PDA

View Full Version : Scary Al Lutz Article (Security Issues)



Pages : [1] 2

BJW
02-13-2003, 11:42 PM
I was wondering what the opinion was on today's article from Al. I personally think this is a serious situation that should be addressed immediately. While he made a few good suggestions, I think metal detectors at the turnstiles would be a much better solution. Even setting them up before the park entrances would be a good idea like Six Flags does before you get to the gap between Hurricane Harbor and Magic Mountain. His suggestion on closing DL Drive and increasing security in the garage was good too. Does anyone know anymore developments on this since the article was written?

tiggerandtink
02-13-2003, 11:54 PM
I haven't read the article yet (it's late man) I agree with the points you've brought up that something should be done, not because I want it to, but because it's better to be safe than sorry. Disneyland has been mentioned as a possible target since 9/11, so what should they do? Armed guards and bomb sniffing dogs? I really don't know but they should probably address it for the public's peace of mind if nothing else. Personally I'll keep going regardless. Life's an E ticket baby! (and yet something of a dark ride too- that Walt was deep.)

tabacco
02-14-2003, 12:00 AM
Metal detectors would be pretty pointless. I can think of any number of things you could do that wouldn't involve any metal at all. One thing I *would* like them to do is give bag checking back to security.

mousey_girl
02-14-2003, 06:45 AM
Originally posted by tabacco
Metal detectors would be pretty pointless. I can think of any number of things you could do that wouldn't involve any metal at all. One thing I *would* like them to do is give bag checking back to security.

I agree about the metal detectors. I also think that the wait time to get into the park would be unbelievable. At our local courthouse, just waiting with the other 60 prospective jurors, the line to get thru the metal detectors was a good 15-20 mins. This was wtih 2 detectors and a total of maybe 65 people. Mulitply this by the amount of guests that visit daily... Every time you enter or re-enter the parks you would have to be screened again, you could potentially spend an hour or more just waiting to be screened.

As for the difference between security vs reg CM's checking bags... When we went in Dec '01 security was doing the bag checks. They barely glanced in my backpack. I could have hidden anything in it and they never would have seen it. I can't remember going thu the main gates Dec '02, but we just went on a day trip Feb 1st. The CM's checking were (in my opinion) not only more thourough, but much faster. This went for both the DL main gates and the gates at DCA. The only time my purse/backpack was not checked at all was in Dec '02 when we entered DCA via GCH.

No matter how hard they try to "screen" guests a determined person will make it thru. This does not mean I am worried about it, but I remember grad night '86 when 75% of our bus was dropping acid in the park after going thru what felt like extreme security.

jrad32
02-14-2003, 07:19 AM
Yep if a crazy *** wants to hurt people and doesn't care about what happens to him or her there is really no way to stop them. It's a fact of life.

GREGOR
02-14-2003, 08:10 AM
Besides, what are we trying to prevent here, terrorism or violence? A metal detector isn't going to detect a bomb or chemicals, which is the tool of the terrorist.

The guns and knives that metal detectors detect prevents violence to an individual from another individual. Violence has always been with us. Sure, that individual can hurt a handful of people before he/she is stopped but that is different than terrorism which can anonymously hurt thousands.

Until detectors can detect bombs and chemicals, those metal detectors are only protecting us from our fellow Americans and not from foreign terrorists.

Techie7
02-14-2003, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by GREGOR
Until detectors can detect bombs and chemicals... They can. People don't want to spend the money to get the detectors.

GREGOR
02-14-2003, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by Techie7
They can. People don't want to spend the money to get the detectors.

They're also unreliable because they are new(er). The technology just isn't good enough yet.

And yes, they are very expensive. Same reason why every household doesn't have high definition plasma flatscreen TV's. They're available but they're very expensive (and the industry still hasn't developed a standard yet).

I guess it all depends on how much extra people are willing to pay. I mean, they were already complaining about the price increase this year. Can you imagine tacking on more to cover the cost of detectors?

Berry Princess
02-14-2003, 08:50 AM
I'm just curious about how much of it is fact. It worried me for a moment but it isn't going to stop me from going, you know? If there is this guy and they know he keeps coming there then why aren't they watching for him better? Why aren't CMs and whoever calling in faster when they spot him? It had me wondering about this stuff and few other things. I don't doubt there has been people scoping the place or that there will be in the future but if this guy keeps coming back then they should have better security to catch whoever. I don't think metal detectors or anything will stop someone that is a terriost in doing the kind of harm they want to do.
And as for bag checks I don't think it matter if it was security doing it or the CMs. I was always checked the same when I went. They glanced in my bag and that was it. I do think that they may have been told to check more at this point with the alert being higher right now which is why they did Feb 1st. I'm going Sunday so we will see if they are still checking as much. I know it wasn't that way last month.

RStar
02-14-2003, 09:00 AM
The one thing that comes to my mind is that it is now much more difficult to get in and out of the parks, so if some one wanted to do something and leave it would be real hard. There are alot of other targets much easier to do than DLR that would have the same effect.

Of course if it is a suicide deal, that would be different, but what could be done getting through security would be small enough that you'd pretty much need to be in the right place at the right time, and that could happen anywhere at any time for any reason. If it is your time, it will happen. So why worry about it.

My Mom says:



"TODAY IS THE TOMMOROW THAT YOU WORRIED ABOUT YESTERDAY,
AND ALL IS WELL"

Duane
02-14-2003, 10:55 AM
Disney cannot use metal detectors because it would injure guests who have heart conditions which require a defibulator. The metal detectors activate these devices which could give someone a heart attack. I know because my father has a defibulator and cannot walk through the detectors in airports. Also, my opinion is Al Lutz has blown the security threat way out of its true condition. If you haven't noticed in his past reports, he thinks almost everything is a crisis with Disney and complains constantly about Disney practices. I'm glad he is no longer with Mouseplanet and enjoy their site much more without his presence. If he is so unhappy with Disney, he should never visit and do something else with his time. Although I don't agree with everything Disney does, I still find it the most magical place on earth!

Lani
02-14-2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by Duane
If you haven't noticed in his past reports, he thinks almost everything is a crisis with Disney and complains constantly about Disney practices.Duane -- now that Al is no longer with MousePlanet, he qualifies under the same policy as all other Web sites; you can discuss articles at their site, but you may not criticize the people.

This is a general warning to everyone in this thread: You may continue to discuss specific issues written in any article elsewhere, but you may not include opinions about how you feel about the authors.

mightduck
02-14-2003, 02:45 PM
you know bag checks are unfair to people...
what could be in a bag that you cant put in your pockets.
If they are looking for a gun, theres other places to hide them and not in a bag. I walked in to disneyland on new years eve with my bag under my jacket and know one checked it. bag checking is only works if no one wants to do anything wrong

wdtv
02-14-2003, 03:12 PM
It hurts me deeply to see what Disney has become under Eisner's reign, and it feels good to be fighting for what's right; to fight for the Disney principles. The company, since the death of frank wells, has lowered in quality at an amazing level. They have ignored the principles that disney was built under, and there is nothing wrong with trying to uphold these ideals today.

Thank God for people like al lutz and michael moore.

JeffG
02-14-2003, 03:13 PM
I think that the types of incidents described in the article are ones that should be investigated, but I also think it is dangerous to jump to conclusions or get overly paranoid about it.

As an example, many of the photographs or videos that are taken for the various fan sites certainly are not the types of things that your typical tourist would be photographing. I could easily see some of the photographs here on Mouseplanet (or on Miceage and other similar sites) potentially raising some suspicion when the photographer's motivations are not known. That is particularly true of pictures taken of construction or closed/backstage areas.

It is completely possible that the person described in the Miceage article could have also been choosing video subjects for a reason that is unusual but not sinister. One possibility that immediately comes to mind is that the subjects mentioned might be areas of the resort that an industrial engineering student would study if researching how Disneyland handles crowd control and traffic flow. I'm sure there are lots of other harmless possible explanations as well.

That said, I definitely think it is wise to play things safe right now and at least have security ask a question or two when someone is observed engaged in potentially questionable behavior. It just needs to be done with tact and without immediately jumping to the worst conclusion.

-Jeff

TecTalker2K
02-15-2003, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by Duane
Disney cannot use metal detectors because it would injure guests who have heart conditions which require a defibulator. The metal detectors activate these devices which could give someone a heart attack. I know because my father has a defibulator and cannot walk through the detectors in airports.

I think if the quests were to inform securiy of their problem and if they were smart, they would carry documetation, they would not need to pass through the metal detectors.



Also, my opinion is Al Lutz has blown the security threat way out of its true condition. If you haven't noticed in his past reports, he thinks almost everything is a crisis with Disney and complains constantly about Disney practices. I'm glad he is no longer with Mouseplanet and enjoy their site much more without his presence. If he is so unhappy with Disney, he should never visit and do something else with his time. Although I don't agree with everything Disney does, I still find it the most magical place on earth!

And who gives you the key to the magic kingdom? What gives you the ight to determine what should or should not be said? I personally think that Al is an assest that we and Disney needs. Most large coporations lose track of their operations in search of the bigger picture. It takes Al ad people like the padders to bring them back to focus. I think it is terribly sad thast Al is gone because we lost a major resource here and al lost a much biggr platform to deliver his information. Tihis is America where we all have the right to say what we want and the right to close our minds and stay ignorant.

Pirate33
02-15-2003, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by Lani
This is a general warning to everyone in this thread: You may continue to discuss specific issues written in any article elsewhere, but you may not include opinions about how you feel about the authors.

This policy does not seem fair to me, at least in the context of the comments about Al above. Those comments were "fair game" in my view, as they addressed the general point of view Al delivers. That is part of how one assesses a writer's opinions.

I can see discouraging "flame-out" type attacks that are rude and personal, but the comments about Al were not personal -- they went to his general point of view and, hence, the validity of the comments made in his particular article.

Wizard69
02-15-2003, 12:46 PM
This policy does not seem fair to me, at least in the context of the comments about Al above. Those comments were "fair game" in my view, as they addressed the general point of view Al delivers. That is part of how one assesses a writer's opinions.

I can see discouraging "flame-out" type attacks that are rude and personal, but the comments about Al were not personal -- they went to his general point of view and, hence, the validity of the comments made in his particular article.

I agree. I don't like the comments that Al gives most of the time. Which are usually negative. Sometimes his comments are ok but most of the time they are very negative.

BTW I have been noticing lately how negative the MP writers have been especially when it comes to anything DCA.

Do you just totally hate DCA or what? Me personally, I love DCA.

gn2dlnd
02-15-2003, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Wizard69
Do you just totally hate DCA or what?

Another thread, another time.

MammaSilva
02-15-2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Pirate33
This policy does not seem fair to me, at least in the context of the comments about Al above. Those comments were "fair game" in my view, as they addressed the general point of view Al delivers. That is part of how one assesses a writer's opinions.

I can see discouraging "flame-out" type attacks that are rude and personal, but the comments about Al were not personal -- they went to his general point of view and, hence, the validity of the comments made in his particular article.

Pirate33, you indicated that you had read and agreed to the MP policies and guidelines before your membership was approved. It is not up to the individual members of the community to decide policy, nor is it up to individual community members to pick and choose which policys/guidelines they intend to follow just because they may not agree with them. The original poster was in violation of guidelines and was warned. That should end the discussion. MP does not allow bashing of competitors websites/nor the authors of articles on those sites... end of discussion.

YellowMan
02-15-2003, 05:30 PM
And who gives you the key to the magic kingdom? What gives you the ight to determine what should or should not be said? He didn't say he held the key to the magic kingdom. He merely said that it was his opinion and made the statement that if Al disliked Disney so much, which I could understand somebody thinking after reading his column, that he shouldn't bother visiting the parks. I would agree. If somebody really dislikes something, then what's the point in them continuing in that thing if it isn't any fun for them?

Now on the topic of metal detectors, I could kind of go either way on this subject. I know Six Flags Magic Mountain has them and they are a bit of a nuisance. Not only do you have to wait in line to get tickets, but you have to wait in line to get through the metal detectors, and then again in line to get into the park. I think they should just install the X-ray security machines for bag-checking at the front gate (you know, the ones in airports where you set your bag on a conveyor belt as it slides through a machine where a person watching a monitor can see what's inside your bags), although I know that ain't gonna happen.

DisneyFan25863
02-15-2003, 05:32 PM
Maybe they should just close the park, so no one can bomb it :D

AliKzam
02-15-2003, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by Wizard69
BTW I have been noticing lately how negative the MP writers have been especially when it comes to anything DCA.


Define "lately".

A metaphor, by AliKzam:
Suppose you have a best friend you've known since childhood. You grow up together, but as your friend gets older they start to get into trouble. They get into drugs or something that's completely fixable if someone wants to fix it. But they don't want to and proceed to get worse and deteriorate as you watch. You know this person and know they're capable of great things. And they're your best friend and you love them.
What should you do? Should you not do anything, figure everyone has their own problems and focus on the good times you've had? Or should you try and intervene, even if the risk is your friend will get upset and you won't be friends anymore?

It's a state of denial to simply focus on the good points of anything. True, one can get depressed by only focusing on the bad points, which is why it's important to be well rounded. I think Al's new site is just that. Seriously, do you think Disney's going to tell us if their planning on cutting costs and upping prices?
It's the same thing with terrorism and the possible war. We can think that this country is evil, say it's all about oil and pretend September 11th never happened. Or we can wait until another landmark or another country is attacked. Of course some wacko will try and say it's a conspiracy and the target was attacked by the CIA, but people will be wackos from time to time. That's just life.
Yeah, I just talked politics. But we always talk politics here. That last paragraph just wasn't about Disney

AVP
02-16-2003, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by AliKzam
Define "lately".

I was wondering the same thing. Alex and I just co-wrote a 3,000 word column about the changes at DCA over the past two years, with a conclusion that DCA really has improved.

I'm still trying to figure out why that was negative.... :confused:

AVP

Pirate33
02-16-2003, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by mammasilva
Pirate33, you indicated that you had read and agreed to the MP policies and guidelines before your membership was approved. It is not up to the individual members of the community to decide policy, nor is it up to individual community members to pick and choose which policys/guidelines they intend to follow just because they may not agree with them. The original poster was in violation of guidelines and was warned. That should end the discussion. MP does not allow bashing of competitors websites/nor the authors of articles on those sites... end of discussion.

Gee, I was just expressing my opinion. Isn't that what a board like this is about? I'm not trying to cause trouble, but I suggest that you undermine the whole purpose of a board like this if you are heavy handed. I realize that both the policy and Lani's response are well intentioned, but part of a community involves discussion of community norms. Just my two cents. No need for a big debate -- it's your board and you can do what you want with it.