faeriewench Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 http://www.orlandose...0019,full.story I have to be honest I'm a little mixed on this one. Though most people from what I always seen do hold onto the restraints for some of the rides at all parks I been to (and I certainly do as well, very seldom if ever have my hands up) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beastrider97 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 I too feel mixed, after all, many people put their hands up, not holding the restraint. I feel bad for her, unlike a lost limb, she could easily ride the rides and be safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcgoble3 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 In today's sue-happy world, the parents could have easily sued for some ridiculously large sum of money. I applaud them for not doing so and going to the Department of Justice instead. As for the requirement that you have to have a hand to ride, if there really was a safety-related reason why riders needed to hold on to the restraint, then they wouldn't let people put their hands up. To that end, I feel the requirement in question is discrimination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnrealNightmare Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 In order for them to say you can't put your hands up, they'd have to handcuff you to the restraint. Other than that I don't really see how they could enforce telling people to keep their hands down. Personally I keep my hands up on everyting it just makes it that much better for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldschool75 Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 As I see it, yeah it sucks. There are rules set for safety of the rider and others. Unfortunately handicapped people are not able to do everything that non handicapped people can do. That is the reason they are classified handicapped. "Life sucks sometimes, and there is nothing you can do about it but suck it up and do something else." That comes from a person I know that is handicapped, he understands that he cannot do everything, so he does the best with what he can do. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 This is a very touchy subject, one that there are no winners and also one that has many victims- including parks. Interpretations of rules is difficult for everyone to agree on. What I believe is one way is most likely different for someone else. I'm sure this particular park visitor is more than capable of handling herself on the ride like everyone else given she has lived with this unfortunate condition her whole life. The ride attendants have no way of knowing this (how could they?). Their safest decision is to not allow her to ride. Sure, she was allowed sometime ago. It was a mistake, everyone makes them. What about the park visitor that has casts on both hands? Are both visitors to be treated the same, or is each visitor different? I want everyone to remember the Darian Lake visitor that fell out of the train last year that had no legs. Nobody wants to live with the memory that as a ride attendant, poor judgement was used. Safety is top priority. If Kraken broke down and riders had to be escorted down the lift hill, could she hold on to the railings? I have no idea, and I'm sure anyone that does not know her either can honestly say yes. I agree with Jcgoble3 that the family should be recognized for not seeking monetary damages. But I do question why they did not ask the question of being able to ride before getting in line before every ride. That would have certainly solved the embarrassment issue. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigacoaster2k Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 If I were Katie, I would be angry, but there are a lot of rides that have manufacturer limitations. If the employee doesn't follow the rules based on those limitations, they can lose their job. Perhaps an employee or member of management saw Katie riding back in December and perhaps the policy was modified as a result. We have no way of knowing what the media cut out of this, so I'm throwing that out there. Every park has rules and limitations for personal rider safety and security. Diamondback doesn't allow casts, Millennium Force and Dragster don't allow backpacks in their queue or on the ride, and Dollywood doesn't allow riders to wear hats or scarves on any of their rides. Many rides at parks all over the US do not allow pregnant riders, too-short riders, or riders with prosthetic limbs. None of that is discrimination, but people play that card all the time in sue-happy America. We may not understand why the rules are there, but if something is not allowed then surely something must have happened for the rule to be in effect. People get up in arms over things like this all the time, but suppose they let rules fly and an accident happens as a result of negligence. I as a rider would rather be angry than dead or injured. I understand and admire that Katie is skilled and adept in her personal life, but the park does not know that. I'm hoping to be a ride operator for the first time in my life this year. I know that if I was faced with a similar situation and was told that a guest with amputations could not ride as a result of manufacturer regulations, I would have no choice but to politely ask the person to exit the ride. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkroz Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Browntggrr hit my thought on the head: I remember saying it back when the woman made the news for not being allowed on Shoot the Rapids due to a missing leg or two missing arms or something... If you have a condition that is truly that seriously, shouldn't your very first instinct at an amusement park be to stop at guest relations and just ask a couple questions? Regardless of how capable you feel you are, you must at least acknowledge that limitations exist, and shouldn't it be obvious to stop at a main office somewhere and ask? At least then, you can "plead your case" (as little help as it may be) and the park can get its ducks in a row and send out a message of their final decision, thus taking at least some of the weight off of the shoulders of ride attendants. It feels like it should be considered ones responsibility to find out the limits before you even begin instead of assuming you can do as much as anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CedarPointer Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Don't a lot of "ride requirements" signs actually say to hold onto the restraint at all times? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomTheater Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 On some rides at CP, the policy requires riders to be able to secure their own seatbelt and lap bar. The Dragster auto speil is a good example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07OsBo3csn0&feature=related Requirement at 45 sec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markr Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I always thought that it was interesting that park rules state you are required to hold onto restraints yet they look the other way when people put their arms up. It seems like this is a rule meant to be broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkroz Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 And the article points out that this girl could indeed hold on - she had adapted to grasp things with what she had. Which begs the question, is it appropriate to evaluate if a person meets the requirements on a case-by-case basis? And if so, whose job is it? Should a person need to stop at guest relations as soon as they arrive and have a written document from there? Or should it be up to ride operators to use their best judgement on each individual attraction? Not easy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BavarianBeatle Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Don't they test those rides with handless water dummies that don't fall out? And she had ridden before? What's the rule there, "You can ride, except when you cant?" And are there any stories out there about any lives being saved on a B&M floorless coaster (like Kraken) solely because someone was able to hang on by one hand? Ridiculous discrimination by Sea World! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkroz Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 BUT, it's not just about the ride restraint coming unlocked during the ride... Part of it is bracing oneself against the sudden acceleration and stops. Water dummies don't have to worry about bruising or breaking bones if they slam against restraints. And as with any situation, you have to plan around the "what if." Why are shoes required on Diamondback? Some say the reason is because, what if the ride broke down and you needed to climb across the metallic grated floors at the brake runs? And why are hands required on Kraken? Maybe because you need to grip a stair handle when you walk down the 150 foot lift hill during an evacuation. You have to plan for the worst case scenario, and that means excluding people who couldn't safely navigate during those worst case scenarios. Water dummies don't have to deal with that, either. Wouldn't discrimination imply intent to selectively remove one specific group from an activity unfairly? Discrimination is the last thing I would call it, and your post reads very inflammatory and over-exaggerated. Most of us would say we feel sorry for the girl and the situation, but to claim SeaWorld instituted a purposefully discriminatory policy? That is ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 The issue here is not necessarily discrimination. The major issue is reasonable accommodation. Has the park/industry/manufacturer taken the required measures to reasonably accommodate the differently abled? Many of the posts here seem to put the burden of accepting that there are activities/devices/accommodations that cannot reasonably accommodate every patron on the patron. Disability advocates would strenuously argue otherwise. As for any argument that while on ride the rider must take physical preventive measures to protect herself from injuries the ride may otherwise cause a passive rider, any lawyer would have a field day with that one. Rides cannot in this day and age require such rider actions. And they ARE tested to be certain this is not the case. Not just water dummies or even bags of corn are used. Very sophisticated measuring equipment is used to ascertain every ride force, much of it even as the rides are designed. And changes are made before rides open (a northern Ohio funpark's relatively recent major coaster installation comes to mind) or even after opening (several publicly known changes at a major central Virginia funpark to its relatively recent major coaster installation) or even many years later (two Pennsylvania parks drastically altered major coasters in recent years, one many, many times until it was removed for other reasons). This is an area where good intentions and common sense are not necessarily a good defense. And there will be major changes seen at many parks this year due to regulatory changes in this arena. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I sympathize with the girl, and feel terrible that there are things I can do that she cannot. I also praise her determination to lead a life like everyone else, she can influence many people that have disablities. That said..... I cannot play football, I do not have the physical talents to do it. Should I sue the NFL for discrimination? I cannot dunk a basketball, I do not have the physical talents to do it. Should I petition the NBA & NCAA to lower the hoop heights? I cannot perform open heart surgery. I so not have the mental skill to do it. I have no idea who to complain to.... Extreme cases? They sure are. Just like she has an unfortunate extreme case. If parks/ coaster designers had to cater with every unfortunate case like this, we would never be able to enjoy an amusement park again. Many in today's society are WAY too sensitive. It has become acceptable to hand out trophies & praise for a 6th place finish. This type of action had great intentions, but has resulted in an entitlement attitude by many. Praise should not be given for a 6th place finish, just like coasters cannot be designed for every person. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XGatorHead 8904 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 In the video on the Orlando Sentinal website, the father makes the comment that you can't just put a blanket requirement on everyone, that you need to look at everyone on a case by case basis and determine what each individual is capable of. While that idea is very noble and I kind of agree with it from a guest standpoint, from a theme park business standpoint I would have to disagree. Who would make that determination for each individual whether they could ride or not? And if said person were allowed to ride and something were to happen that resulted in injury or death, the park would open themselves up to all sorts of legal problems. In order for them to say you can't put your hands up, they'd have to handcuff you to the restraint. Other than that I don't really see how they could enforce telling people to keep their hands down. Personally I keep my hands up on everyting it just makes it that much better for me. You MUST keep your hands on the restraints on Dollywood's Dizzy Disk, as Mrs. Gator found out. She rode while I waited with GatorGirl, and while on the ride she waved to us. The ride op announced over the speaker to keep all hands on the handles. Apparently Mrs. Gator didn't hear/understand, as she continued to wave. The ride op made the announcement again, saying that he would stop the ride. She still didn't hear/understand, but I was able to yell over to her "He's talking to you! Stop waving and hold on!" When she got off the ride she was embarrassed by it, but now it's a joke between us every time we go. Whenever she says she wants to ride Dizzy Disk, I always tell her "Make sure to hold on!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CedarPointer Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Why are shoes required on Diamondback? Some say the reason is because, what if the ride broke down and you needed to climb across the metallic grated floors at the brake runs? I had always heard that it's so your foot won't get caught between the moving train and the stationary station platform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_humor Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 After what happened at Six Flags with the tragic death of the veteran, I am in full favor of parks getting a zero-tolerance policy on issues like this. You can't make it an emotional issue when making the call of whether or not she could ride. Do I personally think she could ride safely? Of course, but policies are policies for a reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 After what happened at Six Flags with the tragic death of the veteran, I am in full favor of parks getting a zero-tolerance policy on issues like this.... Not at Six Flags. Darien Lake, long after Six Flags had sold it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_humor Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Oops. Showing my age there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheikra_rocks Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 In Florida, persons with artificial limbs or casts are limited to what they can ride. I worked at BGT 10 years ago, and the policy was in effect then. There is also a loose article policy on rides, does it get enforced 100%? No. Do people still take illegal POV's? Yes. There is a way they could have handled it, and let the girl ride. Without making a huge scene, they could have simply asked the girl to demonstrate that she could indeed hold the restraint. I know for a fact that on Kraken, (most B&M's for that matter) the bars are large enough there one can put their hands through them, essentially hugging the restraint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOB_TOM Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm going to say some things that people are not going to like about this story.... the easily offended, skip this post. First off, the rules to ride are NOT set by the parks, they are set by the ride manufacturers, who determine what type of forces the rider undergoes, and what needs to be done in order for someone to ride. The parks are there to enforce those rules, and if they do not enforce those rules, they take on the liability of an injured rider, not the manufacturer. No park wants to take that risk, so they do the smart thing and follow the manufacturers guidelines. Secondly, the rules are not that she has to be able to "hold" onto the restraint, it is "grip." Why the difference? Holding onto something mean you can loosely wrap a hand, arm, whatever, around something, and you are holding it. Gripping something is when you can apply force to something, in this case, apply force to a restraint to help brace yourself for sudden changes of force; left, right, forward, backward, up, and down. So the fact is that to help brace yourself against these forces, someone must be able to grip the restraint, and she could not. Thirdly, a big BRAVO to the ride ops who enforced the rules. Is it a touchy subject? Absolutely, but lets go over the situation here. Lets say that HP would have broken down, and she was required to evac. I do not know the evac procedures over there (and I'm 99.9% I'm wrong here,) but what if the procedure was to grip a rope/handrail/ect in order to cross over a very narrow platform safely, or she had to wear a harness, which she would have to put on herself? Because of her disability, she would not be able to do that. The ops acted properly in this situation and did not put her in a potentially dangerous situation. I personally liked that whover wrote this article pointed out all the things she can do and I applaud her for taking her disability and turning it into a positive (admit it, how many would just sit around all day and mope if you were missing your hands?) but those things they listed, you don't need to grip anything. Equestrian, AKA horse riding, she can do while holding reigns, and I believe rock climbing was in there? Again, you can use your lower body to push yourself up, and use your arms for balance. None of that is gripping, so the person writing the article was trying to point out oranges when we were looking for apples. Finally, every park has ride requirements, and every ride has the ride requirements posted out in front of the ride. In both cases that she brings up, she did not stop to read the requirements, ask an operator, or inquire before they bought the tickets if there would be any issues. The parks down here are more than happy to give out that information if you go and ask, because it elimates the issues that you get while on the actual ride, and elimates the dangers that she may face if she cannot grip the restraints. She is pushing blame on an industry that does everything in their power to educate the public, minus walking up to her while she is buying the tickets and saying, "Hey you can't ride this/this/this because of your disability" (which if you have ever had to deal with a situation like this, is completely the wrong way to do it.) Those are my thoughts, coming from years and years of experience in the industry. While the parents did the correct thing and held their lawsuit, I dont see how the DoJ can do anything about this, except say "sorry 'bout your luck." Go ahead and blast me, I feel it coming on. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLiveTheSmurfRide Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 As for any argument that while on ride the rider must take physical preventive measures to protect herself from injuries the ride may otherwise cause a passive rider, any lawyer would have a field day with that one. Rides cannot in this day and age require such rider actions. And they ARE tested to be certain this is not the case. Not just water dummies or even bags of corn are used. Very sophisticated measuring equipment is used to ascertain every ride force, much of it even as the rides are designed. Agreed. I bet if I got on any of the rides that she was taken off of, I'd be allowed to just rest my hands at my sides and not hold on and nobody would say anything. Sure, I have the ability to grab the restraints if I want, but if I am not required to then I don't see why she should have been removed. If there is a blanket rule, like with the example above about Dollywood's Dizzy Disk, then I can understand where this could be an issue. It's stated from the beginning that they need to hold on, and it applies to everyone, hands or not. That is not to case with the majority of rides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Agreed. I bet if I got on any of the rides that she was taken off of, I'd be allowed to just rest my hands at my sides and not hold on and nobody would say anything. Sure, I have the ability to grab the restraints if I want, but if I am not required to then I don't see why she should have been removed. I believe she was not allowed on for more than not being able to hold the restraints. What the article does not say is if she was able to buckle herself in/ pull the restraint w/o assistance or if she would be able to remove herself from the buckle/ restraints in a reasonable amount of time. She also may not be able to effectively hold railings if an evac were to be performed. I have seen guests of exceptional size (at CP & KI) be asked to leave a ride due to not being able to buckle themselves in even though after enough struggle (or assistance) they would be able to engage buckle/ restraint. I also am surprised the article does not mention if she is capable of driving a car. Given she is 17, the question/ issue had to of come up by now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 A little more, plus reader comments: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/teen-born-hands-barred-rides-seaworld-universal-theme-parks-cite-safety-reasons-article-1.1016919 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast1979 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 In the wake of the infamous accident on Ride of Steel, I think the park made the correct decision here. If it's in the manufacturers requirements, it's best to abide by those rules and not take a risk. If this case becomes loud enough, they might re examine their requirements and determine that it's unnecessary. Until then, it's best to be safe rather than sorry. I sympathize with her cause however, because having ridden Kraken and multiple coasters like it, it's quite clear that you do not need hands to ride that ride. She missed a wonderful experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiocolts Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 If the rules are you have to have hands, I guess the park made the right decision. But, have I ever fell out of a ride because I wasn't holding in? I barely ever hold on to the restraints on rides. And its never has it felt like I was going to fall out (except for Diamondbacks air time, but that's what the lap bar is for). Also if you do have to hold on, why aren't you allowed to do it with your arms? If she can use her arms like we use our hands, she should be fine. So they should change the rides rules so you can hold on with your arms. But, because the current rules are you must hold on with hands, the park made the right decision at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOB_TOM Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Except the manufacturers set the limitations, not the parks... The parks may add their own (mostly dealing with height requirements. Perfect example, the manufacturers of Forbidden Journey recommended 48" and above, the ride opened with a 54" height requirement, then went to 48") but mostly, the parks will stick with what the manufacturers say for legal reasons. Also, being able to hold on may not have to deal with being on the ride itself. Like was previously brought up, what if there was an evac situation, and the girl in question could not perform a task necessary to evac safely? Therefor, the ride requirement cannot just "be changed," as you put it, but it would have to be brought up and new forms of evac would have to be researched, then tested, then put into the field. Regardless, I still blame the girl for A) not asking questions about what she would be/would not be able to ride, and trying to make the parks look like the bad guys in this because they were looking out for guest safety. Lawsuit or not, going to the press about this (or any agency that can make this type of incident public) just shows they are out for nothing but money because the parks are looking out for her safety. How dare you, parks of the world. How dare you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If parks were qualified to make safety decisions for coasters, they would also be qualified to build them. Anyone remember the last time KI used their own resources to build a coaster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.