• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers

mergatroid

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
maxairmike said:
Did everyone just forget that Universal has a history of, in my opinion, overreacting to incidents? Cat in the Hat is severely neutered in the back half of the ride with netting on the cars and increased restrictions in reaction to incidents, and I’m pretty confident that’s part (if not most) of why Yoshi has a surprisingly higher height requirement. They stopped Dragons from dueling because of incidents after like 15yrs of perfectly safe operations. Added metal detectors for intense attractions that interact with guest areas/other attractions due to incidents on RockIt and Dragons when most parks still don’t feel that kind of restriction is necessary. I’m sure I’ve told the story before, but during either the 07 or 08 season at Cedar Point I was standing in the Magnum station when a phone came flying in and smashed against an interior column from Top Thrill across the midway. That didn’t have super strict restrictions similar to Universal until it reopened last year as TT2 IIRC.

Universal just tends to operationally overreact to situations like this, which is unfortunate for whichever group is impacted by a given decision. As to everything else, all I’ll say is that sometimes things are fine until they aren’t, mechanically or medically, without any advance warning or knowledge.
Click to expand...
So would you prefer they just did nothing after those incidents proved that stuff can go wrong that they'd not considered an issue before those incidents? I'm not sure the point you're making really?

It reads like you're saying Universal only change stuff after 'incidents' at their parks which you think is an overreaction personally, so don't read anything into them changing something following a death it's just an unnecessary step?

I think that they should be applauded for making changes following 'incidents' especially when you look at the potential of those 'incidents'. If metal detectors and nets are installed following coins and phones falling from riders pockets during rides on coasters that's the right thing to do? The alternative would be to say "Well in 15 years nobody has been injured by falling objects so let's allow objects to regularly fall until somebody is hit and injured by one and then at that stage we can consider taking precautions to make sure people don't carry things to fall and claim no knowledge that this could even happen". If an 'incident' happens and highlights that an 'incident' like that can and probably will happen again, then even if in that 'incident' nobody was seriously hurt you have to look and think could somebody have been hurt but not just for dumb luck? If the answer is yes, then morally I think they're obliged to make changes even if they make the ride slightly less exciting, visually attractive or accessible to certain folks.

I don't think other parks ignoring incidents should make that the accepted normal response and make parks like Disney and Universal reacting fairly swiftly to any identified threats to be seen as overreacting. If anything it probably more highlights other parks not reacting enough as in the example you give of Cedar Point wasn't it only sheer luck that the phone didn't strike a person in the face causing potential blindness or worse?
 
mergatroid

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
What I assumed @maxairmike was getting at is that Universal has a history of over-adjusting after incidents, making this conspiracy presented in this thread that they’re currently knowingly putting guests at serious risk and hoping for the best even more outlandish.
Click to expand...
Cheers though to be honest I'm more confused by the whole lack of any clear idea of what went on and why changes were made rather than there being a conspiracy. Thanks though.
 
T

TalkToEthan

Well-Known Member
If you know………..
IMG_0780.jpeg
 
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Several posters in this thread have alluded to it, most notably JT3000.
Click to expand...
I've said no such thing. You're more than welcome to go looking for a relevant quote, but I already know you won't find it. I've spent how many pages of this thread laying out the argument that they're being overzealous with these new rules? But now I suddenly think there's a conspiracy by Universal to knowingly put guests at risk? 🤔 Make it make sense.
 
Last edited:
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
I've said no such thing. You're more than welcome to go looking for a relevant quote, but I already know you won't find it. I've spent how many pages of this thread laying out the argument that they're being overzealous with these new rules? But now I suddenly think there's a conspiracy by Universal to knowingly put guests at risk? 🤔 Make it make sense.
Click to expand...

Your argument is not just that the new restrictions are overzealous, but that they are a scapegoat because, as you assume, Universal doesn't actually know the cause of the accident. If this were true, that they didn't know the cause of the accident but were operating the ride anyway, then they would be knowingly putting people at risk and hoping for the best.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Your argument is not just that the new restrictions are overzealous, but that they are a scapegoat because, as you assume, Universal doesn't actually know the cause of the accident. If this were true, that they didn't know the cause of the accident but were operating the ride anyway, then they would be knowingly putting people at risk and hoping for the best.
Click to expand...
That they don’t know the specific cause of death isn’t a conspiracy. They have no way of knowing. The conspiracy would be that they do know, because that would mean the medical examiner was secretly giving Universal information.
 
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Your argument is not just that the new restrictions are overzealous, but that they are a scapegoat because, as you assume, Universal doesn't actually know the cause of the accident. If this were true, that they didn't know the cause of the accident but were operating the ride anyway, then they would be knowingly putting people at risk and hoping for the best.
Click to expand...
Are you referring to my theoretical response to another poster's suggestion that they have no idea what happened and reopened the ride anyway? Because you would be disregarding a vital piece of context in that case.

Universal doesn't need to know or not know with absolute certainty what happened in order to be scapegoating. Whatever they know, they will not be willingly offering that knowledge to anyone. They're looking for positive (or at least neutral) PR with these moves, not clarity.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
Are you referring to my theoretical response to another poster's suggestion that they have no idea what happened and reopened the ride anyway? Because you would be disregarding a vital piece of context in that case.

Universal doesn't need to know or not know with absolute certainty what happened in order to be scapegoating. Whatever they know, they will not be willingly offering that knowledge to anyone. They're looking for positive (or at least neutral) PR with these moves, not clarity.
Click to expand...

You’re still insisting that they’re scapegoating. If they’re scapegoating then that would mean they are knowingly putting people in danger.
 
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
You’re still insisting that they’re scapegoating. If they’re scapegoating then that would mean they are knowingly putting people in danger.
Click to expand...
There's inherent danger in any ride. Disney is knowingly putting you in potential danger every time you ride "it's a small world." It doesn't have to be some cartoonish conspiracy. This is all irrelevant to whether or not Universal is scapegoating, which is the act of passing off blame to innocent parties. These companies will do anything to save their own hides, even before blame can be assigned at the conclusion of a proper and full investigation, a milestone we have yet to reach in this case. I feel like this last fact needs to be reiterated at least once every page of this thread, since we have so many resident Sherlocks ready to call it a day just because the ride is operating again, and even before it reopened.
 
T

TalkToEthan

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
Disney is knowingly putting you in potential danger every time you ride "it's a small world."
Click to expand...

Disney??
No, you’re mistaken——people willfully/knowingly position themselves in a state of risk be it skydiving, boating, rock climbing, even eating a plate of spaghetti or defying police on a routine traffic stop.

folk assume risk
 
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
TalkToEthan said:
Disney??
No, you’re mistaken——people willfully/knowingly position themselves in a state of risk be it skydiving, boating, rock climbing, even eating a plate of spaghetti or defying police on a routine traffic stop.

folk assume risk
Click to expand...
So you think theme parks have never been successfully sued and held liable for accidents? Because their guests "knowingly positioned themselves in a state of risk?" 🤔

Or skydiving schools, etc?
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom