Very true but I have a questions Please tell me which ones are good, honest decent people? How do you know by looking at some one? There are many who have been teachers, counselors, police officers, etc.. who are known as good, honest, decent people who were not?
So yes parents need to be vigilant but would you let a know sex offender into your business that caters to children?
Would you take the risk? I do not think this is wild or emotional either.
Yes, I would allow a sexual offender to babysit my child, if I knew he was a good, honest, decent and responsible person.

Yes, if I had a business that attracted children, I'd do the same.

I worry much more about whether or not people are decent people than I do about gossip and lies.

"Sexual offender" doesn't mean anything.

If you wish to believe it does, that is your choice. If everyone wants to say, "Oh, my God! Sexual offender! Kill the beast!" that is their choice.

I just think we should all be a little smarter and maybe make it a little harder to whip ourselves up into an emotional frenzy over a term that describes a 17 year old kid having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend.
 

tissandtully

Well-Known Member
Yes, I would allow a sexual offender to babysit my child, if I knew he was a good, honest, decent and responsible person.

Yes, if I had a business that attracted children, I'd do the same.

I worry much more about whether or not people are decent people than I do about gossip and lies.

"Sexual offender" doesn't mean anything.

If you wish to believe it does, that is your choice. If everyone wants to say, "Oh, my God! Sexual offender! Kill the beast!" that is their choice.

I just think we should all be a little smarter and maybe make it a little harder to whip ourselves up into an emotional frenzy over a term that describes a 17 year old kid having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend.

Also, not to mention that most children that are sexually assaulted were by someone they knew or a family member.
 

lego606

MagicBandit
I just think we should all be a little smarter and maybe make it a little harder to whip ourselves up into an emotional frenzy over a term that describes a 17 year old kid having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend.


This.

Very true but I have a questions Please tell me which ones are good, honest decent people? How do you know by looking at some one? There are many who have been teachers, counselors, police officers, etc.. who are known as good, honest, decent people who were not?
So yes parents need to be vigilant but would you let a know sex offender into your business that caters to children?
Would you take the risk? I do not think this is wild or emotional either.

Possibly repeat offenders? Someone had it happen once due to case described above is wildly different from someone who's continually offended. I believe there are levels of sex offense? Someone at a lower level shouldn't be treated the same way as someone at a higher level.
 

Jim Chandler

Well-Known Member
Yes, I would allow a sexual offender to babysit my child, if I knew he was a good, honest, decent and responsible person.

Yes, if I had a business that attracted children, I'd do the same. You are asking for trouble

I worry much more about whether or not people are decent people than I do about gossip and lies.
"Sexual offender" doesn't mean anything. It means a conviction on your record even in the case you state (17 vs 16)

If you wish to believe it does, that is your choice. If everyone wants to say, "Oh, my God! Sexual offender! Kill the beast!" that is their choice.
Never said that maybe you should read all my posts.

I just think we should all be a little smarter and maybe make it a little harder to whip ourselves up into an emotional frenzy over a term that describes a 17 year old kid having sex with his 16 year old girlfriend.

You are comparing a single person with whom you have contact.
Disney has thousands entering into their properties every day. Included in that quantity could be many sex offenders, some not rightfully labeled and some very undesirable. They can not make a distinction, to do so would be irresponsible and discriminatory. If you allow one known SO in you can not stop another it has to be all or nothing.
You need to look at the bigger picture and not the one person unrightfully labeled. BTW if you have the label of sex offender it may be debatable if you should have it. It is because you were convicted of doing something as an adult on some one not of legal age it is not gossip or lies even if you were 18 and the girl was 16 .
 

luv

Well-Known Member
You are comparing a single person with whom you have contact.
Disney has thousands entering into their properties every day. Included in that quantity could be many sex offenders, some not rightfully labeled and some very undesirable. They can not make a distinction, to do so would be irresponsible and discriminatory. If you allow one known SO in you can not stop another it has to be all or nothing.
You need to look at the bigger picture and not the one person unrightfully labeled. BTW if you have the label of sex offender it may be debatable if you should have it. It is because you were convicted of doing something as an adult on some one not of legal age it is not gossip or lies even if you were 18 and the girl was 16 .
You're setting up these hypotheticals, lol. If you don't like the answers, don't blame me for the situation, lol.

For your new one, if my choice is all or nothing, I'll take the nothing.

And I have never been labeled a sexual offender, lol. If you only knew me, you'd know how funny that is. :)
 

R W B

Well-Known Member
This is good I guess. The label of "Sex Offender" is pure BS in a lot of cases though. The federal courts need to change it to have different levels of some sort. Level 1 being something like a 18yr having intercourse with his 16yr GF and level 3 or so being the mid age guy abusing a child, no way IMO should those cases be treated the same.

For example, one of my good friends dad is labeled a Sex Offender, wanna know why? He had intercourse with a 15yr old when he was 19 and guess what, they've been married for over 25 yrs now with 4 kids. He's tried getting it removed from his record but judges won't do it. It's a shame really. /End rant
 

Jim Chandler

Well-Known Member
You're setting up these hypotheticals, lol. If you don't like the answers, don't blame me for the situation, lol.

For your new one, if my choice is all or nothing, I'll take the nothing.

And I have never been labeled a sexual offender, lol. If you only knew me, you'd know how funny that is. :)

My reference of you was not to you it was you in the sense of labeled SOs. I'm not setting up hypotheticals. When one references the 17 yr old that is hypothetical. I stated Disney has to make it all or nothing. Believe it or not Disney can not make a distinction between SOs. If they did the ACLU would have them in court in a blink of an eye. You yes you may want the SOs let in but Disney is not taking the chance that one child gets hurt and thus having a major lawsuit on their hands not to mention the bad publicity. WDW is known as a safe place for CHILDREN sex offenders make it far less so and WDW not having a policy is an open invitation to being sued. There are many other areas where SOs are not allowed right or wrong for the specific SO but it is what it is. As they say don't do the crime if you can not do the time and accompanying consequences and fallout.
 

Jim Chandler

Well-Known Member
This is good I guess. The label of "Sex Offender" is pure BS in a lot of cases though. The federal courts need to change it to have different levels of some sort. Level 1 being something like a 18yr having intercourse with his 16yr GF and level 3 or so being the mid age guy abusing a child, no way IMO should those cases be treated the same.

For example, one of my good friends dad is labeled a Sex Offender, wanna know why? He had intercourse with a 15yr old when he was 19 and guess what, they've been married for over 25 yrs now with 4 kids. He's tried getting it removed from his record but judges won't do it. It's a shame really. /End rant

Absolutely but until then it is what it is.
 

luv

Well-Known Member
My reference of you was not to you it was you in the sense of labeled SOs. I'm not setting up hypotheticals. When one references the 17 yr old that is hypothetical. I stated Disney has to make it all or nothing. Believe it or not Disney can not make a distinction between SOs. If they did the ACLU would have them in court in a blink of an eye. You yes you may want the SOs let in but Disney is not taking the chance that one child gets hurt and thus having a major lawsuit on their hands not to mention the bad publicity. WDW is known as a safe place for CHILDREN sex offenders make it far less so and WDW not having a policy is an open invitation to being sued. There are many other areas where SOs are not allowed right or wrong for the specific SO but it is what it is. As they say don't do the crime if you can not do the time and accompanying consequences and fallout.
There is so much wrong with this that I could spend all day going over it, but I won't.

You have your ideas. I have mine. Such is life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom