Stardust Racers Accident

[jseal777]

Only thing I will say about all of this as somebody who knows very little about the legal side of this, the healthcare side of this, and didn't even get to ride this ride on my one trip to Epic this year is this:

It says a lot about where we are socially, politically, and culturally, that we are so so good at turning tragedy into spectacle.

 

[KlownzNskullZ]

Yeah, my mom has serious mobility issues so I’m very used to helping her in & out of ride vehicles so with the wording of this new change I can’t imagine we’ll be visiting Universal parks any time soon if offering my hand to get a loved one in & out of a ride vehicle is going to be a problem.

When I was a ride op, we used to be able to help guests. Then guests would try and drag us down when they fell, so we were told nope, we can’t help. Families then were able to help their own guests get on whatever ride. The wording is clear. You need to be able to walk from a mobility scooter or crutches or cane, unassisted to the ride vehicle.

I’m guessing universal wants to make it clear that you need to be able to be a little more independent than before.

 

[nikem3]

Knowing her, thats not surprising

I think the thing that bothers me the most about her posting is how much random speculation it has. Including details about the ride being rough, yet she later admits she has never been on the ride and proceeds to criticize the ride by saying "Because it was broken the 3 times I was there" as a way to reiterate how "unsafe" it is.

 

[Mad Dog]

Knowing her, thats not surprising

and...what are the 'Influencers' about.....Click, click, click......$,$,$.....and that's why I pay no attention to any of them, with
the exception of @Alicia.

 

[Allison]

When I was a ride op, we used to be able to help guests. Then guests would try and drag us down when they fell, so we were told nope, we can’t help. Families then were able to help their own guests get on whatever ride. The wording is clear. You need to be able to walk from a mobility scooter or crutches or cane, unassisted to the ride vehicle.

I’m guessing universal wants to make it clear that you need to be able to be a little more independent than before.

Which is why I posted I don’t think I’ll be returning to Universal anytime soon, we don’t go on enough of the rides regardless but if I’m gonna potentially get scolded for even offering a helping hand to a family member on the few rides we do go on, it’s simply no longer worth the added aggravation.

 

[RGMick77]

In the United States, amusement rides have gotten safer with each passing year. That’s truly great news for those of us alive today.

Unfortunately, those safety regulations had to be written in blood.

After any deadly accident, lessons have to be learned and new rules have to be created.

And, because lawyers are so clever now, parks have to go above and beyond to cover themselves from being sued out of existence.

You can’t just slap a sign up that says “ride at your own risk” and call it a day. You have to be very specific about which risks people are taking and you have to prove that you enforce your own rules.

I understand that people will be discouraged by the addition of new restrictions to their favorite rides. It’s unfortunate, but human error has consequences.

Some parks already have more restrictive rules than Universal, but those who don’t might eventually follow their lead. The amusement industry functions through networks and they can all be very reactionary. Pretty much all of the amusement parks in this country have eyes on this case and the corporate lawyers are chattering.

How much will really change going forward? Who knows. It all depends on each park’s tolerance for liability. Corporations will always rush to protect themselves from liability because it’s their job to stay in business.

We as people, however, should look out for each other because we care. I want everyone to be able to have the same care free escapism at their favorite parks, but I also want them to be safe.

 

[tommyhawkins]

Just want to make two points

Jenny Nicholson once threw a massive hissy fit on Twitter because she wasn't on the media list to some Universal ride opening media event. The animosity isn't a new thing.

People are assuming the changes to ride access are Universal, when the Directive is just as likely to come from the ride manufacturer with liability issues. Since the same changes have been made to at least one Mack ride with the same train in UK, we can deduce a risk assessment took place that identified a need for mitigation with that set of disabilities. We may see others quietly change policy before next spring. It's very sad for wheelchair users but hopefully it's contained to very specific rides

 

[UOR92]

Except the actual "safety issues" on most of these rides has not changed at all. In fact, even the particular circumstances surrounding Stardust Racers' safety hasn't been made any clearer, nor have they really changed since it first opened, they're just now realizing, "Hey, maybe our ride can kill people." Why? We don't know. They apparently haven't figured that part out yet, or they just aren't saying. Regardless, what does changing the safety protocol on other, completely unrelated rides solve? Or for that matter, changing protocols on Stardust Racers that may have little to do with the actual problem? Nothing, that's what. It's all reactionary nonsense to make it look like they're being proactive.


If they were actually stupid enough to start enforcing such a blatantly discriminatory restriction, I wouldn't be filing a complaint, I'd be filing a class action lawsuit. And since you've decided to be so condescending about it, I won't be sharing any winnings with you.



Why is that a problem? Because it's complete overkill that solves nothing in particular? Why are we pretending that altering operations elsewhere is somehow the magic bullet for fixing what happened on Stardust Racers, when it's so clearly not? Not to minimize the tragedy, but this is like chopping your hand off at the wrist because you burnt your finger... on your other hand. And just because Universal is a massive corporation that doesn't mean every business decision they make is a sound one (I can give you a whole list of very unsound decisions they've made over the years.) It's also not "standard practice."

Accomplishes nothing?

Nothing at all?

Might I propose to you that had a rule been imposed before this gentleman ever boarded this roller coaster, there would be a strong chance he’d still be alive.

So, please. Continue telling us nothing will be accomplished by this. I get your mad. I would be too if this directly affected me or a loved one. But not because a new rule had to be put in place that wasn’t there before. Someone’s dead. You should be cautious to remember that in the time you ponder this. It’s a dreadful accident, and unfortunately, they can have dreadful consequences. But I’d rather a loved one still be alive than risk their life on a 2 minute roller coaster. That’s just me, though.