3DisneyNUTS
<font color=green>can't think of anything witty!<b
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,850
MorganLeFey said:I don't make blanket statements about who's side I'm on.
Disney has an obligation to maintain a reasonably safe environment. not a perfectly safe environment, but one where reasonably foreseeable accidents are prevented.
similarly, park patrons have an obligation to obey the rules, use common sense, protect themselves.
each accident is different. you need to examine all of the facts, and apportion blame among all the parties who contribute to the accident. and some times there's no one to blame.
Mission space is a prime example. the boy who died met all the safety requirements and neither he nor his parents did anything wrong. the Disney set up the ride with appropriate warnings so that people who have certain medical conditions were on notice they should not ride, but boy had an undetected medical condition. no one could have forseent eh boy would die (though now, with hindsight being 20/20, Disney has wisely decided to offer guests a tamer version of the ride. http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...03383708_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-DISNEY-RIDE.xml )
as fr this accident -- the stepfather claims the girl obeyed all the rules. another source says the girl stood up on the ride, and that's how she was injured. Disney's had numerous people stand up n the ride, and even climb out of the boats. so even if the girl did stand up, it's possible that Disney has some responsibility for the accident.
I agree my point wasn't what happened on Mission space but how people reacted with blaming the parents for putting a young kid on the ride. Just like they are blaming the father for letting his teens in the park alone.
for me.

Kool-Aid anyone?
