Let's get this Space Mtn thing cleared up

[aalan]

i have read that a person was suing disney because he claimed that a camcorder battery that had fallen from another car wacked him in the face. disney was claiming the individual was trying to stand up and hit his head. it could be bogus, but i do know that all kinds of stuff falls out of the moving coasters. this must go back to the days when the coasters had seat belts, which you could have (foolishly) unbuckled during the ride.

 

[wdwguide]

Originally posted by OnWithTheShow
Well you can definitely touch the tops of the two tunnels the train passes through. I have actually done this. The train doesn't travel fast through these sections but there is still the possibility of a laceration from a sharp edge.

I smashed my fingers going into one of these tunnelsa few years ago, and it hurt quite badly.

 

[umbluegray]

Originally posted by aalan
i have read that a person was suing disney because he claimed that a camcorder battery that had fallen from another car wacked him in the face.

That's ridiculous. How can someone be held responsible for the actions of someone else?

Darn frivolous lawsuits.

 

[Stash]

Think the only danger is not listening to your instructions when in Space Mountain... "keep your head back, etc..."

I loved it, my kids, 8 to 14 loved it. My wife, so-so.

It's not like you're been forced into riding on it, but this is coming from someone who was nearly sick on the MAD TEA PARTY tea cups..... its the spinning thing with me...

 

[BEACHCLUBVILLAS]

what happened on Big Thunder mountain?

 

[Stash]

No problems with that... in fact quite tame compared to some I've been on, but still good fun. It's just if they constantly go round and round in circles...like the tea cups!!!

 

[umbluegray]

Originally posted by BEACHCLUBVILLAS
what happened on Big Thunder mountain?

Unfortunately, there was an accident with the ride that resulted in a rider being killed.

This was at Disneyland approximately a year ago.

 

[lightningcoach]

The train at Big Thunder Mountain slid off the lift into a safety brake and a young man was killed. The ride in both parks was shut down for several months to work on fixing any problems. They have made it somewhat slower.

Space Mountain had a problem with a car slamming into the back of another one in 2002. The ride was closed for several days while they figured out why it had not braked properly. And in 2000 SM had a bolt come loose on one car which forced it off the track. Luckily no one was killed, but it did send several people to the hospital.

Remember- Theme Parks in Florida (laws have changed in California somewhat) do not have to report any accidents or injuries. There is no federal regulations.

Most rides are safe- places do not want to be sued, but everyone needs to ride with care and adhere to all ride guidelines.
Nothing drives me crazier than a parent attempting to convince the CM's that their child is tall enough(when they have several inches to grow) and that they have to ride or their day will get ruined. Height requirements are for safety reasons- get a clue!!!

 

[wdw4us2]

Space Mountain isn't nearly as dangerous to ride on now as it was in the '70's. Back then, the ride had seat belts for restraints.

In my teenage years, we thought it was fun to loosen the belts so we could have more "air time" over the hills and in the drops.

Ah, youth.

 

[kjustice]

Well, I heard of a tall guy who was riding Space Mountain and was decapitated and the guy behind him caught his screaming head! (HA HA)

Come on - every theme park has the same urban legends.

In this case, I think they are perpetrated by people who heard the TRUE story of the family who sued Walmart because, in the process of stealing sodas from a soda dispenser, was pinned under one when he climbied up on it and it fell on him.

Don't get me started...

 

[bdg100]

Originally posted by umbluegray
That's ridiculous. How can someone be held responsible for the actions of someone else?

Darn frivolous lawsuits.

Your son throws a baseball through my window.

You give your guest too much to drink and he proceeds to kill me while driving home.

Someone breaks into your home and you have a shotgun rigged to shoot anyone attempting break in.

A child trespasses on your yard and breaks her neck while jumping on your trampoline.

A trespasser on your property falls in a hole and breaks his leg.

The mailmain slips and falls on your icy sidewalk.

Your neighbors two year old daughter is bitten by your pit bull and seriously injured.

You are permantly disabled because the driver of an eighteen wheel truck owned by Wal Mart slams into the back of your vehicle.

Darn frivolous law suits.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by bdg100
Your son throws a baseball through my window.

You give your guest too much to drink and he proceeds to kill me while driving home.

Someone breaks into your home and you have a shotgun rigged to shoot anyone attempting break in.

A child trespasses on your yard and breaks her neck while jumping on your trampoline.

A trespasser on your property falls in a hole and breaks his leg.

The mailmain slips and falls on your icy sidewalk.

Your neighbors two year old daughter is bitten by your pit bull and seriously injured.

You are permantly disabled because the driver of an eighteen wheel truck owned by Wal Mart slams into the back of your vehicle.

Darn frivolous law suits.

You're kind of all over the place with your examples.

The robber who is shot by the shotgun and the trespassers who are injured are breaking the law to begin with and it would be a lot harder for them to file their claim. If "NO Trespassing" signs are visible and prominent, the injury claims wouldn't carry much weight. The guy breaking into the house can only claim injury if I don't have a license to have the gun.

The mailman who slips and the child injured by my pet are my responsibility because they were presumably not on my property illegally, and they have a reasonable expectation of safety.

If my son breaks a window, it's his responsibility, not mine. He'll be the one paying for it out of his savings, and he'll be the one in small claims court, if it goes that far. In the drinking example, I am only liable if it was clear to me, as my guest left, that he was drunk and unable to drive. If he appeared sober and competent, then we're in the gray area.

And Wal-Mart is only responsible for my injuries if they knowingly put an incapacitated or incompetent person behind the wheel. Otherwise, it's the driver's fault.

The only examples here that I would not consider "frivolous" are the child injured by my pet and the trucker who paralyzed me. IMO

 

[DancingBear]

You may or may not consider some of these frivolous, but you are wrong as a matter of law on several points:

--The spring gun set up to shoot thieves is a classic law school case, and there are a number of cases saying that is an excessive response when you are only protecting property and not persons. I agree that it's hard to have sympathy for the plaintiff in this situation.

--You are certainly financially responsible for the acts of your minor child, and you can certainly be named as a defendant in small claims court for such actions. How you work out the costs between you and your son is a personal matter.

--Wal-Mart is certainly financially culpable for the negligent actions of its employees.

 

[bdg100]

Dancing Bear is right. Where do you practice? I am a lawyer in St. Louis.

 

[umbluegray]

--The spring gun set up to shoot thieves is a classic law school case, and there are a number of cases saying that is an excessive response when you are only protecting property and not persons. I agree that it's hard to have sympathy for the plaintiff in this situation.

Tennessee has a very strict handgun carry licensing process and they cover those situations where you can and cannot use deadly force.

In Tennessee, I can use deadly force if someone breaks into my home -- no questions asked.

But I do wonder if I would have the right to ****y trap my property.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by DancingBear
You may or may not consider some of these frivolous, but you are wrong as a matter of law on several points:

Sorry ... I was thinking logic, not law.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"In Tennessee, I can use deadly force if someone breaks into my home -- no questions asked."***

In Jersey we can kill'em if they're IN the house, but if they land in your front yard you have to drag them back inside before the police arrive. You can usually find a nabor who will help you do the dragging if he's a big S.O.B.

 

[umbluegray]

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
***"In Tennessee, I can use deadly force if someone breaks into my home -- no questions asked."***

In Jersey we can kill'em if they're IN the house, but if they land in your front yard you have to drag them back inside before the police arrive. You can usually find a nabor who will help you do the dragging if he's a big S.O.B.

Heck, give me a holler. I'll make the trip up to give you a hand.