Should the Federal Government monitor our ride safety?

With the relocation (and rename) of a Windseeker ride within the CF chain in 2014 (apparently due to the local California ride safety standards), should parks be able to move around rides if they don't meet the local oversight standards - to a location with less stringent government oversight? Or should there be a nationwide safety standard everyone has to conform to?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/22/us/texas-roller-coaster-death/index.html?iref=allsearch

At the very least, should there be mandated disclosure about why local shutdowns are activated to the public?

I know that 99.999% of cruise ships are registered outside of the United States because the oversight of our government in that market would make the entire business unprofitable due to prevailing U.S. laws.

This isn't going to go well.

darkrider68 said:
This isn't going to go well.

+++ 1

No way the federal government should get involved.

I will give them a pass when they can run Washington D.C. right. LOL

The reason to have state governments is that some things are best done locally. I think that is true with respect to regulation of amusement park rides.

I don't have an issue with a Windseeker being moved from one state to another because of regulatory issues. There are very few regulations that the fine folks of California don't like. That is their choice and no one is stopping them. But they shouldn't get to dictate to the rest of the country.

And in the case of the Windseekers, it may well be the case that if we have federal regulation of amusement park rides, the ladder issues in California wouldn't be an issue because the federal rules wouldn't require what Califnornia requires.

What disclosures should be required here? That the rides have stranded guests for periods of time at various parks and that no one has been injured on one yet? That California requires access ladders that other states do not? How long is the list of what California requires but other states do not?

Some states actually outsource inspections, and six do nothing at all. Some have "rider" laws covering behavior, and actually expect the patron to evaluate the safety - which is kind of impractical for children and teens.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/ConsumerNews/summer-safety-carnival-rides/story?id=11126429

Worlds of Fun will be getting SteelHawk (formerly KBF's Windseeker) in 2014. Their website bills it as a "Major New Ride for 2014" - which is kind of misleading for anyone not aware of it's past - of which, nothing is noted.

If it's actually up to me to determine the safety, them the issues with STR and Skyhawk need to be documented to the public before my trust in them is restored.

If you look at anything that isn't regulated by the feds, you will see different states having differing degrees and types of regulations. With some states doing little if anything. I don't think any time you see those differences, there should be federal regulations.

As for Skyhawk and STR, you can ask Cedar Point for full, public disclosure. If they do not provide it (which I suspect they won't), you then have a decsion to make in terms of whether you ride those rides. If you decide not to ride you will join a lot of other people who don't ride certain rides or amusement parks rides in general because they do not feel they are safe.

And you found a press release/marketing statement that is kind of misleading? Ah my, alert the media. We have a first. LOL

I never got to ride it but i think most people know more about the o-ring failure on the space shuttle than they do about any amusement ride failure that their kids might have already ridden.

If you look at the regulation the government has enacted on airplane and car/truck safety, it has dramatically improved the product as a result.

And, although it is a dying art, truth in advertising does much more for brand loyalty than hype does.

What is the basis for federal regulation? What says that the current system (with state regulation) isn't working? And what are the likely benefits of federal regulation?

SteveH said:
If you look at the regulation the government has enacted on airplane and car/truck safety, it has dramatically improved the product as a result.

Comparing amusement parks (purely entertainment) with automobiles (mostly for non-trivial transportation) is not really valid.

SteveH said:
Worlds of Fun will be getting SteelHawk (formerly KBF's Windseeker) in 2014. Their website bills it as a "Major New Ride for 2014" - which is kind of misleading for anyone not aware of it's past - of which, nothing is noted.

It is a major new ride for World's of Fun, not misleading at all. The fact that it came from another park is not relevant to installing and marketing the ride.

One thing this is overlooked with these Windseeker rides is that nothing broke which has a potential of hurting riders. They just stopped moving, the reason being according to the parks is that the safety system engaged. That does NOT make for a dangerous ride, it is arguably just the opposite.

Putting faith in the federal government to regulate amusement rides in the name of safety is misplaced trust in a bloated, wasteful organization that has not proven it can't be corrupted by special interest groups or run a program competently. If you think aviation safety has improved because of government regulation, do some digging in the the FAA. Aviation safety has improved largely in spite of the FAA, which is understaffed and underfunded, while being more biased to help companies like Boeing instead of the flying public.

I have zero faith in the federal government doing anything but harm to the amusement industry. An industry which is extremely safety conscious and has so few accidents that more regulation is a solution that doesn't have a problem.

The failure of the "O" rings cost how many lives?

How many people have died on Sky Hawk, Maxx Air & all of the Windseekers combined?

BTW, Go Bucks, no airline has ever provided "full, public disclosure" for any mechanical delay I've experienced. What decision should I make about air travel?

I read that article when it was first out and I say leave it at the state level. If a state is sorely lacking in regulations then the people of that state should get involved to create them. I haven't been to many parks outside of Ohio so I don't really have much to compare to but I look at our rides at CP and remember back to Geauga Lake and I think overall we've managed to keep ourselves pretty safe without getting the feds involved.

I don't understand... are you saying that California's big-brother, oversized, over-regulating government isn't enough, and we need the feds to add in another layer of regulation, and that only then, things will go more smoothly? ;)

This is also the same Federal Government that way back when took over a Adult Entertainment Pleasure business and it went broke.

+1 on Pete's previous post. Still laughing.

No. It is not good for business for parks to skimp on safety and injure/kill people. For that reason, they don't skimp on safety. The industry regulates itself quite nicely like most markets do when they are actually free from intervention from outside manipulation. Maybe if there were a huge increase in injuries and deaths and negligence of the parks was to blame, there could be a discussion about this, but I'd probably still be against it because the Feds are incompetent at almost everything they do.

I will spare you my opinion on the other things the Federal government has no business being involved in. :)