Kentucky Lawmakers Taking Action after Amusement Ride Accident
Southeast News • March 11, 2008
Kentucky lawmakers are taking steps aimed at improving the safety of amusement rides in the wake of a grisly accident last year that severed the feet of a girl at Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom in ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: Will 2 years difference in age have significant impact?
Posted On: March 11, 2008, 11:19 am CDT
Posted By: KLS
Comment:
An 18 year old ride operator and a 16 year old ride operator (assuming both have had the same training) are probably equally qualified to do the job. I don't see how raising the age limit by 2 years will have any impact on amusement park ride accidents.
Amusement parks are dangerous, period. The rides are machines and all machines should be expected to fail at some point. That point may happen sooner or later depending on the maintenance and care of the machine, but there is always the possibility that something is just going to break.
Parents should know that's a risk when they send their kids to an amusement park. What happened to this girl was extreme in nature, but as long as amusement parks exist, accidents can and WILL happen. Sometime they will occur due to negligence on behalf of the operator; or they'll happen due to poor condition of the machine; or they'll happen for no other reason than the ride just decided to shoot craps that day.
When I was a teen, I was badly injured in an amusement park ride. That was all it took for me to decide the thrill was SO not worth it. Granted, I knew my situation was rare; but for me, I didn't feel like it was a chance I wanted to take ever again. As a family, my husband and son have gone to amusement parks a couple of times, but we've gone knowing there was a possibility one of them could get hurt. (I waited for them on the bench, with the other cowards, holding their cotton candy and popcorn.)
The amusement park and the manufacturer of the ride should compensate this family for their loss and then some for their pain and suffering. For the amusement park to say they had no liability is such a crock!
However, unless there are significant details left out of the article, I don't see how the 18-years-of-age aspect of this legislation is going to prevent these types of things from happening. The only way to prevent amusement park accidents is to ban amusement parks completely.
As for requiring daily inspections of the rides, I'm not sure how big of a task that might be, but it surprises the heck out of me that amusement parks don't already do so. That should be an industry standard.
If I were an amusement park owner, I would EXPECT to have to pay a crap ton in premiums to have coverage for injured riders; and I would EXPECT to have the occasional injured rider from the occasional malfunctioning machine. Duh, duh and duh.
Subject: Will 2 years difference in age have significant impact?
Amusement parks are dangerous, period. The rides are machines and all machines should be expected to fail at some point. That point may happen sooner or later depending on the maintenance and care of the machine, but there is always the possibility that something is just going to break.
Parents should know that's a risk when they send their kids to an amusement park. What happened to this girl was extreme in nature, but as long as amusement parks exist, accidents can and WILL happen. Sometime they will occur due to negligence on behalf of the operator; or they'll happen due to poor condition of the machine; or they'll happen for no other reason than the ride just decided to shoot craps that day.
When I was a teen, I was badly injured in an amusement park ride. That was all it took for me to decide the thrill was SO not worth it. Granted, I knew my situation was rare; but for me, I didn't feel like it was a chance I wanted to take ever again. As a family, my husband and son have gone to amusement parks a couple of times, but we've gone knowing there was a possibility one of them could get hurt. (I waited for them on the bench, with the other cowards, holding their cotton candy and popcorn.)
The amusement park and the manufacturer of the ride should compensate this family for their loss and then some for their pain and suffering. For the amusement park to say they had no liability is such a crock!
However, unless there are significant details left out of the article, I don't see how the 18-years-of-age aspect of this legislation is going to prevent these types of things from happening. The only way to prevent amusement park accidents is to ban amusement parks completely.
As for requiring daily inspections of the rides, I'm not sure how big of a task that might be, but it surprises the heck out of me that amusement parks don't already do so. That should be an industry standard.
If I were an amusement park owner, I would EXPECT to have to pay a crap ton in premiums to have coverage for injured riders; and I would EXPECT to have the occasional injured rider from the occasional malfunctioning machine. Duh, duh and duh.