Girl's feet severed on ride at Six Flags in Kentucky

[Dwarful]

In the grand scheme of things this was an accident. Things can happen, it could have been checked and rechecked and then that one time in between routine checks this happens. Six Flags St.Louis has had its share of deaths...the old skyway style ride, some family over crowded their gondola and started rocking it and the cable snapped and broke and they fell to their death, then they had a stand up rollercoaster, where a husband during the ride unbuckled his wife and she was run over by the coaster.
This was a tragic accident, I feel for the girl, her family and her friends who were with her.

 

[Tom Morrow]

A ride failure happened, that is the fault of the park. Period.
Thats not possible. The ride system prevents it completely. Even multiple failures directly in that area of the ride would not cause it.

And they probably didn't think that it was possible for this cable to snap, either, but it did.

 

[majortom1981]

Yes, once the ride is completed and given over to the park, it is the responsibility of the park to maintain and operate. Not the designer of the attraction.

I fail to see how heart attacks have ANYTHING to do with a ride failure.

Regardless of WHY the cable failed, it is the fault of the park. The ride was installed 12 years ago, meaning it was in working order after the designer installed it.

I don't see how I'm a hypocrite for blaming the responsible party for something.

There is a HUGE difference between someone dying from a heart attack and someone being injured by the ride itself. Disney has had its share of deaths and injuries, yes, but EXTREMELY few of them have been due to a ride failure.



You're correct, its possible they couldn't. Its possible they inspected it fully, and no mistakes were made.

However, that doesn't make it any less their fault. They are still responsible for a ride failure in their park. I don't see how you can think its any other way.

I am saying it could be intamins fault. The ride might not have been designed to protect the passengers of the ride incase of a cable snap.

Also we dont know if the cable snapped or something on the ride caused the cable to snap.

So you are saying that all the cam shafts snapping on the New Toyota Tacomas are the owners fault and not toyotas?

 

[Champion]

And they probably didn't think that it was possible for this cable to snap, either, but it did.

No no, its literally impossible. The track doesn't line up correctly for it to roll back that way.

I am saying it could be intamins fault. The ride might not have been designed to protect the passengers of the ride incase of a cable snap.

Also we dont know if the cable snapped or something on the ride caused the cable to snap.

Thats all well and fine. Maybe they didn't. Who was operating the ride when the accident occured? Not Intamin.
Since you're usually all these 'what-ifs'. What if the cable was supposed to be replaced after 10 years of operation? And they never replaced it?

And obviously something on the ride caused it to snap. Something, somewhere on the attraction made it happen. Maybe it just wore out. Its possible. But thats part of the ride. Unless, again, you're trying to say that something was done intentionally by the girl to cause this.

So you are saying that all the cam shafts snapping on the New Toyota Tacomas are the owners fault and not toyotas?

Thats not even remotely the same thing. The only way it would be the same situation is if the girl owned the ride.
Toyota caused that problem, they must fix it.
Six Flags caused this problem, they must fix it.

If you want to say that the cam shafts were made by some outside company, then it would be up to Toyota to go after that company for its losses. Not the victim. Toyota sold the car to its customers, same as Six Flags operates (sells) the ride to its guests. So if Intamin is somehow sort of responsible, thats up to Six Flags to take up with them, not the victim. She deals with the company that created the problem for her, which is Six Flags.

 

[Nicole220]

I read another article where people have said there was no blood. How the heck is there no blood when her feet get cut off?

 

[Champion]

I read another article where people have said there was no blood. How the heck is there no blood when her feet get cut off?

Well, if the cable was hot for some reason, it could have cauterized her wounds. If the cable was rubbing on something and then wore out, I guess it would be remotely possible.

But I'd expect that there was lots of blood.

 

[majortom1981]

No no, its literally impossible. The track doesn't line up correctly for it to roll back that way.



Thats all well and fine. Maybe they didn't. Who was operating the ride when the accident occured? Not Intamin.
Since you're usually all these 'what-ifs'. What if the cable was supposed to be replaced after 10 years of operation? And they never replaced it?

And obviously something on the ride caused it to snap. Something, somewhere on the attraction made it happen. Maybe it just wore out. Its possible. But thats part of the ride. Unless, again, you're trying to say that something was done intentionally by the girl to cause this.

Yeah what if the cable was replaced two days ago and the cable had a defect in it? Rides can be manufactured wrong just like cars.

You and everybody else are right away blaming SIX FLAGS when there is very little info about what happened.

For all we know it was windy and the wind caused the cable to rub against something and causing it to snap.

 

[PinMadness]

Ouch!

And I can't believe the didn't [sic] the quotes from the witnesses! "I seen..." Gah! That drives me crazy!

 

[sbkline]

Maybe it was Six Flags' fault and maybe it wasn't. But whoever made the comment about this being yet another reason for never visiting any Six Parks...that's simply ludicrous. It's about as dumb as vowing to never eat at Wendy's because a finger was allegedly found in the ketchup at one Wendy's restaraunt.

 

[Champion]

Yeah what if the cable was replaced two days ago and the cable had a defect in it? Rides can be manufactured wrong just like cars.

You and everybody else are right away blaming SIX FLAGS when there is very little info about what happened.

For all we know it was windy and the wind caused the cable to rub against something and causing it to snap.

You're missing it still. Even if it was windy, or it had a defect, or Jabba the Hutt came to the park and sat on it causing it to break. Six Flags is still the one responsible for what happened. They were operating the attraction at the time of the accident.

You can say all you want that I'm jumping to conclusions. I would come to the same conclusion no matter who was running the park. It happened under their watch, its their responsibility. You are the only one jumping to the unfair conclusion of "it might not be Six Flags' fault". Unless you are claiming some sort of foul play, there is no way it ISN'T Six Flags' fault.

At the BTMRR accident a few years ago, would you have jumped to say 'its not Disney's fault' for the death because they didn't design the ride? No. The guy died, it was Disney's fault, they didn't design the ride. This is the same. The girl didn't die, but its the same situation.
A ride created by someone who didn't operate the park, resulting in a ride failure that injured a park guest. The park is responsible.

 

[majortom1981]

You're missing it still. Even if it was windy, or it had a defect, or Jabba the Hutt and sat on it causing it to break. Six Flags is still the one responsible for what happened. They were operating the attraction at the time of the accident.

But your logic is flawed. You re saying if anything happens in a SIX FLAGS park then they are responsible. So that should go for disney also.

Tehnically somebody having a heat attack and dying on a ride can be Dsneys fault. Example if there was not enough signs warning of the danger of the ride.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

This bickering is pointless:

Intamin will be liable only if the defect was something that manifested itself in the design or if they manufactured the cable and it had a defect (very unlikely on both counts because the design would have had to have been present for 12 years without incident and they almost certainly buy their cable).

Six Flags will have liablity in other situations. I should, but don't, know KY's standard of care owed to the guest. If it is simple negligence, and they went through appropriate channels, they may have acted reasonably. More likely, though, they have an elevated standard, so Six Flags will be on the hook for not maintaining fully.

Until we know what exactly happened, be it a defect int he cable design, defect in the individual cable, defect in the ride system (something rubbing), or bad maintenance/operation, this argument is moot. THis one is really sad because it had no assumption of the risk on the part of the rider (unlike most accidents which involve rider decision or rider behavior).

Almost certainly, they will all be sued, and some will get out on summary judgment, and whoever is most likely liable will settle (which Six Flags likely will anyway since they have almost certainly some liability as operator).

 

[Nicole220]

But your logic is flawed. You re saying if anything happens in a SIX FLAGS park then they are responsible. So that should go for disney also.

Tehnically somebody having a heat attack and dying on a ride can be Dsneys fault. Example if there was not enough signs warning of the danger of the ride.

You cut out the part where he mentioned deaths at Disney are their fault as well.

Forgot to quote but Champion said:
"At the BTMRR accident a few years ago, would you have jumped to say 'its not Disney's fault' for the death because they didn't design the ride? No. The guy died, it was Disney's fault, they didn't design the ride. This is the same. The girl didn't die, but its the same situation.
A ride created by someone who didn't operate the park, resulting in a ride failure that injured a park guest. The park is responsible."

 

[Champion]

But your logic is flawed. You re saying if anything happens in a SIX FLAGS park then they are responsible. So that should go for disney also.

Tehnically somebody having a heat attack and dying on a ride can be Dsneys fault. Example if there was not enough signs warning of the danger of the ride.

No. I've said MULTIPLE times that they are responsible for A RIDE FAILURE in their parks. Like I said 5 posts ago, there actually have been very few ride failures resulting in serious injury/death compared to ridership. If this had happened at a Disney park, I would be saying the same thing. But a heart attack and this accident are not even close to being the same thing. If you can prove the heart attack was directly caused by the ride, then yes, the park is responsible. The closest situation to this, again, is the BTMRR accident.
Are you going to try to say this wasn't a ride failure?

 

[majortom1981]

You cut out the part where he mentioned deaths at Disney are their fault as well.

He mentioned that the heart attacks where not disneys fault. Wich if there were not enough signs talking about the dangers then it would be.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

But your logic is flawed. You re saying if anything happens in a SIX FLAGS park then they are responsible. So that should go for disney also.

Tehnically somebody having a heat attack and dying on a ride can be Dsneys fault. Example if there was not enough signs warning of the danger of the ride.

Actually not true. Six Flags, as any operator would be, is responsible for maintaining a safe environment. They guests are "licenses" or "invitees" (depending on your jurisdiction). That basically means they owe a duty of reasonable care to maintain their premises and warn of dangers, potentially known or hidden, for their guests. It is not strict liability for something happening in a park (although that does happen in some states on rides - but another discussion for another time). This is a direct case of something on the premises being a danger, and Six Flags owes that duty of care. It is a static fixture on their property, so they have control. A person having a heart attack on Disney property for completely unrelated reasons (it was just time - could have happened just as easily on I4), involves no duty from Disney because it was unrelated to their activity.

Having said that, Six Flags can argue that their "negligence" was not the cause if the cable was faulty or can be found liable and sue the cable manufacturer for the damages. Lots of potential avenues depending on the specific facts, but, bottom line, this is not like someone having a heart attack on Disney property.

 

[Sumshine 904]

Yeah what if the cable was replaced two days ago and the cable had a defect in it? Rides can be manufactured wrong just like cars.

You and everybody else are right away blaming SIX FLAGS when there is very little info about what happened.

For all we know it was windy and the wind caused the cable to rub against something and causing it to snap.

Who's job is it to inspect their rides? Who's job is it to ensure their rider's saftey? Who's job is it to make sure there are no malfunctions on their rides? Who owns their rides? Six Flags. Six Flags, Six Flags, SIX FLAGS! And because of this, it is their fault for what happened to the poor girl on their ride.

Your arguing is just starting to get annoying. You are entitled to your own opinion, and if someone dissagrees with you, just get on with your life and move on.

Besides, they don't call Champion Champion for nuttin.

But your logic is flawed. You re saying if anything happens in a SIX FLAGS park then they are responsible. So that should go for disney also.

Tehnically somebody having a heat attack and dying on a ride can be Dsneys fault. Example if there was not enough signs warning of the danger of the ride.

And that would be the rider's fault for not reading it if they knew they had a heart problem.

Lets take that boy on Rockin' Roller Coaster a year ago as an example. He had a heart defect and went on the ride anywho. Did he or his family know about it? No. So it's niether Disney nor the rider's fault for his death.

 

[majortom1981]

Actually not true. Six Flags, as any operator would be, is responsible for maintaining a safe environment. They guests are "licenses" or "invitees" (depending on your jurisdiction). That basically means they owe a duty of reasonable care to maintain their premises and warn of dangers, potentially known or hidden, for their guests. It is not strict liability for something happening in a park (although that does happen in some states on rides - but another discussion for another time). This is a direct case of something on the premises being a danger, and Six Flags owes that duty of care. It is a static fixture on their property, so they have control. A person having a heart attack on Disney property for completely unrelated reasons (it was just time - could have happened just as easily on I4), involves no duty from Disney because it was unrelated to their activity.

Having said that, Six Flags can argue that their "negligence" was not the cause if the cable was faulty or can be found liable and sue the cable manufacturer for the damages. Lots of potential avenues depending on the specific facts, but, bottom line, this is not like someone having a heart attack on Disney property.

Ok fine the thing i am trying to get at though is all this other company bashing that goes on on this site. Like the comments that stae how they never liked six flags.

I get bashed all the time on this site if i even mention the smallest bad thing about disney.

I have some big things to contribute in relation to the opening of the animal kingdom parks with relation to tv spots that were forgotten about and things like that but if This is how I am going to get treated here then I will take my stuff else where.

People should be focusing how disney can prevent things like this happening on their rides. Not how bad six flags is because a cable snapped (wich by the way has happend at other parks not just six flags parks)

 

[Champion]

He mentioned that the heart attacks where not disneys fault. Wich if there were not enough signs talking about the dangers then it would be.

Oh don't worry, there are enough signs giving health warnings to cover Disney.

Again, using a heart attack is NOT the same as what happened here. This is an event that can be directly linked to the accident. A heart attack cannot. Its just not the same thing.

 

[Champion]

Ok fine the thing i am trying to get at though is all this other company bashing that goes on on this site. Like the comments that stae how they never liked six flags.

So people can't dislike Six Flags? They have to enjoy it? Six Flags has some nice AMUSEMENT parks. But some people like THEME parks, which Six Flags doesn't have. So if people like being immersed in a theme, they won't like Six Flags.

I get bashed all the time on this site if i even mention the smallest bad thing about disney.

Its a Disney fansite. What do you expect? A lot of people don't like certain aspects of the company, but overall like it. Personally, I hate the Pixar deal. But that doesn't mean I won't defend TWDC on other things.

I have some big things to contribute in relation to the opening of the animal kingdom parks with relation to tv spots that were forgotten about and things like that but if This is how I am going to get treated here then I will take my stuff else where.

So then contribute instead of arguing pointless semantics?

People should be focusing how disney can prevent things like this happening on their rides. Not how bad six flags is because a cable snapped (wich by the way has happend at other parks not just six flags parks)

Maybe it did, but this story is about THIS incident, not THOSE incidents.