Cedar Point new security checkpoint

RideWarrior18 said:

What shocks me is how up in arms all of you get about something so simple.

Giving up personal privacy for the illusion of safety is not something to be taken lightly.

Go to any concert, festival, race, or sporting event, and this is exactly what's going to happen to you.

This is just the world we live in now, ladies and gentleman.

So, because it's ubiquitous, that makes it OK? So if random searches of private residences becomes commonplace, you won't mind? The more widespread this illogical type of thinking becomes, the more clear it becomes that we've lost the War on Terror. To ourselves.

Just remember, they're not there to hurt you or take away from your experience. They actually provide another opportunity for CP and their staff to make an impression on you, to greet you and welcome you to the park, and can up not only the level of security, but the level of customer service as well.

ROFLMFAO!!! Yes, during the 5 minutes that I had to empty my pockets of contraband such as my phone, keys, change, and FitBit, all I could think was "this hospitality is so great! I wonder who's going to violate my privacy next!"

I couldn't disagree with you more Ridewarrior18. These security checkpoints are a pain in the ass no matter where they are. Concerts, ball park, etc. makes no difference, and they do very, very little to actually enhance safety. And, a ball park or concert hall is a very different place from an amusement park, which is obviously not confined to a building and is more akin to walking around a city.

As far as making an impression on you, I agree. A cop with a wand that makes you stand in front of him, hold your arms out and proceeds to "wand" you sure does make an impression. The wrong kind. It either puts the thought in your head that you are entering a dangerous place, why else would they need cops electronically frisking you at the gate? Or, perhaps it just makes you feel like you are experiencing a similar experience that a common criminal goes through. In either case it is neither friendly or welcoming and makes for an ugly start to your day. Not to mention that these checkpoints are a bottleneck and it will take longer to enter the park.

As far as wands and magnetometers catching weapons, you can pretty easily make a very robust knife using a 3D printer out of hard plastic that will have no problem killing someone if that is the intended use.

Has there been any explanation given for why these checkpoints are randomly appearing? Is there any credible threat? I don't want this to become standard procedure. These checkpoints will do no good at stopping some sort of violent act from happening. If a criminal wants to do something, they will find a way. Has any such incident ever occurred at an amusement park?

If Cedar Fair is increasing security at just the Ohio parks, it may be in response to the upcoming election cycle.
And I'm not trying to bring any type of political discussion into the fray.
Just pointing out that Ohio is a big center of the political universe this cycle with high profile events coming up soon.
These might be recommendations from government security to avoid any potential high profile incidents around thes events.

^Although I doubt this, it could be a possibility. Just to let you guys know, Dorney Park in Allentown, PA has also implemented this security at the front gate. I think Cedar Fair is going to implement these procedures across the chain in future years. These security checkpoints may become commonplace at Cedar Fair parks. Yes, these checkpoints are annoying and i wish Cedar Point didn't use these procedures but apparently management thinks this is the best procedure to follow to ensure "safety." Hey, you never know, these security measures could prove useful in the future... maybe?

It seems like an odd change of course if they do institute these checks across the chain. It was only a few years ago that Kings Island, Kings Dominion and Carrowinds when I went had magnetometers. And they were removed since, presumably under current managements discretion.

I am not sure, but I think all the Paramount Parks had these.

Also, When I was at Busch Gardens two years ago, they did have these checks.

djDaemon said:
Giving up personal privacy for the illusion of safety is not something to be taken lightly.

What you're forgetting is this isn't your home. This isn't a personal place. Cedar Point is a public assembly venue (by definition) where you are not entitled to the same right to privacy as you are elsewhere. Take a look at the roofs and you'll see surveillance cameras everywhere.

I side with both you and Pete that we shouldn't have to sacrifice personal freedoms to go about our daily lives. When you make the decision to take a trip to Cedar Point, you're venturing outside of that scope. If a park, concert venue, or stadium which restricts access (i.e. your ticket) chooses to further search you, that is their right. As it is your right not to go to those kinds of places.

djDaemon said:

So, because it's ubiquitous, that makes it OK? So if random searches of private residences becomes commonplace, you won't mind? The more widespread this illogical type of thinking becomes, the more clear it becomes that we've lost the War on Terror. To ourselves.

I appreciate your passion for this, but again these are two completely different subjects. I would argue strongly against you when you phrase this as "illogical" thinking. The reasoning for these kinds of procedures is well versed in history and theory. The individuals I graduated with would side with me here, we all majored in some sort of security specialty. But again, Cedar Point is not your private residence, it is a private business that has the right to choose how they operate.

djDaemon said:

ROFLMFAO!!! Yes, during the 5 minutes that I had to empty my pockets of contraband such as my phone, keys, change, and FitBit, all I could think was "this hospitality is so great! I wonder who's going to violate my privacy next!"

There will always be those who believe the inconvenience isn't worth it. Many people argued this way pre-9/11 (though the TSA is a whole different level of incompetency, so we won't go there). Fact is, the 5 minutes that you took to take your personal items out of your pocket are a minor inconvenience, just as is having to unzip your pants before you use the restroom.

The point I was trying to make is there are different ways of doing things. As Disney demonstrates, there are ways to include this search as a part of your experience as opposed to something to rile everyone up. It's the same principle that my company uses. But as Pete details below, having Cedar Point "Police" searching you provides neither service nor hospitality, but rather focuses on security instead of the customer. Not saying which is right or wrong, though I definitely know which is preferred. Again don't be so quick to shout violation of privacy, as that entitlement is different in this setting.

Pete said:

These security checkpoints are a pain in the ass no matter where they are. Concerts, ball park, etc. makes no difference, and they do very, very little to actually enhance safety. And, a ball park or concert hall is a very different place from an amusement park, which is obviously not confined to a building and is more akin to walking around a city.

Real quick, for the average individual they do very little. You're not there to create a nuisance or scene, only to enjoy your time there. What this does do is weed out the individuals who wouldn't be on this forum. It keeps out the people that have already had too much to drink. It's a visual deterrent to those trying to do stupid things (at which you cannot quantify the value). Technically, yes, a ballpark or concert venue are very different from an amusement park. But at their core, they're a confined venue with restricted access that individuals attend because of the spectacle. Cedar Point obviously has more spectacles than a 3-act concert or a ball game, but the concept is the same. It's a public assembly venue.

Pete said:

As far as making an impression on you, I agree. A cop with a wand that makes you stand in front of him, hold your arms out and proceeds to "wand" you sure does make an impression. The wrong kind. It either puts the thought in your head that you are entering a dangerous place, why else would they need cops electronically frisking you at the gate? Or, perhaps it just makes you feel like you are experiencing a similar experience that a common criminal goes through. In either case it is neither friendly or welcoming and makes for an ugly start to your day. Not to mention that these checkpoints are a bottleneck and it will take longer to enter the park.

Again, it all depends on the approach from the venue. Again, Disney is a fine example. They treat it as just another part of your experience. As I pointed out in my original post, this is why I'm against the wanding in the first place, but I support the concept. In this day and age, this is common place, whether we like that or not. It doesn't necessarily mean you're in a dangerous place. We already know that every NBA and NFL game already do this, and most people wouldn't qualify those as a "dangerous" place. Again, as for the bottleneck, you're either going to get caught up there or at the gates while they scan tickets and passes.

^^ Think you mean Carowinds

Canada's Wonderland still has permanent metal detecting devices, though that's a whole different country.

RideWarrior18 said:

djDaemon said:

Giving up personal privacy for the illusion of safety is not something to be taken lightly.

What you're forgetting is this isn't your home.

What has that to do with personal privacy?

If I may quote a rather wiser man than myself...

Benjamin Franklin said:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty or Safety.

No matter where these security checkpoints are used, they're Security Theatre.

Well, scanning tickets takes a couple seconds, the "security" takes much longer.

I'm looking at it from the point of view of someone staying at the marina, and there are a lot of us. People may enter the park and leave a number of times throughout the day for various reasons. It becomes a major hassle to go through security that often and frankly will take the fun out of it. Take a quick walk across the park to get a cocktail at the Surf Lounge? Eh, don't feel like being wanded again, I'll just drink my own on the boat.

Quite frankly, what is to stop someone from shooting up guests on the beach, boardwalk, hotel, campsites, through the fence at Soak City, at Challenge Park or even at the front gate when there is a large group of people waiting to get in which are sitting ducks? There are plenty of ungated public areas on the peninsula that makes security getting into the park a moot point.

What Pete said. Security checkpoints at any venue, not just amusement parks, are for show, not security.

Pete said:

I'm looking at it from the point of view of someone staying at the marina, and there are a lot of us. People may enter the park and leave a number of times throughout the day for various reasons. It becomes a major hassle to go through security that often and frankly will take the fun out of it.

And I completely agree with you there. For someone going in and out throughout the day, it can be a bit of a nuisance. But you've already given a solution to this problem. While there are many of you, my guess (and it is a guess, I don't know the size/scope of your group) is that is still represents a small population of the visitors to the point. You can never make everyone happy (See: Every time we get a new coaster)

Pete said:

Quite frankly, what is to stop someone from shooting up guests on the beach, boardwalk, hotel, campsites, through the fence at Soak City, at Challenge Park or even at the front gate when there is a large group of people waiting to get in which are sitting ducks? There are plenty of ungated public areas on the peninsula that makes security getting into the park a moot point.

Nothing, and that's part of the security nightmare a place like this presents. But you have to look at the variables you can control, and the responsibility the park assumes when you enter the gates (remember when all of us were talking this legal responsibility not too long ago with the man that jumped the fence? Imagine the lawsuit from the family of a victim because Cedar Point allowed a weapon in the park, which a controlled area).

noggin said:

What Pete said. Security checkpoints at any venue, not just amusement parks, are for show, not security.

As someone who's been in the business for a while now, I'd have to disagree. As stated before, there is a certain aspect of visual deterrent (or as some of you call it, Security Theater) involved in any type of security. It's the reason why you tighten up on the highway when you see a cop, it provokes a certain response. But saying they're all for show is ridiculous. I've had stitches, broken bones, concussions, and a lot more from this so called "for show" security. The problem is, to most people we're just the guys that love looking in purses. They'll rarely see us stopping the drunks at the gates, kicking out the people selling/doing drugs, resolving domestic disputes, and generally maintaining order, and that's how it should be. The necessity for security is the minority, not the majority in which all of us reside.

And stopping drunks at gates, kicking out drug sellers/buyers, resolving domestic disputes and assorted other duties are among the responsibilities security teams should be focused on. Monitoring and addressing problems and concerns, not putting on a show at the entrance(s).

I think where myself and others have concerns about Security Theatre is that providing the appearance of security by scapegoating every person entering draws resources away from monitoring and addressing that minority.

Between Cedar Point and Soak City as I've mentioned before I go through gates two, three sometimes four times a day at the park when I make a whole day of it. A quick look in a large bag is different than being wanded and having to empty pockets. Nobody is arguing that Cedar Point wouldn't have the right to search like this but as a customer I guarantee having to empty my pockets and be wanded several times in a day is not going to make me a happy customer or make me feel any safer. If something bad is going to happen to me on a trip to the point it is most likely to happen while I'm flying down Rt 2 at 70mph. I put up with it at the airport but I don't fly often so it affects me very little and I can see the pint in it there. I see no reason for it at the park where I also happen to be sometimes twice a week and enetering and exiting to my car numerous times. I don't know that I've ever seen a disturbance there in all the years I've been going and going frequently. If the park had a history of crime problems within the gates it might make sense but we don't seem to have these problems. Unless they can wand for fake money, we do seem to have a problem with that...

I put up with it at the airport... I can see the point of it there.

Sadly, there's no point there. TSA has, time after time, year after year, failed security tests, and failed spectacularly. TSA is incapable of detecting banned items; indeed, between 2007 and 2015, TSA;s failure rate went up, not down, this year failing 95% of those tests.

But since Americans have been conditioned to accept security checkpoints as a legitimate means of stopping criminal activity, all evidence to the contrary, the use of security checkpoints has spread. And so we have security personnel at amusement parks and baseball stadiums and so on spending their time inconveniencing the many at the expense of focusing on those few intent on criminal activity.

Oh I don't think they are effective at the airport in proportion to the inconvenience that's for sure. I got the pat down in San Antonio and that was awkward. I think in general people have become much too obsessed over security. Personally I'm happy with statistical likelyhood. I don't panic about most things because even though it(robbery, abduction, terrorists what have you) can happen to me the chances are quite low. I'm only so tolerant about it at the airport becuause I have flown so little it has affected me very rarely. In general I think most precautions are overkill. The only sudden increase in security I've ever been happy about was finally not having the front doors of our school wide open. I don't fear shootings, but I had one student with a restraining order against a parent and I liked knowing there was something betwen him and the parent other than me.

RideWarrior18 said:
Imagine the lawsuit from the family of a victim because Cedar Point allowed a weapon in the park, which a controlled area).

That brings up an interesting point. By setting up a security checkpoint, CP is taking a variable that is out of their control, mainly deviant behavior of a guest, and saying we will try to protect you from that. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems by doing that they are taking on liability they would ordinarily not have.

I believe that by scanning for weapons they are in a sense saying that they are guaranteeing that no weapons will be in the park. If one gets in and a security incident occurs, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit by being partially responsible because they failed at keeping weapons out.

Not scanning would push the full liability on the deviant guest because the guest broke the rule (clearly displayed) that no weapons are allowed in the park.

I was asked to take everything out of my pockets....cell phone, wallet, eye drops, loose change.....did their scan....all clear. Asked to visually check the bookbag in the wagon...he said "i see some powerades, and some snacks"....all good, sent me on my way

Pete said:

By setting up a security checkpoint, CP is taking a variable that is out of their control, mainly deviant behavior of a guest, and saying we will try to protect you from that.

If Cedar Point stopped each vehicle at all toll booths, and asked all guests to step out of the vehicle while their persons and vehicles were searched; and stopped all boats at the entrance to the marina and had all guests move to police boats while their persons and boats were searched...

...yes, that would be an effective detriment to criminal activity.

Randomly expecting some but not all of the guests on the property proper to submit to invasive searches is not protecting anyone against anything. It's Security Theatre.

RideWarrior18 said:

What you're forgetting is this isn't your home. This isn't a personal place.

I'm not forgetting anything. You seem to be forgetting that my pants are a personal place.

The reasoning for these kinds of procedures is well versed in history and theory.

That is absolute BS. The TSA nonsense has done what, exactly? And at what cost in real dollars (to say nothing of the immense invasion of privacy)?

There will always be those who believe the inconvenience isn't worth it. Many people argued this way pre-9/11 (though the TSA is a whole different level of incompetency, so we won't go there).

How convenient that one of the single most obvious examples of why security theater is utterly useless is somewhere "we won't go".

"Hey guys, Big Macs are perfectly healthy! Of course, the actual nutrition facts completely contradict that statement, so we won't go there. But you get my point, right? Big Macs. Totally the most nutritious things ever."

Fact is, the 5 minutes that you took to take your personal items out of your pocket are a minor inconvenience, just as is having to unzip your pants before you use the restroom.

Fact is, you don't get to decide whether that's a minor or major inconvenience to me. I make that value judgment. And to me, it's not a minor inconvenience, because emptying my pockets provides practically zero benefit to me, while costing me time, which I value.

And seriously? Unzipping my pants? That action is pretty much required on the rare occasion I'm wearing clothes. Showing some guy with a wand my car keys is not in any way necessary for me to feel safe in an amusement park.

...don't be so quick to shout violation of privacy, as that entitlement is different in this setting.

It's absolutely shocking to me how cavalier you are about needlessly abandoning any sense of privacy. Now anyone who resists is entitled? Dear God. Our children are absolutely doomed if this type of thinking becomes widespread.

...as for the bottleneck, you're either going to get caught up there or at the gates while they scan tickets and passes.

Absolutely, demonstrably false. I've walked through the gates countless times with almost no wait. Even on the busiest days, the line continues to move.

When they were searching people on my last visit, which was mid-week, late in the day, there was no one in line at the gate, so I should have never stopped walking (save for a second or two for the pass scan). Instead, I spent almost 5 minutes dealing with Officer Tough Guy, who literally made me remove my FitBit One, even after showing him what it was. I can only imagine how cumbersome a process this would be on a nice Halloweekends Saturday.