Security at Epcot

[eliza61nyc]

Benjamin Franklin: “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Security makes me sick, I do not want to live everyday the rest of my life looking over my shoulder in fear.
Look what we surrendered so far, all these security checks, cameras everywhere and yet we are not safer and some look for ways to surrender even more freedom.

lol, not laughing at your feelings but it does kind of amaze me because we are a litigious society. Let something happen at Disney and watch how quickly someone sues. Disney has zero choice in doing security checks.

You don't have to live that way at all.

I have a fake knee, I know from now on when I go through airport the buzzer is going to go off and I'll get wand. Does it bother me?? not really, never had a problem with TSA, takes me an extra 10 minutes

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Benjamin Franklin: “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Security makes me sick, I do not want to live everyday the rest of my life looking over my shoulder in fear.
Look what we surrendered so far, all these security checks, cameras everywhere and yet we are not safer and some look for ways to surrender even more freedom.

It ain't just about you. I take it you don't have kids....... because that's a very irresponsible comment.

And now the actual quote is “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”

It doesn't mean what you think it means. Unless you were part of the Pennsylvania Assembly during the French and Indian War. But if you were part of the Pennsylvania Assembly - you would have put the quote in context. So nevermind

 

[UncleMike101]

Benjamin Franklin: “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Security makes me sick, I do not want to live everyday the rest of my life looking over my shoulder in fear.
Look what we surrendered so far, all these security checks, cameras everywhere and yet we are not safer and some look for ways to surrender even more freedom.

So what???
Humans have always been in fear.
Ever since the first one fell out of the trees in Africa we've been the target of predators, disease, climate, the planet, and each other.
No one has EVER lived without fear of something, or someone, taking their life.
Many of todays security measures are meant to eliminate a small fraction of that fear.
I'm all for them when I go to a place that I know to be a potential target of some nut case individual or group.
I can choose to not subject myself to those security measures by staying away from a target rich environment like WDW.
As long as we have a Constitution that limits the scope of such security measures I'm perfectly happy to submit to them when the occasion calls for enhanced vigilance against the nut cases of the World.

 

[marni1971]

Or better yet, can you explain how you would realistically fix it?

Increase staffing levels and available lanes. I don’t want to start a uni debate but we were pleasantly surprised with their speed and efficiency last September.

 

[Biggen]

The whole security thing is a dog and pony show anyway. A madman with a bomb or gun can easily go up to the security checkpoint where 100s/1000s of people are waiting to pass through security and commit their crime there. In fact, it makes the most sense to do it there as it’s a natural choke point.

Best to have good situational awareness and keep your nose out of your phones when around large crowds.

 

[joejccva71]

Best to have good situational awareness and keep your nose out of your phones when around large crowds.

You ask..for..too much.

 

[wdisney9000]

And now the actual quote is “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”

If I may ask, who or what made that quote any form of standard logic? And how does one "purchase temporary safety"?

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

If I may ask, who or what made that quote any form of standard logic? And how does one "purchase temporary safety"?

The attributable quote had to do with a political battle between the Assembly (basically Franklin) and the Governor over the issue of implementing a tax on land in order to fund defenses on the frontier due to the French and Indian War. Franklin's quote had more to do with the decision that faced the legislature between making the funds available for said defenses vs maintaining its right of self governance. Had nothing to do with personal freedoms - as everyone who recites it seems to think.

The safety would have been temporary as it only addressed what was needed during that war.

 

[_caleb]

If I may ask, who or what made that quote any form of standard logic? And how does one "purchase temporary safety"?

Here's a little bit about that quote.

@Astro_Digital , what are you concerned we're "giving up" in the name of security at Disney World. Are you referring to the privacy about what's in your bags? The time we spend waiting to pass through screening?

@Biggen, to say that security is a "dog and pony show" sounds very dismissive. Maybe you're overstating for the internet, but surely you can recognize the value of some degree of security screening of guests? Would you really prefer NO bag/person checks at the gates at all?

Of course people queuing to pass through security screening present a target for bad guys. This will always be the case at the perimeter of any security bubble, but it can be mitigated. This is why Disney needs to staff up and reduce the number of choke points. Guests should not have to wait 30 minutes (or more) to pass through screening.

 

[wdisney9000]

The attributable quote had to do with a political battle between the Assembly (basically Franklin) and the Governor over the issue of implementing a tax on land in order to fund defenses on the frontier due to the French and Indian War. Franklin's quote had more to do with the decision that faced the legislature between making the funds available for said defenses vs maintaining its right of self governance. Had nothing to do with personal freedoms - as everyone who recites it seems to think.

The safety would have been temporary as it only addressed what was needed during that war.

Ahhh, I was just confused because you said "and now" the actual quote is....

I thought by "now" you meant it was a current quote made by someone else. Thanks for the clarrification and apologies for the confusion.

 

[lazyboy97o]

@Biggen, to say that security is a "dog and pony show" sounds very dismissive. Maybe you're overstating for the internet, but surely you can recognize the value of some degree of security screening of guests? Would you really prefer NO bag/person checks at the gates at all?

We’re talking about a method of protection that is routinely circumvented in tests. What level of success is considered useful?

 

[_caleb]

@lazyboy97o, I take your point. But the value of security measures can be very difficult to measure. We never really know how many bad guys are deterred by visible security (as the Pulse shooter was), and it only takes a single security failure to miss something big. But we do know that Disney security screening has stopped people from bringing guns into the parks.

Yes, people can circumvent metal detectors. But that’s why the screening is only one part of Disney’s security. It’s the most visible (and maybe the easiest to defeat), but even the just-for-show parts serve a purpose.

 

[Biggen]

Here's a little bit about that quote.


@Biggen, to say that security is a "dog and pony show" sounds very dismissive. Maybe you're overstating for the internet, but surely you can recognize the value of some degree of security screening of guests? Would you really prefer NO bag/person checks at the gates at all?

I'm not overstating it. It is useless when you have a choke point at the front where THAT is the spot where something should happen if it was going to.

I'm fine with no security myself. There is no security at 99.999% of the places I visit on a daily basis. Probably the places you visit as well. To each their own... I"m also not going to complain about the lines or wait time to go through security either. It is just how it goes. No point of arguing about it as in today's 24/7/365 media coverage, if you aren't "appearing" to do something, the media will skewer you for it on the morning talk shows.

 

[larryz]

We’re talking about a method of protection that is routinely circumvented in tests. What level of success is considered useful?

Deterrence. Reference Mateen's decision to change targets after spotting police presence at Disney Springs...

 

[_caleb]

I'm not overstating it... I'm fine with no security myself. There is no security at 99.999% of the places I visit on a daily basis.

This is what I meant by "overstating." Surely you mean "no security screening" and not "no security." Because there is SOME layer of security at most of the places I visit on a daily basis. Cameras, guards, bollards, strategically-placed planters.

I promise I'm not trying to be argumentative or even to change your mind. I'm just curious about where you're coming from.

It sounds like we agree that "choke points" are very bad and present new targets while trying to mitigate others. But I really can't see how "no security" could be a good answer to this problem. Thanks for explaining your opinion.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Deterrence. Reference Mateen's decision to change targets after spotting police presence at Disney Springs...

But not a bag check.

 

[_caleb]

But not a bag check.

But there are no bag checks at Disney Springs. If there had been, maybe THAT would have been the deterrent.

 

[larryz]

But not a bag check.

Bag check is another layer that would be "hard" to implement at Disney Springs. Just having the extra police being out and very visible saved lives at Disney Springs.

Let that sink in. Just the officers being there in uniform SAVED LIVES AT DISNEY SPRINGS.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But there are no bag checks at Disney Springs. If there had been, maybe THAT would have been the deterrent.

Or the bag check could have been dealt with like it was at LAX.

Bag check is another layer that would be "hard" to implement at Disney Springs. Just having the extra police being out and very visible saved lives at Disney Springs.

Let that sink in. Just the officers being there in uniform SAVED LIVES AT DISNEY SPRINGS.

The difficulty in implementing a bag check at Disney Springs is also part of what protected it. The design is open and allows people to move in many directions. It would be difficult to corner people in a place while maintaining cover from the police.

 

[joejccva71]

I'm not overstating it. It is useless when you have a choke point at the front where THAT is the spot where something should happen if it was going to.

So am I understanding correctly that because you have this "choke point" that you're referring to, then they might as well not do any bag checks or security because it wouldn't happen inside the parks anyway?

I'm confused by your post.