Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<how often do you witness a white all-American family of say six acting boorishly, possibly engaging in behavior where they or their children could be injured, using profanity, maybe even physically beating a child or abusing a CM and ... nothing happens at all>> Isn't that a bit of a strawman argument? How could I possibly know the answer to that? I have certainly heard of people being banned from Dsiney for a variety of acts, but I have no idea how many or how often it happens. FWIW, I happened to go to a local mall, which I almost never do. As I was walking out, I saw a sign basically saying that while they want "your" business, there would be no congregating in groups larger than four, and loitering, profanity (I think it said that) and vandalism were not allowed.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<They have a similar policy at the mall of America that the employees in the mall are allowed to throw out anyone 18 and under.>> No quite, but close. The Mall of America has adopted a policy which in no way could be considered discriminatory: <<PARENTAL ESCORT POLICY While all children are welcome at Mall of America®, a Parental Escort Policy requires that the Mall’s youngest guests – those 15 and younger – be accompanied by an adult 21 years or older on Fridays and Saturdays after 4 p.m. Anyone 21 years or younger should be prepared to show a driver’s license, state identification card or passport during the Parental Escort hours. One adult can escort up to ten children 15 years of age and younger.>> Obviously that policy would not have prevented the incident in question. But since both PI and the West Side have a large number of places serving alcohol, I think Disney could easily adopt that policy and change the age requiring escort to those under 18. That WOULD have prevented this incident.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>I always intend to hit the nail on the head, Trippy. Always.<<< Well, rumor has it the Spirit has a very large hammer. So that's to be expected.
Originally Posted By xrayvision >>An insanely high percentage of young black men are currently in jail or have been in jail at some time. Is this because of racism?<< In some aspects...YES. Crimes commited by Black men are more often convicted with jail time for longer sentences whereas the same or similar crime can have lessor or no sentences for Whites. Thus, you have a disportionate number of Blacks serving long jail sentences than you have Whites serving time. The Paris Hilton jail sentencing and next day release created such a stir partially because it gave blantant credence to the long held argument that preferencial "Blond Law" and/or preferential treatment to the rich exists in the American legal system, particularly in L.A. But, jail time has nothing to do with the DTD incident as none of these guys were put in jail. Regarding undesirables hanging out at WDW's DTD...Based on my own experiences, there are lot of people hanging out outside the DTD nightclub gates who are profanely talking so loud and playing their car stereos so obnoxioulsy loud that it deters and/or scares away some paying customers from entering the gates. I've actually went to DTD and turned around and went elsewhere based on one of these experiences. The loud loitering group are horsing around in the parking area and have no intention of purchasing tickets to the DTD nightclubs nor purchasing anything at the stores/restaurants. If more desirable guests are able to brave through a rough-acting group to enter a nightclub, those guests will notice that none of the paying guests look, dress or profanely speak like hoodlums loitering outside of the nightclub gates. The loitering outside the DTD defintely needs to be controlled to so as not deter paying customers, regardless of race. The rules are not exclusive to Blacks and do not exclude Whites..which both groups can and have acted obnoxiously at DTD and other parts of the resort. And, there does not seem to be a certain dress code for loitering, as I've seen loiterers wearing tight 501 jeans, Calvins, baggy pants, cargo shorts and other style pants. The clothes and race didn't make a difference, their behavior made the difference.
Originally Posted By bobbelee9 All this has been strickly black/white. But where I live, we are over run with hispanic gangs. They come here, don't get jobs, collect welfare, yet they drive big fancy SUVs. Wonder where they get their money? One only has to read the court news to see that it's mostly drugs. They've taken over many areas in this city. When I moved here in '64, there were no hispanics and only one black family. We also have Asian gangs, but they seem to only bother other Asians.
Originally Posted By Elderp "Oddly enough in America you usually have to break a law first. Then enforcement." Crazy rabbit, don't you know? The constitution is for rich people. JK, actually we say that people are "innocent until proven guilty" but you wont find this in the constitution. The closest thing I think you can derive is the 5th admendment which states "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ..." but in this case we are dealing with private property so I say Disney can make up whatever rule they want. Now PR might dictate a different course of action, but legally I think Disney was sound on this one.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<we are dealing with private property so I say Disney can make up whatever rule they want. Now PR might dictate a different course of action, but legally I think Disney was sound on this one.>> A similar situation exists in Las Vegas. Card counting is not illegal, but if a casino thinks you are a card counter, they will throw you out; you are no longer welcome on their property, or at least in their casino.
Originally Posted By dshyates ..." but in this case we are dealing with private property so I say Disney can make up whatever rule they want. Now PR might dictate a different course of action, but legally I think Disney was sound on this one." But what about the civil cases chatted up on CNN by the Revs. Jackson and Sharpton. Aside from the PR nightmare and the out of court settlement. Hassling black men, who, as it turned out, are NOT gangbangers, for hanging at the mall is flat out unequivically racism. Many of you seem ok with that with the justification that some black men belong to gangs. So we shall punish all for the actions of some. And the only impact this policy has on me is I am far more comfortable in MY loitering at the mall. No Problem, right?
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<Hassling black men, who, as it turned out, are NOT gangbangers, for hanging at the mall is flat out unequivically racism.>> It doesn't matter if they were gangbangers or not. They were determined by security to be loitering or causing a disturbance (or whatever, since we really don't know). That's not racism. Once again, since none of us weren't there, we can't say unequivically wether they were justly or unjustly singled out. What percentage of groups of young blacks and/or hispanics where thrown out last weekend? All, or just a few? Do you see what I am driving at? Maybe 70, 80, or 90% of black and hispanic kids at DtD didn't get thrown out... just the ones who appeared to be causing trouble.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Hm, because generally I thought that we were supposed to believe people were innocent until proven guilty. You're just ticked because you want to slam these kids w/o any facts to back it up. << I woiuld hardly describe my feelings as being ticked. Innocent until proven guilty is a judicial term. I am not sitting on a jury, I am here on a Disney forum. I did not say they were guilty of anything because, just like you I do not have the facts. I suggest you go back, and reread post #53. I do choose to make my opinion on this matter known though. My opinion always is to give the benefit of the doubt to the authorities, until proven other wise. That's why we have courts of law. >> I don't know if it is racial profiling, age profiling , or what, but I know they would never, never, never ever, walk up to my dad, a 70 year old white retired physician, wearing his rolex and fugly coogi sweater and tell him that he needed to get to his movie or leave the mall. << No probably not. Security, and police are more concerned with a group of young men who might attempt to knock your 70 year old white physian father in the head, then steal his Rolex. >> I kind of wonder how they can seriously ban someone for life? Seems like that would be hard to enforce. << It's really only a ban to insure that if they return, and get in trouble, they can then be charged with trespassing. >> Most of these posts hint of racism. << Accusing someone of racism is a very serious thing. Exactly which post are you referring to? >> If Disney banned me for a year for deciding to skip the movie I bought a ticket for and chose to try and meet a lady instead, there would indeed be litigation. << You seem to be reacting only to what was written in the local paper. Would you care to here Disney Security or the Orange County Sheriffs side of it? >> ... and while you do that, I think I'll go pack a refillable mug for my next trip! << I see a future lifetime ban from resort soda dispensers, over the horizon! >> Hassling black men, who, as it turned out, are NOT gangbangers, for hanging at the mall is flat out unequivically racism. << Let's see...do you mean having a no loitering policy, and attempting to enforce it equates to " Hassling black men", and the enforcers are Racist. What a novel concept.
Originally Posted By BeautysBeast The recent supposed "mugging" of the 2 tourists certainly stepped up the exposure of Disney security.No doubt they have done there job and in doing so there will be two sides to every story, the actions of the security officers and Disney and the accused.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <"then again exactly what % of 70 year old white males are involved in gang activity which is what security is trying to avoid ?" But to NOT hassle my dad and toss him out along with a ban IS profiling and discriminatory. This policy is the same as saying just ban all blacks because gangs are black. I have a better nondiscriminatory policy. Wait until someone actually breaks a law them nail them to the wall so hard others will reconsider their path. Then when the liberals say "Your just making an example of him." reply with "Yep, I sure hope so."< that's quite a leap -- and also what pie in the sky land are we living in here-- we all know the story of law enforcement - cops crack down, little johnny goes to court and even with a rap sheet as long as a summer queue for Everest - the judge pats him on the head and sends him on his way. I am not a big fan of wait until they do something first - the vicitms tend to not approve either. If you read here NO ONE has said ban all blacks because they are black - NO ONE - except you. They were asked to disperse and leave and did not... they chose to stay and from all accounts mouthed off to security - that is not profiling, that's trying to diffuse something BEFORE it happens...
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Ask yourself if you witness that or gangsta wannabes scaring the beejeebers out of good, God-fearing Midwestern DVCers more often? Also, ask yourself if you're really getting the whole story (on all sides) when making judgments < ask yourself which is a bigger threat to innocent bystanders. If ever in Chicago I'll take you thru my old neighborhood on the south side and through any other area you want...and you tell me which one concerns you more with regards to YOUR safety ....and which scenario you would least like to see in Disney. I am not a sheltered Midest DVC'er - I grew up for years in areas you likely would never travel thru or even see...it takes a whole heck of a lot to scare me. I grew up with members of many infamous street gangs -- do I want that presence in DTD - heck no. Can anyone tell from just looking at anyone - especially those that are the same age who are the troublemakers and who are not - NO. Are there sometimes mor etell tale signs that at least hint at 'potential' issues - yes. They are not fool proof and race / dress / male or female are also not sure fire give aways. but then how do you propose they handle it ? Wait until numerous incidents happen and people avoid the area - and you know press - especially the O Sentinel will play up any type of altercation as armageddon.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <No quite, but close. The Mall of America has adopted a policy which in no way could be considered discriminatory: <<PARENTAL ESCORT POLICY <M Dave & Busters has a policy that restricts age int he game areas without adult supervision also -- Someone somewhere has to try to do something to be able to provide some level of safety feeling for people or else their business goes away.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <>> If Disney banned me for a year for deciding to skip the movie I bought a ticket for and chose to try and meet a lady instead, there would indeed be litigation. << You seem to be reacting only to what was written in the local paper. Would you care to here Disney Security or the Orange County Sheriffs side of it? < Sine Disney is private property good luck with that litigation -- another sign of sue happy America
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 >>>I always intend to hit the nail on the head, Trippy. Always.<<< <<Well, rumor has it the Spirit has a very large hammer. So that's to be expected.>> Wow! I'm glad to see the word's getting around! ;-)
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 This thread has been very interesting and mostly on topic so far. Let's stay on track.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror <<Well, rumor has it the Spirit has a very large hammer. So that's to be expected.>> Wow! I'm glad to see the word's getting around! ;-)<<< Well gee, after all, I heard it from YOU...
