Alleged drunk guy restrained by other guests at Disney California Adventure

Go to the money based "line management" system and...

That's where I stopped reading. We get it, and a lot of people already agree with you, and the ones who don't understand your point, and we don't need to talk about that anymore, especially in a totally different topic. Geeze man.

:)

Finally got to watch it with sound. My opinion is that the drunk guest needs some jail time. The security officer who sprayed him AFTER the drunk was calmed down should serve double the drunk. Do you really need training to know that there is no need to re-spray a guy who is barley able to stand? He is holding onto the gate to keep his balance.

Things did not get super-ugly until the unnecessary spray. Vigilante guests sticking their forearm in the back of a drunk guy's neck did not need to happen.

All the training in the world will do nothing for a person who simply has poor judgement and an inability to focus under pressure. These are the 2 primary qualities needed for security. That security guard needs to lose the job, or be repositioned where contact with guests is nill.

The guy with the spray repeatedly told the drunk guy to get back down on the ground (probably until backup came). He was clearly fearful that the guy was going to get physical again, which he did. I think he would have got phisical again with or without the extra spray.

If instead of pepper spray he had a taser, and the drunk guy didn't get on the ground when instructed, would it had been just as bad if he would have tazed him? The way I see it, he was trying to keep everyone around him safe until he got some help.

And again, if I was there, I would probably be one of the guys holding him down until help arrived. He was dangerous. He could have paid no attention in his fit of anger and kicked an unsuspecting child, elderly person, or pregnant lady.

If you introduce a taser into that scenario, things can get even more ugly, especially when someone is already that incapacitated due to the influence of whatever they're on. Who knows, his disability could have been a pacemaker. If that was the case, and security didn't know it, a shot with a taser would likely kill him.

Tasers and things are best left to folks with an absolute understanding, and training. That, and I'd go so far as to say this situation wasn't anywhere near the level of danger that would warrant an electric shock.

LostKause said:
I think he would have got phisical again with or without the extra spray.

Easy enough to say, but the fact is, the dude wasn't doing anything but standing still and rubbing his eyes at that particular moment until provoked by the additional spray. At least if he had started swinging without being sprayed a second time, there was more of a chance backup might have arrived by then.

Yeah, like the article said, we can all say what we think we'd do in that situation...but I honestly don't think I would have sprayed the guy again unless he was already on the offensive at that time. It just doesn't make sense to poke a sleeping bear.

Besides, last I heard, that was illegal in 49 states.

I bet WV is one of the two States that it isn't illegal. lol

How many states are there LK? Did Puerto Rico squeeze in when I wasnt looking? ;-)

Easy enough to say, but the fact is, the dude wasn't doing anything but standing still and rubbing his eyes at that particular moment until provoked by the additional spray.

This is how I feel about it too. What sucks, is Disney will have to pay the drunk who started/caused all this.

Oops. That's why I'm not President of the United States. lol

I always count D.C. and forget to explain it. Why can't they just make it a State or something already.

Apparently it doesn't matter if you were President of the United States. In fact you were a lot closer.

Pepper spray is not a preventative measure.

If the guy was really that much of a danger, you couldn't tell with all the people getting in his face, posing for pictures in the foreground, and yelling at him. If a pregnant lady, an elderly person, or a parent with small children would rather push their way forward to get a ringside seat of the action instead of heading in the other direction to safety, I would have just a bit less sympathy for them if something had happened. There was nothing keeping anybody there other than the TMZ/ gawker mindset that permeates our society.

The only sure way to keep everyone in the area safe from this man's actions would have been to clear the area, which is something that the cast members didn't think to do (or weren't trained to do), nor any of the crowd taking in the free show.

If the guy with pepper spray WAS security, then they have some real horrible security and that is a shame. When you get a guy that is either really drunk OR especially high as a kite, pepper spray is not going to cut it in defending yourself. When things got physical he had absolutely no skills to protect himself and to subdue the assailant.

I think the entire security staff there should have some skills in Verbal Judo (the main instructors are based in L.A. actually). If he would have used those skills he could have gotten the guy backstage and calmed down or in a place where he could be taken down that wasn't in sight of guests of the park.

Secondly, the security staff should have some minimum skills in self defense. A few simple joint lock maneuvers would have changed that situation around completely without the use of pepper spray. They hire these guys to be able to diffuse situations that could harm the guests or other cast-members. If they can't defend themselves and properly subdue an opponent they have no right to be working in security.

Last point. I am surprised that a CM didn't see that guy filming the whole incident and try to take the camera. I know it's not exactly legal to do, but I wouldn't put it past a park like Disney that is so image conscious to do something like that. The one guy telling them to get back didn't even tell him to stop filming or anything...

"There was nothing keeping anybody there other than the TMZ/ gawker mindset that permeates our society."

+1

So you guys are saying that if this was happening while you were there, you would immediately turn the other way and get as far away as you can, and not be interested in the least with the outcome? You wouldn't want to stick around and make sure that you couldn't help?

I have kids...I would run away. If my kids were not there...? I'd probably walk away. Of course I would have wrongly assumed that security had it under control...and would have been shocked to see the whole event end up on You Tube.

I find this whole situation sad on almost every possible level. Why are you drunk alone in a park? What possible disability could have allowed this clown to abuse the GAC? Why did Disney not train their security better? What fool sprays mace a second time on a guy that is doing nothing? Why are the teenagers filming this situation, screaming, etc...those that want to help...help? Why does Disney have a system that is so easily abused? Why does Disney have a system that relies on underpaid Cast Members to act as judge and jury? Why does Disney allow their Cast Members to be put in harms way by asking untrained staff to act as security officers?

This is just my opinion. But every angle of this story is 180 degrees the opposite of how I believe it should be. Not one character in the film acted in a wise and mature manner. I guess there is no reason I should be shocked.

It is just sad.

What are you TALKING about? Are you STILL yapping about disabilities and "system abuses" and disability training and Fastpass or whatever?

I understood it that the "fool" sprayed him a second time because the drunk would not get on the ground after being told many times. He might have been afraid that the drunk was going to decide to attack once again. The drunk was unpredictable, and spraying him again was an attempt to put him down on the ground to wait for the Police or more security staff. It was a good attempt, but failed nonetheless.

Underpaid? Are you saying that since something like this might happen once in a blue moon that Disney should pay their employees more? What would that opinion have to do with this story? Perhaps you should suggest that Disney hire a psychic to tell them where the next altercation will take place so that security staff can be there before it happens?

I was giving my opinion that EVERY part of this story is sad and 180 degrees opposite of what/how I believe people should behave, Disney should operate, etc.

I don't believe Disney needs to pay their employees more. I believe Disney needs to have policies that assure their lowest paid positioned employees are not making decisions that have a high probability of leading to confrontation. Confrontation producing policies should be limited to the greatest extent possible. And in places where they can't, or choose not to limit confrontation producing policies, a higher paid security type officer should be the immediate contact with the public...not a ride attendant. The linked article on the first page indicates that these confrontations are not a rare event as you suggest. It particularly mentions GAC as a point of contention.

Personal experience shows me that there is often verbal confrontations that take place at the Fastpass access point. Whether it is minor debate about what the exact times is, or a maced drunk guy taking swings...the point remains. I suggest Disney come up with a system/policy that limits the potential for verbal and/or physical confrontation.

Travis, is it standard procedure to make people who get confrontational in amusement park queues to get down on the ground? As I see it, the idea should be to get them calm and avoid further violence. The second shot of pepper spray did the exact opposite; it riled him up and made him more physical than before. As I mentioned previously, pepper spray is not a preventative measure. You can't say, hmmm I'm not sure if this guy will get violent so I better spray him just to make sure. Hell if the goal is to get him on the ground and not moving, a .45 would serve the same purpose.

To answer your other questions. No, I don't usually stand and gawk at situations. I don't rubberneck at accidents. Helping in a situation like this is risky. Unless you know exactly what the man's condition is, how do you know whether you're "helping" or not? What if someone else who's "helping" dislocates the guy's shoulder or otherwise causes some injury? Can you say for sure you'd be protected under some kind of Good Samaritan law?

As long as we're playing "What Would You Do?" I wonder how this would have played out, including web reaction, if the guest had been anyone other than a middle-aged white male?

RatherGoodBear said:
As long as we're playing "What Would You Do?"

Every single time I find myself answering with, "I'd walk the hell away as quickly as possible."