Man arrested at Kings Island for allegedly trying to kidnap child had 4k rounds of ammo

One vote is not enough for that post, Gator! I literally laughed out loud a little bit.

Hawkeye, I didn't mean to insinuate that I was supporting the statement in Rideman's previous post that the items in the van are everyday items that may be found in many cars in the lot. What if those items were the only things in an empty van, or readily available for quick use in a preplanned way to further accomplish the goal of snatching a child? What if the van seemed to be prepared as a kidnapper's getaway vehicle? I think that's a better way for me to say it.

On the other hand, and back to what Rideman was saying, those items could be in anyone's car. One or even two guns, yes, but not A family van could have DVDs (and a portable player) and toys for the long drive to the park, a taser in the glove box for protection while at the hotel, a baton under the seat for carjacking situations, and unregistered medication, because grandma gave Daddy a pill to relieve his vertigo if he started to get dizzy while on vacation, for example.

And the guns and ammo? Someone with that in their vehicle could be a gun show dealer or a pawn shop employee or owner or something. There is lots and lots of speculation going on here, because the story is so vague.

Captain Hawkeye said:

OTOH, if you have a plausible explanation of how tasers, batons & 4000 rounds of ammo might be used in an "innocent" manner, I'd love to hear it. :)

You've got to remember that the dude was from Texas. That barely qualifies as a first date.

LostKause said:

And the guns and ammo? Someone with that in their vehicle could be a gun show dealer or a pawn shop employee or owner or something. There is lots and lots of speculation going on here, because the story is so vague.

The whole problem is that he wasn't allowed to have these items...

HE WAS ON PAROLE

I'm not sure why this story is so confusing to some of you guys.

Dude was acting creepy. Someone questioned it. Authorities followed up and found a guy on parole with items he wasn't allowed to have in his possession. They further find that he was videotaping children with a hidden camera in his glasses and speculate he was potentially trying to abduct a child.

It's no harder than that. He violated the conditions of his parole, was doing creepy things and had items that lead one to believe even creepier thing were coming had he not been pointed out.

I get that. He violates his parole, he gets arrested. Investigation proved that there was plenty about this guy to be suspicious about. Good outcomes all around.

But the fact remains that based solely on the content of the article, the only thing that suggests that he was trying to kidnap a child is the headline and an eclectic assortment of odds and ends in the man's truck. To me, that is the very essence of a sensationalistic article. That's the equivalent of Senator Markey running his mouth about baby carriages being subject to stiffer regulations than roller coasters.

I don't know, maybe I'm a little more sensitive to it than most of you, because I have been hassled more than once in amusement parks by well-meaning security details who wanted to know why I was taking pictures where children were present (and I am sure the beard probably doesn't help me much in those cases...). Obviously in my case, they figured out pretty quickly that I'm mostly harmless (in the most recent incident, the ability to immediately play back the video became really handy!). But it doesn't take much for that kind of suspicion to go beyond a mere annoyance.

Clearly with this guy, there was something going on, and I really hope that his "suspicious behavior" truly was suspicious enough to warrant hauling him in for investigation. I just don't want "acting a little strange" to become an arrest trigger. Most of us are strange enough to not want to get caught up in that.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

You are assuming that the writer of the story didn't leave things out, but I get what you are saying. It's all about the guns.

But why are they accusing him of trying to kidnap a child? Sitting on a park bench with a hidden camera is not enough evidence. Acting creepy is subjective. The toys and DVD in the van could belong to a young relative and left there from a previous meeting. I'm pretty sure he is a bad guy, but it's fun to speculate.

I want to know details. The report is very interesting, but too vague.

It would kind of make an interesting short story.

Actually I am assuming that the reporter left out a *lot* of details. In fact I hope that is the case.

And while the headline makes it all about the guns (in spite of the fact that short of his prior record, that's not entirely unreasonable, especially if he's collecting ammo during his travels in order to circumvent the present ammunition shortage), it's really more about connecting the dots between his behavior, his record, and the assortment of stuff in his truck.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Here's the same story from the same source run three days earlier. The headline doesn't mention kidnapping at all. It does say that it was children who pointed out his weirdness.

Here's the story from another Dayton station saying the man "may have been at Kings Island to abduct a child." It also explains in more detail that a man complained when the guy kept trying to get near his kid.

Here's a follow-up story from a Cincy station talking about the Dad wanting further charges pressed. This story claims the creepy guy had his hands under the child's armpits.

Still seems pretty obvious to me. His actions were suspicious enough to be noticeable. Authorities followed up with it and found he'd broken the law in other ways and arrested him on those charges. He wasn't arrested for being creepy, just noticed. Once noticed he was arrested for the gun and prescription medication.

EDITED TO ADD - Interestingly, the headline of this thread was the headline of the article linked when I submitted it. It's not the headline of the article linked anymore. The article shows a stamp of "Posted: 8:12 p.m. Thursday, July 11, 2013 | Updated: 10:08 a.m. Friday, July 12, 2013"

So if the headline is the issue, it appears they changed it to be more accurate.

Wow. Creepy. It's pretty much obvious to me now what was going on. Thanks for doing the work, Gonch.