Sledding Banned in 1 Pennsylvania Park, Restricted in Another

December 20, 2010

  • December 20, 2010 at 7:53 am
    TPG says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Fanucci–please if you want people to take your comments seriously, learn how to spell–or, learn how to use spell check.

    I’m wondering if your name is really “Fanussi” ??

  • December 20, 2010 at 12:49 pm
    America Redefined says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It is about time that the liberal lawyers get sued for the pain and suffering of not being able to have fun. Can’t fish here, ice skate over there, play ball on that lot, sledding on that mountain. No wonder today’s kids don’t know how to GO OUT and have fun.

  • December 20, 2010 at 1:17 am
    dakota guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Heck, I take my grandkids and pull them on sleds behind my pickup (live in a town of 80 people and not much traffic) and just found out that that is child endangerment. Hard to convenience my 5 grandsons that we shouldn’t do it any more. Let people be responsible for their own actions.

  • December 20, 2010 at 1:25 am
    P.K. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It’s rather pathetic that for fear of getting sued by some money-grubbing _sshole with a law degree, America has to change or abandon traditions that we’ve had and enjoyed for centuries. I recall the old “flexible flyer” sleds. You were taught not to walk in front of one; otherwise, you’d get hurt. One incident provided a lesson you’d never forget. You were also taught that if your sled was approaching water or a tree, you’d best roll off the damn thing.

    Enter the scumbag personal injury attorney. Anything for a few buck. “my client suffered severe emotional and psychological injuries when he was injured while playing”. How bad off are these charlatans in suits to take a case involving a few stiches or a simple fracture? Where were the parents supervising the kid?

  • December 20, 2010 at 1:48 am
    TN says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    wudchuck it looks like the plastic “disc” sleds are the ones being banned. Likely because they’re harder to steer, who knows.

  • December 20, 2010 at 1:59 am
    Exadjuster says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    ROSEBUD……………..

  • December 20, 2010 at 2:18 am
    Big E says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Blame it on juries that when faced to assess damages in a death or paralysis case have no problem in making awards against boroughs for the hazards that might be downhill. Happens all the time. Some times the hazards are man made, other times a tree in position to impede the sled. Plastic sleds have no runners and thus no control. As a councilman in my borough (that’s what insurance people do – they take leadership roles in the community), I cannot disagree with the course taken. We removed a slide about a decade ago due to similar concerns. When I was a kid, if you got hurt on a sled or slide, your parents took you to the doctor and then coached you on being more careful. Since the advent of attorney advertisement, everyone seems to be looking to blame someone now a days.

  • December 20, 2010 at 3:00 am
    Bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Years back, my town had a tobaggon slide. It went out onto the lake and people loved it. When condition weren’t right the city would block it off so people wouldn’t use it. One night an idiot climbed the fence and helped his kid over the gate barricading the slide (top and bottom) The kid went doen the slide and hit the bottom gate. The guy sued and won because the city didn’t post a sign at the top of the slide warning someone that if they climbed the barricades and used the slide, there was a gate at the bottom of the slide too. The slde was removed by the city.

  • December 20, 2010 at 3:23 am
    Fanucci says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That’s the underlying issue. Nobody wants to take responcibility for theit own actions. When I was growing up we were responcible for our own actions. Parents were respecible for their own kids. These days it’s easier to blame the city, and sue for big bucks.

  • December 20, 2010 at 3:51 am
    Sue Q says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Exactly, I don’t know where the parents are. If someone has to sue a city that’s pretty drastic. I remember bouncing my head, arms and legs off of trees. Heck My boyfriend shattered his leg on Christmas Eve sledding, they never sued the city.

    I guess its safer to the cities to convince kids to stay indoors, then the liability lies with the parents or care givers, sad

  • December 20, 2010 at 6:55 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    here we go again, the city did not create the hill, it just happens to be there. now, if you go sledding anywhere is it not possible you get hurt anyways? why should the city be responsible? now this one hill supposedly overlooks or lands into the ohio river. if so, then the city could put up some kind of barrier for the sledders to stop. what i don’t understand is why they can ban plastic sleds? i can understand metal ones.

    so, will this town go downhill? or will the sledders find a bigger hill?

  • December 21, 2010 at 8:00 am
    Rosie says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The unfortunate reality of life in America is that personal injury attorneys have convinced a large segment of the population that everytime something happens, they should sue somebody and make money. Thanks to attorneys, the term “accident” has been lost in our society. They believe that in any and every situation, someobody must be negligent and made to pay. Evertime someone leaves his/her residence, they are assuming a risk that something could happen to them.

    I hope everyone read the article un the “National” header why fear of suits may not curb “defensive medicine”. This is another problem fueled by greedy ambulance chasers. We have a NATIONAL MEDICAL COST CRISIS and a large issue is “defensive medicine” by medical professionals for fear of getting sued. Somewhere, this nonsensical “business” of personal injury has to be controlled. Our “justice” (not really) system is stuck in the attorney defined and created paradigm that accident/injury = money. I’m all for reimbursing pecuniary damages (out of pocket expenses), but the notion of making money never made much sense. In spite of the pure _ullshit that “it’s not about the money”…..It’s ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY. At a minimum, let’s start taxing those awards.

  • December 21, 2010 at 9:15 am
    1099 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Attornies don’t decide suits. We have judiciary/jury problems. There is a tremendous amount of precedent we need backed out.

    I disagree about “taxing” as the answer – to almost anything. Nor do I think we need new legislation to redefine what is plainly stated in the original intent of the law (i.e constitution).

    The solution should start at the bench in my opinion.

  • December 21, 2010 at 9:20 am
    jurisprudence says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You’ve got it exactly right 1099. These frivilous suits aren’t won or lost by those disreputable attorneys but by juries that see nothing but deep pocket insurance bad guys that out of malice they want them to pay for the most ridiculous allegations

  • December 21, 2010 at 10:40 am
    Compman says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    And finally brought her some common sense as a Christmas present. Thank you Santa!

  • December 21, 2010 at 4:09 am
    I have an idea! says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hows about if we get a bunch of attorneys & use them for sleds (face down, of course) and slam them into the gates at the bottom of the hill?

  • December 21, 2010 at 6:07 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    that is the question — who is willing to take responsibility? why are parents so into blaming someone else?

    the article mentioned steel and plastic sleds, last i heard most sleds have a steel runner. does that not disqual them?

    that person climbing the fence, is that not considered trespassing when closed? sounds to me that the city ok’d the idea along with the judge and jury, that it is ok to trespass to do something fun. so can we say it’s ok as a robber to trespass into someone house and have fun because i love to rob, whether a bank or house, just because i don’t have a sign stating that it’s illegal to grab things that don’t belong to you? or if i had a neighbor who had a big hill, is it ok to climb his fence and trespass just because i want to slide?

    where is common sense and responsibility?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*