Do you enforce the rules? - Page 3

PGH_Steeler · #31 05-20-2005, 12:02 PM

why do yall keep saying the ride designers made up the height restriction? KW changed a bunch of height restrictions on a few rides. I don't think they asked the people who designed the rides if they could change them.

Sir Willow · #32 05-20-2005, 01:34 PM

Because the initial height requirements absolutely do come from the ride designers. Why do you think pretty much every B&M coaster with an inversion has a height requirement of 54" (I think Wildfire may be the only exception there)

Insurance companies, the state, or the parks may decide to refine that a bit, but it's almost always to make the requirements higher, not lower, to provide an extra layer of safety. About the only way they would lower it is if they already had it raised above the manufacturers specifications, in which case they might lower back down to that. If they don't at least abide by that, though, then they likely won't be allowed to operate the ride by either the state or their insurance.

Sheik · #33 05-27-2005, 08:44 PM

Thats it they should bump it up to liek 59 and let people get mad then be like were awful cool and nice and we letting it down to 54 in...Aret you guests happy? And they will be...They dont now how easy they got it...

Real · #34 05-28-2005, 04:38 PM

Im not even an employee and I call out smokers and line jumpers. Just follow the rules, everything will be fine and dandy.

People who sit on rails, I like to wait for the guy on the mic to make em look like an idiot in front of everyone, much better that way.

GhostRider3222 · #35 06-18-2005, 12:19 AM

screw making line jumpers go to the back of the line. I call security/ Police dept, and they escort them out of the park.

RidesKid133 · #36 06-18-2005, 01:00 AM

I went to my park today, you know a day off. (Even though they asked me to work for 1hour and a half) Me and my friend went. I was constantly telling people "No playing on the handrails." "Stop leaning on the airgates." "NO LINE CUTTING."
Is that dedication to your job or what?? lol

slnewbus · #37 06-18-2005, 12:41 PM

lmao. I love being off duty and enforcing the rules. I say, "please get off the hand rails", and they are like, "who are you to tell me" and I whip out my ID and they are like "oh no problem sir". That is so funny. And then when people line jump I am like "freeze, you just line jumped, come with me" and they are like, "who are you to tell me" and I whip out the ID. I love it.

I love when I am on the job, and say "Please do not sit, stand or swing on the handrails, that means no sitting as well sir." And then a guest in the area says something like, "stupid". It is so funny.

Cid · #38 06-18-2005, 12:44 PM

I love enforcing the rules when I'm at work, but as soon as that uniform comes off and I'm playing in the park I don't at all. I think it makes the park look bad. Nothing more arrogant than someone in street clothes flashing an employee ID and yelling at you.

If I was playing in a park and not following the rules and some off the clock employee told me what to do I wouldn't listen at all.

My opinion I guess.

Diesel · #39 06-18-2005, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirius_kid

I seen this guy smoking

[POLITE]I saw this guy smoking.[/POLITE]

willski2002 · #40 06-18-2005, 04:56 PM

^ I hope you're joking.

You wouldn't save someone's life because you aren't on duty? What kind of idiot wouldn't help someone if they were in trouble, and especially if they are trained to help those people. If an on-duty lifeguard has the situation under control, that's one thing. It's an entirely different matter if no lifeguard sees the person in trouble, and you say, "Oh, the lifeguards will save them". If they died, you would feel like a piece of ***** for a long time.

This is why I won't go to SFWW. I'd rather go to Lake Lanier.

Diesel · #41 06-18-2005, 07:18 PM

Silly edh.

Federal and State Good Samaritan Laws exist to protect those who assist victims of an accident or crime and the victims themselves.

Duty to Assist: A person at the scene of an emergency who knows that another person is exposed to or has suffered grave physical harm shall, to the extent that the person can do so without danger or peril to self or others, give reasonable assistance to the exposed person. Reasonable assistance may include obtaining or attempting to obtain aid from law enforcement or medical personnel. A person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
General immunity from liability: A person who, without compensation or the expectation of compensation, renders emergency care, advice, or assistance at the scene of an emergency or during transit to a location where professional medical care can be rendered, is not liable for any civil damages as a result of acts of omissions by that person in rendering the emergency care, advice, or assistance, unless the person acts in a willful and wanton or reckless manner in providing the care, advice, or assistance. This subdivision does not apply to a person rendering emergency care, advice, or assistance during the course or regular employment, and receiving compensation or expecting to receive compensation for rendering the care, advice, or assistance.

Find your state's interpretation of the Good Samaritan Statute here: http://www.aedhelp.com/legal/downloa...on_summary.pdf

**Phil** · #42 06-18-2005, 10:21 PM

You are considered a normal guest when off-duty, right? If so, I would be pretty pissed if a bunch of guests that knew CPR stood there looking at me dying while waiting for a on-duty lifeguard to come. You'd have to be a real a-hole to not help out.

***Steven*** · #43 06-18-2005, 10:56 PM

Well, under those samaritan laws any lawsuit they try to file against one who renders assistance is practically baseless unless they harm the person in need on purpose. That means that if you are a guest there (even if you're an off-duty employee), and you witness someone getting hurt and no one else is around at the moment so you render aid until help arrives, you are considered a samaritan and thus legally protected.

A similar aspect would be if you happen to be an off-duty cop where you witness a shooting and you end up for the victim. Low and behold the police department (the same one the cop works for) take their time to get there, that off-duty cop is still treated as a good samaritan and cannot be sued because his own employer twiddled their thumbs in responding.

Suing lifeguards on duty (as well as the park itself) is possible because from the lifeguard up up to those responsible for the park's operation, they are charged with maintaining guest's safety. They are not acting as citizens, and are expected to be properly trained at that time they are giving aid.

coasterking11 · #44 06-18-2005, 11:22 PM

On my last trip to Dorney while waiting in line for Hydra furious already since the day began. (the another story though) at were these 3 girls hoping over and under the rails then they got to me. I told some of my friends to stand by the rails to block them from getting through. "What the hell do you think your doing" "my friends are up there" they said. I yelled back My ******** ****** ( enter an adative and a noun) is up there you dont see me cutting a half an hour of line." It was hillarious and there faces got all red and everyone cracked up and they got imparased and walked out of line. But i was still in a horrible mood the rest of the day. That was proboly the highlight of the trip.

**Phil** · #45 06-19-2005, 10:07 AM

If someone is always on the scene immediately then Whitewater should never have to worry about being sued.