Lake Winnie requires chaperones under 21

Posted Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:20 AM | Contributed by Jeff

Three days after a massive crowd uproar shook Lake Winnepesaukah, park officials met with Catoosa County Sheriff Phil Summers to discuss ways of preventing future occurrences at the 78-year-old amusement park. Lake Winnepesaukah publicist Talley Rhodes said Tuesday that prior to meeting with the sheriff, the park decided to immediately institute a new guest policy requiring visitors under age 21 to be accompanied by a parent or adult chaperone.

Read more from The Catoosa County News.

Related parks

Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:24 AM
Under 18 I can understand, but under 21? I really dont think that is fair to penalize adults 18-20. I would be upset if I was 20 and told I needed one of my parents to escort me around the park.

------------------
Arena football has arrived in the Windy City. Go "Chicago Rush"

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:28 AM
I'm not sure that they're necessarily requiring an 'escort' in the park, but what they want to do is eliminate the drop-offs. If you're gonna drop off your kid, you gotta come inside as well. That way when the kid gets tossed out, you can drive him home.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 5:38 AM
Yeah, strange. If over 18, you'd legally be an adult chaperoned by an adult. Wonder if two buddies 18 years old could chaperone each other? :)
+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 6:01 AM
No, but an 18 year old with a 21 year old could.

------------------
Goccvp1

If I had something inspiring to say, you'd be reading it now.

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 6:44 AM
I could go along with the under 18 rule... but 21?

How old is the average ride op or worker at some of these parks? If under 21, I suppose they will have to and from the front gate by security at the beginning and ending of their shifts.

Again, a case of "zero tolerance" winning out over common sense.

------------------
Kind of hard to take a post as objective if a park or coaster name is part of the "user name"

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 7:49 AM
Lord Gonchar's avatar Ok, here's some of the logic of the 21 thing. I've seen a lot of people here wondering about the 21 years old thing when getting a hotel room. Kind of the same thing as this (I'm an adult at 18, why 21) - I know in most hotels it has to do with alcohol consumption. If someone under 21 is drinking and an incident occurs, the property can be held at least partially liable. I'm thinking the same caution applies here. Looks like they're taking every precaution to cover their butts.

------------------
www.coasterimage.com

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 8:28 AM
Oh, get over it. The owners want to prevent another "riot" from starting again, and this is how they crack down. Mos tof you will never visit the place anyway. I would kill to have over 21 malls, parks, etc. etc.

I think it's fine. Weed out the punks who start trouble.

------------------
Is that a Q-bot in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 8:55 AM
hahahaha this is sort of like that simpsons episode, where the kids get a curfew, then the senior sitizens place one on the adults hahahaha...

------------------

Colossus [1]
Nemesis: Inferno [6]

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 9:43 AM
Wow, my average park visit would be so much more enjoyable if all parks had an 18+ rule. I do think 21 is excessive-if you can go fight in Iraq, surely you can visit an amusement park.

------------------
SRM 2003-Look for the guy with my name on his chest

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 9:51 AM
Hmmmm... I had basically the same line about fighting in Iraq in my first post, but cut it.

You know... when you really come to think of it... The Iraqi "Elite" Republican Guard, or the crowd that I saw at a certain park park about two years ago... Not sure which group would put up more of a fight...

------------------
Kind of hard to take a post as objective if a park or coaster name is part of the "user name"

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 9:59 AM
OK First I have to say the over 21 is WAY overboard. I went there last year and did not have anyone over 21 so yes it affects me.

But the main thing is how is this going to be enforced? Surely they are not going to check the id of every single guest, especially since a lot of people are not going to be carrying wallets or purses into an amusement park.

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 10:02 AM
Does the park serve alcohol? If it does that could also have led to the 21 rule. If not I can't see it being above 18.

Personnally I think it's a great idea that would drastically cut down on the problems that we see at parks (line jumping, rude kids, abusive language). At least one park is now going make the PARENTS responsible for their kids, not the park staff.

edit:spelling*** This post was edited by Brian W 4/24/2003 2:03:38 PM ***

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 11:14 AM
Parents cannot be held liable for there kids if there 18+. Wonder if they thought of that.
“We are not a teen park. We are not a theme park. We are not a rock-and-roll park,”
Hmm sounds like a line out of a bad elvis movie.

------------------
Lets go its on!
Visit History of PKI! *** This post was edited by PKIEMPSOB 4/24/2003 3:22:34 PM ***

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 11:28 AM
Lord Gonchar's avatar

Does the park serve alcohol? If it does that could also have led to the 21 rule. If not I can't see it being above 18.

Yes, but a group of 18 & 19 year olds manages to sneak some alcohol into the park. (doesn't seem too difficult) - now they're drinking on park property and if an incident occurs, the park could be found at fault. Make them come with an adult and the park would still face problems but it'd be a lot easier to put the responsibilty on the "chaperone".

It's easy to whine and moan "unfair", but you're complaining in the wrong direction. Find the idiots who caused a problem in the first place.


At least one park is now going make the PARENTS responsible for their kids, not the park staff.

What a novel idea! It's a shame it took something like this to force a park to essentially say "We are not a babysitting service."

------------------
www.coasterimage.com

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 11:57 AM
I suppose its their right to do what they want, but like others I say 21 is a bit excessive. 18 probably would have been a more logical choice.

I wonder what effect this will have on their attendance. I would say that it will cut down on teen attendance. I bet they might get over this eventually if they find that it hurts their attendance.

And by the way, I think that hiring more security staff or giving the existing staff more extensive training might have been a more effective, though costly way to solve this problem.

------------------
The Trip: CP, SFWoA, PKI, KW, HW, IB, SFGAm, MiA and LeSourdsville too.
8 Days- 10 parks. May 2003

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 1:58 PM
The bottom line is that it is a private park and they can do what they damn well please. I applaud them for swift policy making.

------------------
The Empire will Strike Back....
"What do I know, I only work in an Amusement Park?"
"You are paying to get in. Period."

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 3:40 PM
Well their security is basically just regular people walking around with standard park uniforms on. I would improve that and then work on marketing the fac tthat the park is making itself safer.
+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 6:53 PM
I don't THINK that Lake Winnie serves alcohol of any kind, but if it does, it's either for concerts only, or they allow you to bring it in for concerts. I've never seen anyone in the park itself drinking.

------------------
Is that a Q-bot in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

+0
Thursday, April 24, 2003 7:05 PM
I would agree that the main focus here is to get out of the minor-sittong business.

No admission without a chaperone if you are under 21 is one way to enforce that. I for one applaud that idea.

Another way to go about it is to make it expesnsive financially to use the park as a minor-care service. Take Kennywood for example. Kennywood does not sell season tickets, furthermore they will not sell the cheap "General Admission Only" tickets to unchaperoned minors. What this results in, is that if a parent wanted to use Kennywood as a daycare, the weeks combined admission fees would be over $100. The parks pricing strategy makes it a great deal for the day visitor, but I must admitedly say, a lousy deal for the local. (And then we aren't even getting into the food and drink needs of the minor. but then I must recall that outside food is welcome at Kennywood.

It all boils down to the same ting, a few bad apples ruin it for everybody else. Thanks to a few bad people, high school students can not travel to the park during the summer. (21 seems to be about the junior year in college) You can thank these same kinds of people when parks institute entrance security, eliminate cheap discount tickets and general admission, and so forth.

<flame suit activated> I for one would not mind seeing "21 and over nights" at parks. My tolerance for minors has gotten quite minimal. Between the foreplay that goes on in the ride lines, to the disruptive behavior when groupsof them get together (vandalism, theft, and the occasional flight), the flagrant line jumping ("And you can't do aa thing about it cause my folks aren't here"), the gross disrespect of the no smoking in queue lines polixy. . Yes,, sign me up for 21-and-over night <flame suit off>.

------------------
----
David Bowers
Mayor, Coasterville

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...