Weird Park Policies

We've all run across weird, stupid, or just plain bizarre park policies. My favorite was circa 2005 at Geauga Lake. As I was leaving the park there was a man arguing with security about not wearing a shirt. The man was trying to leave the park without a shirt on. Security stopped him and told him that he couldn't go through the gate until he put his shirt on, effectively telling him that he couldn't leave the park shirtless.

I have yet to understand the reasoning for this. Apparently it was OK for him to not wear a shirt in the park, OK for him to not wear a shirt outside the park, but something magic and awful happened if he tried to go through the exit gate without a shirt.

Anyone have any interesting experiences with weird policies?

At Castle Park yesterday, I found out they don't let single riders on the Scrambler. At SFMM and KBF (when they had one) single riders are allowed. Also, at Castle Park, single riders can't ride the Falling Star. When KBF had one, called the Granslammer, single riders were allowed. It makes no sense to me. I can't imagine what difference it would make.

I wouldn't necessarily call those poiices on the Scrambler and Falling Star weird. I believe those are recommendations from the ride manufacturer. Note that on the Scramber and Falling Star riders could easily turn 90 deg., put their legs on the seat and thus get out of the ride while in motion. Having two riders makes this much more difficult. This is the same type of thing Chance sent out on Wipeouts several years back. The inconsistancy might be due to the fact that the individual rides had seatbelts for each rider, making the double rider policy overkill.

This seems like the perfect time for Rideman to add his $.02 :)

King's Island circa '89-'90. Bunch of friends and I had just ridden the log ride and one female member of the group got drenched. She was wearing a white t-shirt...with nothing underneath. So, of course, she had her high beams on for the world to see.

Being the gentleman that I was (and not wanting other guests to get burned retinas) I offered my shirt. I was farily quickly approached by security and told I had to be wearing a shirt. I politely explained the situation, and was told: "well, the rest of the guys are going to be happy because you have to wear your shirt."

If a woman can walk around in a bikini all day a man should be allowed to walk shirtless. Now, I've got no problem requiring the shirt to be on in stores, restaurants or on attractions.

Said girl DID receive quite a bit of attention before the shirt finally dried.

"No drugs or nuclear weapons allowed inside"

The Manhattan Express (now stupidly renamed "The Roller Coaster") at New York-New York casino in Las Vegas. Quote, "Cell phones aren't allowed on the ride." Now, this doesn't mean you can't *use* them on the ride, or can't take pictures with them, or even that you can't have them clipped on your belt. They mean, quite literally, cell phones were not allowed to exist *anywhere* on the side.

Normally when I go to an amusement park, I wear cargo shorts or pants so I can easily stow such things safely away on a ride. In Vegas I wasn't, so I was in the process of stuffing it into a regular pants pocket when the ride attendant spied me and said I had to put it in a locker. I tried to give it to my friend who was wearing cargo pants (and had already put away his phone before we got up to the platform), and the attendant emphasized that phones weren't allowed on the ride *at all*.

So I went over to the wall with the lockers, only to find that they required two quarters, and there was no change machine to be found. He said I could get change from the cashier, who was at the base of the stairs. After she was done with the current customer, I finally got my change and safely put my phone in a comically large locker. Keep in mind that the ride ticket itself is already $14.

On the plus side, during all that screwing around, our train left, so we were first in line for the next one and sat up front. However I don't remember too much about the coaster since I spent most of the time being pissed off about the phone situation.

The Scramble and Falling Star policeis have more to do with the sliding from side to side factor. Someone slides too fast, hits thier side and breaks a rib, park gets sued.

That , and there have been cases of single riders being thrown out of these rides

Much like the indoor scrambler at Rye, if you can get your legs out from under the restraints, you're no longer "enclosed". We've had several discussions regarding the RoS@SFNE as to whether that might have been a similar situation. An abundance of lateral movement to the point where you're "sitting sideways" instead of having your feet *on the floor* means you're in danger of ejection.

Thanks for the responses about the Scramblers and Falling Stars, that's interesting. Preventing people from being ejected obviously makes sense, but it still seems strange to me that policies on identical rides would be so different.

Some states, and insurance underwriters require procedures

that go way beyond the manufacturers minimum requirements.

Premature ejection can be messy.

^ It's not the ejection that's messy, it's impact with a solid surface.

You'll have to excuse Ensign. He just flew in from California, and boy are his arms tired!

It's not so much the arms as it is the carpal tunnel . . . ;)

Don't forget to turn your lights on in the carpal tunnel.

rollergator said:Much like the indoor scrambler at Rye, if you can get your legs out from under the restraints, you're no longer "enclosed". We've had several discussions regarding the RoS@SFNE as to whether that might have been a similar situation. An abundance of lateral movement to the point where you're "sitting sideways" instead of having your feet *on the floor* means you're in danger of ejection.

No, they just left the bar a foot off his lap. Read all the reports.Nobody sitting in proper possition has been ejected from a scrambler. It's my understanding that most of them now have seat belts as the problem was people getting on their knees, trying to stand or even playing hand slap with passing cars.

A few decades ago, Conneaut had a park policy which stated: STANDING ON RIDES PROHIBITED. OFFENDERS WILL BE ESCORTED OFF THE PARK GROUNDS FOR REMAINDER OF THE DAY.

They had this posted when they had the HellHole (rotor) and a Round-Up...

Speaking of Conneaut, the web site has been updated:

http://conneautlakepark.com/

It certainly sounds like they're going to make a go of it this year. ::fingers crossed::

Charles Nungester said:

Nobody sitting in proper possition has been ejected from a scrambler. It's my understanding that most of them now have seat belts as the problem was people getting on their knees, trying to stand or even playing hand slap with passing cars.

If you're on your knees, then your feet are clearly not on the floor. That is improper riding position. Facing forward, feet on the floor, knees bent IS the safe way to ride almost any amusement ride, and will keep you safe since that's how restraints are intended to be used (obviously there are exceptions, like Stand-Ups). As far as the Mordarsky affair - I'm certain of a few things, guessing on a few others...