Tragedy at Ohio state fair, 1 dead, 5 critical on fire ball ride, 26 July 2017

[Spellbound]

I would also like to know more about who was operating this ride. according to the rules/laws for Ohio amusement rides, an operator only has to be 16 years old. Was this operator alone, what age, how much previous experience, etc. When lives can be at risk, I would much prefer the operator to be knowledgeable and experienced.

''Rules/Laws for Ohio rides: http://www.agri.ohio.gov/divs/Rides/docs/Revised Ridebook.pdf

 

[stormshine]

It would be interesting to know why Tyler and his girlfriend came out of their seats when their car became detached from the arm and why the other two riders didn't. That is an entirely separate issue to me than the arm separating from the ride.

Not really separate. If the car hit something as it was breaking (it appears it hit the floor on the way up) that could have easily bent the beam holding the restraints. It's not going to be designed to take that kind of load.

 

[osu]

Documents: Company that owned Fire Ball is insured for up to $5 million

COLUMBUS (WCMH) — Insurance records show that the company that owns Fire Ball, a ride that malfunctioned at the Ohio State Fair, is insured for up to $5 million in case of injury.

The ride, owned by Amusements of America, malfunctioned Wednesday. One person, 18-year-old Tyler Jarrell, was killed. His family says they plan to file a wrongful death lawsuit.
~snip
http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/30/documents-company-that-owned-fire-ball-is-insured-for-up-to-5-million/

 

[bainalive]

who cares, you ride at your own risk,

anybody with half a brain would know mobile rides are not safe

 

[bainalive]

I would also like to know more about who was operating this ride. according to the rules/laws for Ohio amusement rides, an operator only has to be 16 years old. Was this operator alone, what age, how much previous experience, etc. When lives can be at risk, I would much prefer the operator to be knowledgeable and experienced.

''Rules/Laws for Ohio rides: http://www.agri.ohio.gov/divs/Rides/docs/Revised Ridebook.pdf

they don't need any qualifications whatsoever, no training, no licensing, only need to be 16 years of age, that is why you should ride at your own risk

 

[flourish]

who cares, you ride at your own risk,

anybody with half a brain would know mobile rides are not safe

Clearly many people do care...

So your solution is... No solution? Victim blaming...

 

[bainalive]

Clearly many people do care...

So your solution is... No solution? Victim blaming...

my solution is to not ride a mobile ride like that, if you do it, you do it at your own risk,

 

[flourish]

my solution is to not ride a mobile ride like that, if you do it, you do it at your own risk,

Are you opposed to regulations and additional safety features?

 

[bainalive]

Are you opposed to regulations and additional safety features?

absolutely not, but if those regulations and safety features are not there then your riding at your own risk, just like this time

 

[Tssiemer]

who cares, you ride at your own risk,

anybody with half a brain would know mobile rides are not safe

Is your name Joe?? I literally just had this conversation and that was his response.

Until I sign a document that says I'm waiving liability that ride and operator are responsible to keep me safe!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tssiemer]

absolutely not, but if those regulations and safety features are not there then your riding at your own risk, just like this time

But they are there!! Otherwise there wouldn't be inspectors and agencies and we could ride a rollercoaster that Joe Dirt built in his backyard!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bainalive]

Is your name Joe?? I literally just had this conversation and that was his response.

Until I sign a document that says I'm waiving liability that ride and operator are responsible to keep me safe!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are signing that document when you purchase your ticket or enter the park, read the fine print

 

[Spellbound]

How safe is your ride?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/07/29/fair-rides-safety/521469001/
Ohio has eight inspectors to check amusement rides annually and do spot checks — on-site inspections of how rides are set up and how operators are working the rides —around the state. Those inspectors issued more than 3,700 annual permits in 2015, the most recent year for which numbers are available."When it comes to Ohio, do the math and look at how many hours do they get to do real inspections," Hanlon said.

 

[Spellbound]

The state inspects twice the number of rides and attractions today as it did 15 years ago, but the number of inspectors doing the job has stayed about the same.


http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2017/07/ohio_has_more_amusement_rides.html

The family of 18-year-old Tyler Jarrell, who died in Wednesday's incident, plans to hire an independent investigator to determine what happened and file a wrongful death lawsuit.

STATE INSPECTION REPORT ON THIS FIREBALL RIDE:
Mobile readers click here to see the state inspection report and related documents.
or: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3902821/FireballInspectionDocuments.pdf

 

[Spellbound]

Inspection history of Fireball ride: http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/26/ride-inspections-at-the-ohio-state-fair/

Video shows inspection of Fireball ride at 2012 Ohio State Fair

[video]http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/26/ride-inspections-at-the-ohio-state-fair/[/video]

 

[bainalive]

Inspection history of Fireball ride: http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/26/ride-inspections-at-the-ohio-state-fair/

Video shows inspection of Fireball ride at 2012 Ohio State Fair

[video]http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/26/ride-inspections-at-the-ohio-state-fair/[/video]

a ride could pass inspection THAT DAY, and still have a malfunction on that SAME DAY!

nothing is fool proof, and inspectors are humans and make mistakes, <modsnip>

 

[Spellbound]

[h=3]http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/amusement-park-accidents-32457-2.html

Defenses to Amusement Park Lawsuits[/h]Assumption of the risk. If someone knows that participating in an act or event is inherently dangerous, but chooses to participate anyway, that person is said to have "assumed the risk" associated with that activity. When you visit an amusement park, you realize there are certain risks inherent in riding on the rides and, when you go on those rides, you are assuming those risks.
The legal effect of assumption of the risk depends on the state. In some states, if the park can show that you assumed the risks of a certain ride, the park will not be liable for your injuries. In other states, whether you assumed the risk or not may affect the amount of money you receive should you prevail in a lawsuit. In still other states, assumption of the risk has no affect at all -- the amusement park cannot use it as a defense.
Assumption of the risk is not a blanket defense that can be employed against anyone who knowingly goes on an amusement park ride. Patrons must be aware of the risks involved in order to assume them. So, for example, if a rider doesn't know about a loose screw in a roller coaster, that the ride operator received little or no training, or that the park never conducts safety inspections, the rider cannot have assumed the risks associated with those details.


Disclaimers on amusement park tickets. The amusement park may argue that the disclaimer on the amusement park ticket (the legal language saying you absolve the park of all liability when you enter the park) means you cannot bring a lawsuit against it.
These defenses rarely hold water in court. Judges know that most patrons don't read the disclaimer and usually rule that the disclaimers are so vague and all-inclusive that they are patently unreasonable. In addition, it's questionable whether a child or teenager that is legally unable to enter into a contract can be held to what the amusement park is attempting to do (absolve itself of legal liability) via the disclaimer.

 

[bainalive]

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/amusement-park-accidents-32457-2.html

Defenses to Amusement Park Lawsuits

Assumption of the risk. If someone knows that participating in an act or event is inherently dangerous, but chooses to participate anyway, that person is said to have "assumed the risk" associated with that activity. When you visit an amusement park, you realize there are certain risks inherent in riding on the rides and, when you go on those rides, you are assuming those risks.
The legal effect of assumption of the risk depends on the state. In some states, if the park can show that you assumed the risks of a certain ride, the park will not be liable for your injuries. In other states, whether you assumed the risk or not may affect the amount of money you receive should you prevail in a lawsuit. In still other states, assumption of the risk has no affect at all -- the amusement park cannot use it as a defense.
Assumption of the risk is not a blanket defense that can be employed against anyone who knowingly goes on an amusement park ride. Patrons must be aware of the risks involved in order to assume them. So, for example, if a rider doesn't know about a loose screw in a roller coaster, that the ride operator received little or no training, or that the park never conducts safety inspections, the rider cannot have assumed the risks associated with those details.


Disclaimers on amusement park tickets. The amusement park may argue that the disclaimer on the amusement park ticket (the legal language saying you absolve the park of all liability when you enter the park) means you cannot bring a lawsuit against it.
These defenses rarely hold water in court. Judges know that most patrons don't read the disclaimer and usually rule that the disclaimers are so vague and all-inclusive that they are patently unreasonable. In addition, it's questionable whether a child or teenager that is legally unable to enter into a contract can be held to what the amusement park is attempting to do (absolve itself of legal liability) via the disclaimer.

if all of this was true and held up in court amusement parks would no longer exsist, no owner would ever take the risk

 

[Spellbound]

if all of this was true and held up in court amusement parks would no longer exsist, no owner would ever take the risk

how so? there really are few tragic accidents (that we are aware of, at least). People assume "it won't happen to me/here". Human nature for many is to take risks. But if they know a part is defective, they are less likely to take the ride.

We can hope for better inspections or better ways to detect faults. Being made aware of these horrific accidents will likely lead to some who refuse to take certain rides. But others will continue, and the rides will go on. And it would not be the end of the world if these rides no longer existed .... people would find other thrill-seeking adventures to replace them. So, it is important IMO to make them as safe as we possibly can, and to highlight any defects in the system that lets a defect slip past.

 

[osu]

COLUMBUS (WCMH) — Amusements of America said a ride malfunction that caused the death of a teenager and injured several others on Wednesday was an issue with the specific ride.

Amusements of America is the company that owns, operates, and provides the rides at the Ohio State Fair, including the Fire Ball ride that malfunctioned. The company has said its staff inspected the ride before it opened AOA issued a statement Sunday afternoon, as most rides re-opened at the Fair:

Full statement from Amusements of America as rides re-open at the Ohio State Fair:

"The decision to shut down similar rides around the world and reopen the Ohio midway indicates that this is an issue with a specific ride and not the ride operator or inspectors. There is no evidence that operator error played a role in the accident. We continue to keep those affected by this tragic accident in our prayers and work cooperatively with the ongoing investigation."

http://nbc4i.com/2017/07/30/amuseme...id-not-play-role-in-ohio-state-fair-accident/