Witnessed something eerie

[dtk1378]

Hey now, don't get me wrong, I am not angry at all, these forums are here to have discussions about Kings Island and that's exactly what we are doing. Both sides of the argument are good and have points.

 

And to stray a little bit, there also could be health risks, what if that single rider is severely allergic to something that is currently on that other rider such as peanuts, just throwing that out there.

[bjcolglazier]

Peanuts...I see what you did there.  :-)

 

I don't know though.  Some allergies like that are so severe it's like...what are you doing HERE?  An allergy row?  I actually work at an Elementary School, too...classrooms are totally nut-free.  I don't know how we accommodate that at a park like Kings Island without a specially reserved day.  Which might not be a bad idea!

[The Interpreter]

The biggest fallacy here?

You can LOOK at a person and judge their character and intentions?

Really?

Profiling, anyone?

And when a risk is present, it is the duty of the party who can best mitigate that risk to do so. Here, that's not the rider. It's the park. And the park is either requiring its agents or allowing them to, among other things: (a) require a child predator ride witha child, ( b ) require an innocent adult to ride with a child who can and may make false, difficult and expensive to disprove, highly explosive to the point of being career ending allegations.

Neither risk is very likely, but the consequences of either panning out are highly damaging to the park, its agents and the individuals involved.

The park is playing with dynamite. Even one such incident actually occurring could hurt it for many, many years...not to mention the unnecessary pain on the individuals.

All to fill an empty seat.

Talk about false economies.

Where's Duffield Milkie when you need him? Or IROC?

[Tanna]

The biggest fallacy here?

You can LOOK at a person and judge their character and intentions?

Really?

Profiling, anyone?

And when a risk is present, it is the duty of the party who can best mitigate that risk to do so. Here, that's not the rider. It's the park. And the park is either requiring its agents or allowing them to, among other things: (a) require a child predator ride witha child, ( b ) require an innocent adult to ride with a child who can and may make false, difficult and expensive to disprove, highly explosive to the point of being career ending allegations.

Neither risk is very likely, but the consequences of either panning out are highly damaging to the park, its agents and the individuals involved.

The park is playing with dynamite. Even one such incident actually occurring could hurt it for many, many years...not to mention the unnecessary pain on the individuals.

All to fill an empty seat.

Talk about false economies.

Where's Duffield Milkie when you need him? Or IROC?

I never thought about that.

[Cody]

Single riders make me go "ugh", but hey---don't glare at me when I hop on with you---I'm totally sane I promise!  bahaha.  ;-)

Something tells me you haven't met someone from the North East yet. I wouldn't dare try riding with a solo rider at Six Flags Great Adventure without some kind of peace offering.

[The Interpreter]

I have NEVER had any incident at NJFTP.

Dorney Park, on the other hand...(one of several is described above)...

Or SFA...

[disco2000]

Wow - I continue to be, not quite sure of the right word, at some of the comments in this thread.  

 

Do those that prefer to ride alone never ride a bus, subway, go to a theater, sporting event, etc.  For those afraid of being accused of something, do you not use the restroom at Kings Island?  All these places are more likely for something to happen than on a ride.  Come on, you are on a ride for usually around 2 minutes with a person strapped in.  If they do something, make a scene as the ride enters the station yelling to keep the restraints locked and call for security.  The violator isn't going anywhere - same can't be said if it happens in a restroom, bus, sporting event, etc - the violator is long gone before security could arrive. 

 

What is ironic - many that are complaining about riding solo and the "risks" associated with it take part in KIC "meet-ups", both at the park and overnight stays elsewhere?!  Personally I would be more concerned about that than someone sitting next to me for a two minute ride.  Many of you spill your life on this forum, making you an easy target for a pedophile to select and "friend" and take advantage of.  

 

If you are that concerned about riding solo, then don't ride solo and always come with a friend.  If said friend wants to sit a ride, you sit too.  Plain and simple.  There are much bigger risks in the park than riding solo.  An empty seat decreases capacity - on some rides even more so than such seat being occupied by a FastLane user.

[dtk1378]

The biggest fallacy here?

You can LOOK at a person and judge their character and intentions?

Really?

Profiling, anyone?

 

It was just an example I was using, but of course you can interpret it to fit what is needed for yourself.

 

The main point of my post was that I shouldn't have to exit a ride because I don't want my daughter riding with a stranger.

[The Interpreter]

Amen.

And you can't tell anything about how safe that would be by looking.

Better safe than sorry.

[Italian Job 2005]

At least they don't pair riders on Boo Blasters. Not yet at least...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Browntggrr]

Was there an inappropriate sexual act involving a child on a ride that I did not hear about?

[WindingSon]

Not while "on a ride" but there are many stories of children being raped or fondled while at amusement and water parks.

 

In searching however, I did find something that hits close to home.

 

http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/jun/10/boy-sexually-assaulted-ohio-amusement-park/

 

It happens.

[Browntggrr]

Ok, just making sure it has not happened on a ride and there are just a select few creating paranoia with the only goal of stirring the paranoia pot.

We could sit around playing the "what if??" game all day.

[jsus]

Was there an inappropriate sexual act involving a child on a ride that I did not hear about?

 

Let's all act like nothing could ever go wrong.  Then, when something does go wrong, let's all be outraged that no preventative measures were ever taken.

 

Seems legit.

[jcgoble3]

When the potential damage from a single incident is so severe, playing the "what if" game is the right thing to do. This is the type of thing that should never, EVER, be allowed to happen.

 

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[Browntggrr]

^^Or worry about legitimate issues that have actually happened

You send your kids to school? Church? Sporting event? Camp? Leave them with a babysitter or family member?

Because responses like yours but still allow your child to participate in any of the above is hipocrasy at it's best.

But wait.... if you allow your child to ride an amusement ride you are being hipocritical as well.

To date, there has not been any issue where a child was molested on a ride, but there has been numerous injuries & fatalities involving rides.

And you still allow your child to ride them......

Now what seems legit?

[jcgoble3]

What child? I am single with no children.

[Browntggrr]

What child? I am single with no children.

Response was to previous poster.

But much of what I said does refer to prevention.

As a parent, you don't allow a young child to go to the bathroom anywhere by themselves. But on a ride? Why? Any parent should be more concerned about ride failure resulting in injury or death than child molestation on a ride.

[disco2000]

 

Was there an inappropriate sexual act involving a child on a ride that I did not hear about?

 

Let's all act like nothing could ever go wrong.  Then, when something does go wrong, let's all be outraged that no preventative measures were ever taken.

 

Seems legit.

 

 

 

When the potential damage from a single incident is so severe, playing the "what if" game is the right thing to do. This is the type of thing that should never, EVER, be allowed to happen.

 

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

 

Under this type of thinking (playing the what if game), we should just shut down amusement parks - someone may die while on a ride or get ejected.  Someone may slip on the steps walking up to a ride.  Someone may choke and die on a corndog.  Someone may drown at Soak City.  Someone may step in a pothole and fall out into driving lane and get hit by a car.  Someone may....you get the point.  You may get killed on the roads leading to an amusement park, so you should probably just not go.

 

Let's play the "what if" about someone getting ejected from a roller coaster.  Here is the solution:  how about a 5-point harness, Hans device, helmet, fully enclose the train so that someone cannot put their hands up, etc. and if someone would still get out of all the safety devices, the enclosure would keep them within the ride.  How many of you would ride it then?  Or better yet, let's just not have a roller coaster for the "what if"... 

 

Life it full of risks.  The point I have tried to make, as well as Browntggrr, is that there are other risks in the park as well that are more likely to happen than being molested on a coaster.  Again, if it happens, the violator is strapped in and can be dealt with a lot easier than if it happens elsewhere...

 

If you are that concerned about being a solo rider and getting paired up with a kid that makes a false accusation - it is MUCH MORE likely to happen in a restroom than a coaster full of people/witnesses.  I guess you hold it all day?  And if you have to go, you drive home to use your own toilet?

 

I am not saying we shouldn't be doing "What if" analysis, but like almost everything, it can be taken to paranoia levels.  If you are that concerned, rent the park out all to yourself.

[electricsun]

I've tried to bite my tongue as I have some very strong feelings regarding this topic.

However, paranoia? Really? No. It's not paranoia, it's looking out for the best interests of the child and adult. I will not have my niece and nephews ride with someone that I don't know well. I will not be riding with a child that I don't know well. Done. End of story. And I work with children! I'm concerned with what if a kid, for whatever reason, freaks out on a ride? What if there is an evacuation? I can talk my niece and nephews through a situation, but a stranger won't.

Let me share another example. With work, we have very set rules about what to do with children's attention. They want to hug us, we can't hug back. It is to protect ourselves, our institution and the child. How easy is it for someone to misinterpret a simple innocent interaction? How easy is it to overlook something that is leading to a dangerous interaction?

As for me, should I really never travel or visit parks unless I have someone with me? Yeah, that's not going to happen. I chose to live my life and will not sit on the sidelines because my "single rider" status might upset someone. I'm okay with someone joining me on rides that have more than 2 seats, or space between the two seats (Diamondback, Maverick, TTD, for example). But on the rides that are tight spots? No. I haven't had positive experiences with strangers there. I've had guys follow me onto those rides to take the other seat and proceed to get very much into my personal space. I don't know him, I don't want his sweaty body touching me. At KD, I had a woman decide to join me for a ride on I-305 and proceed to tell me ultra personal details and then hug me. At Busch Gardens, I had a large man - twice my size - decide to push through waiting groups to put his sons and himself on the log ride with me - where I was already siting and waiting to go. His boys in the front, him in front of me and me...very much wedged in the back, in pain because my legs are being squished against the bars. Not a very positive experience for either ride.

As others have mentioned, if it is an adult, ask if you can ride with them if you want. But don't assume and don't be upset if they say no. They may have their reasons and they don't have to justify them to you or anyone else.

[jsus]

Under this type of thinking (playing the what if game), we should just shut down amusement parks - someone may die while on a ride or get ejected.  Someone may slip on the steps walking up to a ride.  Someone may choke and die on a corndog.  Someone may drown at Soak City.  Someone may step in a pothole and fall out into driving lane and get hit by a car.  Someone may....you get the point.  You may get killed on the roads leading to an amusement park, so you should probably just not go.

 

Really?  Really??

Wait a minute.  That was your take-away?

 

In a discussion where we're simply advocating for taking some simple, relatively harmless precautions in the off-chance something goes wrong, that's your take-away?

 

You do know that amusement parks are full of safety features put in place in the off chance something goes wrong, right?

 

Roller coaster control systems are so redundant that it's almost impossible to have a collision without a human override.  Rider restraints are redundant, both in terms of a combo of seat belts and shoulder/lap bars, and redundant mechanisms behind at least the bars.

 

Security systems are throughout the park.  Cameras on the rides, cameras all over the buildings (especially at KI).  Security guards walking all around the park in a way that is very non-Disney Magic™.

 

There already is a certain amount of safety and precaution built into the modern amusement park.

 

And you think that it's a ludicrous idea to separate children from adults unknown to them while on a ride?

 

You think it's a ludicrous idea to want a little bit of personal space on a roller coaster rather than being shoved up against someone's sweaty body?

 

And to suggest that I should have to waste a ticket so that I am not made feel uncomfortable at the park?  What's this, Personal Space Plus wristbands?  Is that when you want more than two inches of personal space?

 

Really??

 

Wow.

 

Let me put this another way:

 

You don't always have to wait for a specific incident to occur in order to take preventative measures.  Sometimes it's best to prevent that which is predictable.

 

Something will always go wrong.  It's like a universal law.

 

That doesn't mean that nothing is predictable.

 

If I'm driving down the road and someone is headed right at me, should I do nothing?

 

No, thanks.  I'll surely maneuver my vehicle in a way to avoid a crash.

[jcgoble3]

Yeah, that's a straw man argument. I said that the park needs to take reasonable steps to prevent this type of situation. In no way did I ever imply that no one should ever be allowed to take any risks at all.

 

The difference here is that all of those risks that you talked about are already reduced and mitigated by reasonable precautions and preventative measures. The issue of potential molestation, or false accusations of such, does not have those precautions. In fact, according to several posters in this thread, the park is in some cases enforcing policies that INCREASE the chances of this happening. That is absolutely not right.

 

The park needs to recognize this and stop forcing single riders to sit with someone else, particularly unrelated children. The slight increase in capacity from filling one extra seat here and there is not worth the massive damages that just one incident of molestation or false accusations by a child could, or rather would, cause. Period.

[Browntggrr]

I have seen where the park has asked to be paired up with a stranger but still have not seen where the park forced anyone to sit with another.

But even then: how old was this child being discussed. 8? 13? We really don't know except that the child was tall enough to ride.

But here is a preventive measure that will not make anyone feel awkward: tell the ride op that you are a single rider and prefer to ride alone prior to getting on the ride. No directing. No questions. No awkward feeling.

And for parents that are concerned about the sudden paranoia involving amusement ride child molestation:

don't let your child ride alone.

[jcgoble3]

I have seen where the park has asked to be paired up with a stranger but still have not seen where the park forced anyone to sit with another.

 

Multiple such cases have been mentioned in this thread, and have been specifically pointed out when this false argument was previously made. They should not need to be pointed out again.

 

But here is a preventive measure that will not make anyone feel awkward: tell the ride op that you are a single rider and prefer to ride alone prior to getting on the ride. No directing. No questions. No awkward feeling.

 

The ride op is not in any way required to let you ride alone just because you want to. Park policy may require them to pair you anyway, or the supervisor on the ride at the time may have decided that improving capacity is more important than fulfilling seating requests, or there could be any number of other reasons why such a request would be denied.

[disco2000]

 

Under this type of thinking (playing the what if game), we should just shut down amusement parks - someone may die while on a ride or get ejected.  Someone may slip on the steps walking up to a ride.  Someone may choke and die on a corndog.  Someone may drown at Soak City.  Someone may step in a pothole and fall out into driving lane and get hit by a car.  Someone may....you get the point.  You may get killed on the roads leading to an amusement park, so you should probably just not go.

 

Really?  Really??

Wait a minute.  That was your take-away?

 

In a discussion where we're simply advocating for taking some simple, relatively harmless precautions in the off-chance something goes wrong, that's your take-away?

 

You do know that amusement parks are full of safety features put in place in the off chance something goes wrong, right?

 

Roller coaster control systems are so redundant that it's almost impossible to have a collision without a human override.  Rider restraints are redundant, both in terms of a combo of seat belts and shoulder/lap bars, and redundant mechanisms behind at least the bars.

 

Security systems are throughout the park.  Cameras on the rides, cameras all over the buildings (especially at KI).  Security guards walking all around the park in a way that is very non-Disney Magic™.

 

There already is a certain amount of safety and precaution built into the modern amusement park.

 

And you think that it's a ludicrous idea to separate children from adults unknown to them while on a ride?

 

You think it's a ludicrous idea to want a little bit of personal space on a roller coaster rather than being shoved up against someone's sweaty body?

 

And to suggest that I should have to waste a ticket so that I am not made feel uncomfortable at the park?  What's this, Personal Space Plus wristbands?  Is that when you want more than two inches of personal space?

 

Really??

 

Wow.

 

Let me put this another way:

 

You don't always have to wait for a specific incident to occur in order to take preventative measures.  Sometimes it's best to prevent that which is predictable.

 

Something will always go wrong.  It's like a universal law.

 

That doesn't mean that nothing is predictable.

 

If I'm driving down the road and someone is headed right at me, should I do nothing?

 

No, thanks.  I'll surely maneuver my vehicle in a way to avoid a crash.

 

 

I know more about amusement parks and rides than most (and will just leave it at that).  I was making a point that almost everything can be taken to an extreme.

 

As was quickly researched by someone (but not confirmed), it appears more people have been killed while riding a ride than being molested on a ride.  Someone can probably do the research and find out if more people died on rides than being molested on a ride.  I also think it is predictable that more people will claim about being injured on rides than will those that claim they were molested on a ride.

 

Adding more harnesses to secure a rider in a roller coaster is a harmless precaution in the off-chance someone's physical dimensions do not fit the design of the intended safety devices.  Will it happen - not until someone that didn't fit the intended design is ejected from such ride.

 

I am in no way trying to downplay molestation as I think it is horrible and personally have friends that were victims of such an event, I just think it is more than likely to happen in a restroom or by a step-parent/lover at the moment or a relative than it is to happen on a roller coaster.  Sometimes a parent needs to take responsibility/precautions.  The park cannot be held responsible for everything.

 

I know that on more than one occasion, I have had my child on one side of me on the Kite Eating Tree and the ride op asked me if it was ok if another child sat next to me because the child's responsible adult couldn't ride (either pregnant, watching a smaller sibling, etc.).  So I guess you would be a kill-joy and ruin the kids day?  I know in every instance the child had a blast and the responsible adult thanked me as it prevented a meltdown of their child.  In most instances, the adult took a video of their child enjoying the ride, providing video evidence their child was not touched, in addition to everyone watching...

[bjcolglazier]

I've many times sat in a row of strangers at a football game thinking, "my butt takes up 1/20th of this row, but there's only 10 seats and I'm squished!".  You know what?  Nobody cares.  If I want my own personal space I have to buy more tickets.  So yeah...Privacy Pass Plus for $49.99, or $34.99...sounds fair to me.  I totally get people wanting personal space, privacy, and the fallacy of "safety".  But be willing to pay for it.

 

What should the ride-ops do when I go on Delirium and request a "buffer-seat" on either side of me?  For my safety.  To protect the park from a lawsuit, and all of that nonsense...I bought one seat, but really need 3?  Same with Banshee, Diamondback...I could go on.  I need the row behind me clear because I might get stabbed in the back by a psycho!  All of a sudden renting the park to yourself makes a lot of sense...

[Browntggrr]

Its threads like this that give parks a bad image when it is actually enthusiasts creating paraniod drama when none actually exist.

What started as a guest being asked to pair up with a child somehow turned into child molestation & the park being accused of forcing many things.

It's sad, nauseating, and also completely understandable why parks are limiting enthusiast perks today that existed 10+ years ago.

Agree to disagree. Creating issues that do not exist for the solitary goal of arguing only hurts the park.

[jsus]

<withdrawn> 

[Browntggrr]

The judgmentalism is strong with this one.

Much thanks to you sir for confirming my point.

[Magenta Lizard]

I've been thinking about this apparent bias against single riders.

Let's say, on every train, you have two singles (or thirds, or fifths) who don't care where they sit (or you think singles or thirds or fifths shouldn't have the right to choose what row they sit after the same length wait as pairs, or no one should ever get to choose rows, whatever). So, the line micromanager pairs them up (hopefully not holding anything up in doing so). Now there's a whole extra row for pairs.

If that occurs /every/ train, perfectly, you've got an extra dispatch every twelve to eighteen trains (depending on the ride). Is that really worth it? For taking away single riders' freedom to choose where they sit, and potentially making them exceedingly uncomfortable depending upon who they are sat with? Not to mention it would never work perfectly, and the micromanagement involved would inevitably slow things down every dispatch to the point it would fritter away any added overall capacity.

I think some people are imagining single riders (and uneven groups) to have a /much/ bigger affect on their perfectly paired day than they actually do.

I've seen three or four full train dispatches "wasted" when someone vomits on a ride (not to mention the copious time used cleaning before each time the whole train is sent empty). When are we going to add a vomit tax to those people, for the inconvenience encountered by those that are behind them in line?