Six Flags Great America posts signs prohibiting gum and candy on rides

Posted Tuesday, May 6, 2003 4:57 AM | Contributed by beast7369

Starting today, Six Flags Great America visitors will see signs throughout the amusement park prohibiting them from eating gum, candy and other foods while on rides. The new restrictions come two days after the death of an 11-year-old Gary, Ind. girl who choked on a piece of taffy while riding the Raging Bull roller-coaster. Officials at the Gurnee amusement park say signs had been in place at some rides with a more general warning forbidding "food and drinks."

Read more from The Daily Herald.

Related parks

Tuesday, May 6, 2003 5:09 AM
Hopefully it actually does something. I don't often find people reading signs.

------------------
SFNE Central v5- Online Six Flags New England Resource

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 5:16 AM
It probably wont, but its more or less a "cover our butt" type of thing. Its a smart move on the park.

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

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 5:24 AM
Yea, that's what I figured.

------------------
SFNE Central v5- Online Six Flags New England Resource

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 5:24 AM
Yea, that's what I figured.

------------------
SFNE Central v5- Online Six Flags New England Resource

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 7:49 AM
Its true though, saying no "Food and Drink", I picture somone on a coaster with a hamburger and a soda. I never would eat candy on a coaster, then again I am not 11 years old. I am really dissapointed about what had happened, and I can't imagine what the family is going through right now. I don't think the park is trying to cover its butt on this one, after all why would it help for them to place the signs up after a child dies? I think they honestly are looking for ways to prevent this from happening again.
+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 8:11 AM
it is just general sense...

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

Colossus [1]
Nemesis: Inferno [6]

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 9:04 AM
General or "common" sense isn't always that common, Nemesis... ;) I think a new word should be created for that (and "common" courtesy, too) :) :)

------------------
--George H
---Superman the ride...coming to a SF park near you soon...
Currency tracking experiment... http://www.wheresgeorge.com (Referring to The "George" on the $1 bill - Not Me)

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 9:24 AM
I suppose this means that SF will be changing the wording on all ride warning signs chainwide,after all most of the other parks don't mention anything about gum or candy eating while in line or on the ride.
+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 9:43 AM
And yet there's so many rides out there sponsored by food companies....
------------------
Brad Sherman
The Headless Horseman awaits thee in 2003!
Arrowed!
+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 10:51 AM
Thats true Patrick, they are finding a way to prevent it again but my point is that if they didnt update the signs, and god forbid this incident happened again, they would probably be held liable because they didnt take steps to reduce the chance of it happening again.

Its probably a combination of both.

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

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 11:35 AM
well i think that the General Public will see the signs and take them as they see the no smoking signs. I find it really annoying when some hick lights up a cigerette right in front of the little No smoking signs in line for raging bull. But this is a smart move by the park to cover their metaphorical @$$.

------------------
You can't fight in Here. This is the War room.
-Stanly Kubricks Dr. Strangelove Or how i learned how to stop worrying and love the bomb.

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 12:16 PM
Sorry, but no matter how many signs are posted, some people will just not see them, or like SFGAm Man points out, the reader will choose to ignore them. In this case, it's a "cover our butts" move for the future.

So now they are putting the burdon of "who has food and who doesn't" on the ride ops? How lame is that? Are they supposed to check everyone's pockets as well? The burdon should fall on the rider for this one. Ride ops are already responsible for more than enough.

------------------
SCREAM with me... in 2003!

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 2:00 PM
I also think this is a way to avoid liability in a lawsuit.What might be read more would be some type of insert with your season pass or pask pass with a paragraph reminding people not to eat ANYTHING while on ANY ride and with the families permission use this as an example.
+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 2:06 PM
Obviously it's to cover their butts but they really don't want to see it happen again. Nobody does. So yes it has to do with legal issues but it also is for everyones saftey which they really do care about, whether you like to believe it or not.

------------------
Don't Fight It, Ride It, RAGING BULL!!!!!!- Six Flags Great America

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 2:31 PM
Its not like the death was the parks fault. They already had "no food or drink" signs, how specific do you have to get?

------------------
Airtime from a pretzel?...Oh yea!

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 2:51 PM
How will the no gum policy be enforced? It seems to me that everyone chews gum at amusement parks. Are the ride ops. going to make people spit out there gum after they have already been seated? Just some thoughts.

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

-Bubba
http://community.webshots.com/user/cpbubba

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 3:12 PM
I really think it is obvious that no food or drink pertains to all items of food or candy. to just make it more specific i think is just a step SF is taking to cover thier butts. I know this is a tragedy its just one of those things you think really wouldnt happen on a ride, and I would never want to see it again.

But the girls family is sueing six flags for not having enough warnings. Yes they do state "no food or drinks", but also the common sense of going 75 mph with candy in your mouth is not a smart idea. The park is at no fault in this incident.

------------------
Your so "emo" you make happy meals cry.

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 3:57 PM
Where did you read that the family is filing a lawsuit against SF? Last time I heard, the family was asked if they would sue, and they stated that they wouldnt because they dont believe the park was at fault. They are a very religious family and believe that it was the girls time to go.

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

+0
Tuesday, May 6, 2003 5:21 PM
I heard it on Fox news, they said their attorny was the same man who is aiding the girl who was in the Cajun Cliffhanger accident.

------------------
Your so "emo" you make happy meals cry.

+0

You must be logged in to post

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