Cedar Point new security checkpoint

Interesting and slightly related this morning I was involved in a discussion on facebook about remembering when you could feel safe sleeping with the window open at night. I occasionally get warned by my female coworkers how big of a risk I'm taking because I still do this. I will not allow general heightened state of fear affect my enjoyment of night breezes and the sound of the wind through the trees and crickets. If someone is a genuine threat to me chances are they want in badly enough they don't need to look for an open window they are simply going to bust their way in. I feel similar about park security check points. That warm, fuzzy feeling of safety some people get from the display is not there for me. I don't feel any safer waiting in line several times per day when at the park to empty my pockets and get magnetically frisked.

Late last year, I moved to a Chicago suburb. The house I now live in has not been locked at any time. Made me nervous at first, but I've come to accommodate it.

What Paisley said. Being expected to empty my pockets doesn't make me feel safer.

Interesting how people have been conditioned to expect a threat. Paisley is in no more danger now sleeping with open windows than she was 20 years ago, yet people are so fearsome today.

Well put, emptying my pockets to be magnetically frisked gives me no sense of security. At CP, you are in much more danger of being bombed by sea gulls than any other threat.

XS NightClub said:

...CPs freedom-ending "security theater"...

A stupid, lazy straw man is the best counter argument you have for those of us who are alarmed by society's acceptance of this type of "security"?

Apparently, yes.

Are we really comparing leaving our window open at night to screening for weapons entering an amusement park?

I see many people post about how this is just theater and wont stop anything. I'd argue that the fact that they screen does deter a great amount of potential threats. Im thinking of the recent IX center mess, or any recent moronic school or movie theater shootings. The idiots who carry out those attacks dont want the hassle of going through security, no matter now light it seems. Im not saying I like the checks, I do not, but security checks in general do help deter. Im sure cedar point is doing this with the idea of trying to deter dumb kids from fighting and making a bad decision more than professional killers. Ya'll seen too many movies.

I just love when people with no experience actually working security or defending an entry point come here and rant about metal detectors, not even going to join that endless banter...

Obviously it is here to stay, so you either have two options:

1. Play by the rules and go through the metal detectors like every other person. No offense most of you probably get at the park early to fulfill your first in line syndrome, so you shouldn't have any issue with the line anyways.
2. Cause a scene complaining about metal detectors to everyone around you, make yourself a visible target, and then spend longer in security or alienate everyone around you to the point where someone informs security of your douchebaggery.

They have their reasoning and intentions for doing it, none of us see 100% of behind the scenes. Spouting TSA numbers or calling it "Security Theater" is a waste of time, if that's the case lets just remove security everywhere and see how that turns out then I suppose right?

Look at this article: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/04/metal_detectors.html

thedevariouseffect said:

Obviously it is here to stay, so you either have two options:

There is at least one more option:

3. Refuse to ignorantly buy into the "fear everything" mindset and continue to question and be troubled by those of you who think irrational fear has no long-term consequence.

I am more than happy to wait longer to enter the park knowing that my riding buddies and I will be safe from any unfortunate situation occurring. Like, are we really complaining about how metal detection is going to cause a longer wait?

But are you really? As mentioned upthread, if someone wants to do the park's patrons harm bad enough, a metal detector or some part timers with wands sure's heck aren't going to stop them.

I'd just as soon assume the best of people- all people- instead of fearing that anyone could attack me at any moment. But if they make you feel nice and secure, I suppose they're serving their intended purpose.

Jeff said:

Are we really comparing leaving our window open at night to screening for weapons entering an amusement park?

I was comparing the mindset of fear and belief that if we don't close the window/make everyone go through the metal detector at the park something bad will happen and so we better give up something we have always enjoyed (sound of crickets/not waiting 20 minutes to get through security) and if we do that nothing bad will happen.

Sollybeast said:
... a metal detector or some part timers with wands sure's heck aren't going to stop them.

Yes. 9/11 happened because of extensive planning, and the perpetrators understanding their target. They knew what they could not take on the planes and planned accordingly. Timothy McVeigh understood his target and planned accordingly. No disrespect meant to the people who staff security passpoints; they are just doing their job. But I just don't think they're equipped to handle such threats.

Generally*, they don't have the authority to actually detain anyone and have to wait for actual law enforcement officials to arrive.

*Don't know if this applies to Cedar Point, which, as far as I know, has a police department authorized by the Ohio legislature and so could arrive quickly.

TwistedWicker77 said:
I am more than happy to wait longer to enter the park knowing that my riding buddies and I will be safe from any unfortunate situation occurring. Like, are we really complaining about how metal detection is going to cause a longer wait?

But if you actually believe you are any safer from Bad Things happening just because there is a security checkpoint at the entrance, you are a fool who either overestimates the odds of such a bad thing happening, or overestimates the efficacy of the checkpoint at preventing it, or both. From a return on investment perspective, keeping an ever-growing list of stuff 'out' is a pretty worthless way to try an improve safety. Particularly if half the stuff on your list is already inside.

noggin said:

Generally*, they don't have the authority to actually detain anyone and have to wait for actual law enforcement officials to arrive.

You are talking about the people manning security checkpoints? They have no need to detain anyone. Their mission is to keep certain "stuff" from getting in. They have no need to detain someone carrying the aforementioned stuff, they need only deny that person entry. Of course, in Egypt yesterday when the bomber was told he had to go through a metal detector he just set off his bomb right then and there.

Finally, and perhaps most important, djDaemon said:

Refuse to ignorantly buy into the "fear everything" mindset and continue to question and be troubled by those of you who think irrational fear has no long-term consequence.

This. Many times over this. We need to be a whole lot less fearful, a lot more willing to take reasonable risks, and a lot more understanding of what real risks are. It's something we as a society have never been good at, but in the last fifteen years or so we've gone from "not being very good at it" to "absolutely sucking at it".

So perhaps the park decides to do a more invasive search a bit more often than in the past. We're going to go through it, and for those of us who may be in and out of the park a dozen times a day, we will be particularly annoyed by it. It isn't a binary question, it's not a matter of either liking it or staying home. But there is always that third way, of deciding that we don't want this to be the 'new normal', that this isn't the kind of society we want to live in, that is isn't the kind of people we want to be. And that means speaking up in reasonable, respectful, and appropriate ways. That means letting the people who make the decisions know that we aren't entirely pleased with the decisions they are making.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Sollybeast said:
But are you really? As mentioned upthread, if someone wants to do the park's patrons harm bad enough, a metal detector or some part timers with wands sure's heck aren't going to stop them.

To answer your questions, yes.

But you need to understand, taking extra precautions should not be shot down. Especially with the crazy things that have been happening in large venues. Not to mention, I firmly believe metal detectors will replace the wands. And since when are the people who wand part timers? lol that's a good one.

And since when are the people who wand part timers? lol that's a good one.

Um, since when they've been employed as part timers...

TwistedWicker77 said:

But you need to understand, taking extra precautions should not be shot down.

Yes it should, especially when an expert called it CYA security theater.

And even if it was effective, good security, I would rather have a higher risk of being blown up then live in a society where I have to walk through a security checkpoint or a magnetometer every time I go out to do something.

It's sure peculiar that all these large venue private corporations that are in business to maximize revenue see fit to blatantly waste payrolls on highly ineffective "security theater".
You'd think there'd be some kind of way for a company to do something called a cost-benefit analysis, but what the hell does Disney, Universal, NFL, Cedar Fair... know about running high-volume for-profit venues?
(And before the TSA gets brought up, I firmly believe U.S. airports should be privatized and run by for profit companies too. )

If you want to find a corporate shill, look my way. I'm usually ready to stand up and say I may not have access to all the data a company has, but I'll come down on the side of the company knowing what it's doing.

That said....

One factor here is we live in a country where many people think security theater keeps them safe; businesses install these measures because other businesses have done so, not necessarily because it can pass a cost benefit analysis. People have given up liberty for a false sense of security.

TSA should be brought up in such conversations. If the hundreds of billions of dollars taxpayers have spent on TSA has resulted in technology that misses 90% of the contraband items it screens in tests it's warned of in advance*, I'm sorry, I remain unconvinced that less-advanced machines staffed by part-time workers at the entrance to Wrigley Field are going to catch people intent on doing harm.

And how would airports being run by private companies diverting some of the monies earned to investors improve security?

*Do I keep harping on this? Yes. As a taxpayer, it really bothers me.