It’s getting absolutely ridiculous to see the law destroy kids play. What’s next? Padding around tree trunks on the Moresby park trail because someone wasn’t looking and hit one? (And please spare me the fallacies talk!)
People have to take responsibility for their own actions.
And who takes responsibility for the action of providing dangerous equipment to kids?
How many kids would have to die before you’d want a particular kind of equipment removed?
How about this: we shouldn’t have life guards at pools, because kids need to take responsibility for their own actions. Sure, you may go years or decades without any deaths at an unsupervised swimming hole or swimming pool, but you know it’s dangerous, right?
That’s what’s happened with this type of equipment – there have been deaths elsewhere due to the design of the equipment.
You know, I come from a very small coastal community. When I was a kid, many people around us had boats. Yes, there were some people who lost their lives at sea (two of my neighbour’s kids did). But there were small boats on the water most days.
Enter all the regulations and the costs for registration and all the safety stuff and now, the only boats you see are lobster boats and only in May and June. That’s it!! People don’t care anymore about small boats. Almost no one has a small skiff as it costs money to take the courses, buy all the extra stuff, not to mention traveling to the place where the courses are given which is 45 minutes away.
I heard that there is even talks about the necessity to have a registered course for paddling a canoe or a kayak. Again, to push it to the extreme, will you need someone “qualified” with you the next time you rent a pedalboat?
I’m not against regulation and safety but if the trend continues, padded trees in a park are not that far away.
I’m more more worried about my kid playing in a sandbox that has been used by the local Ferrel cats, I’m more worried my kid stepping on glass or finding a needle, in the park. all of which I have seen in all our city parks including the skateboard park, who cleans that up?
As bigthumb said whats next closing down the baseball parks because someone might get hit in the head with a baseball, or someone falling down at the tennis court and twisting their ankle.
I get it that the equipment was old but there was nothing wrong with the 2 swing sets on that playground. They were just like all the other swings on all the other schoolyards so why did they have to go too??? No difference between the ones at Westview and the ones at LaxKeen.
A school with no playground whatsoever, nice. Oh, but they can have a gravel parking lot to run around in.
accidents happen, how many kids have to die a needless death due bicycles and helmets serous question, how many kids die in car accidents, should we remove all cars and all bicycles becouse someone may die in a accident?
I grew up playing on monkey bars so what is a faulty design? too high ? no grass under the bars to cushion the fall.
You put a kid in you car, or you hit a kid with your car, you are legally liable for it. That’s why you have insurance.
A kid dies on your playground set that is known for killing kids, then you’re also legally liable for it.
That’s why they’re removing the more dangerous ones.
Does your kid wear a seatbelt or sit in a car seat? Why? When you answer that question, you’ll be answering your question too – you try and mitigate risk as much as possible. If Kids must ride in cars, they should wear belts or sit in car seats. If kids must play on dangerous playground sets, they should do so on the safer ones.
I mean, what are the chances you’ll get into an accident in your car anyway? Why should your kid wear a seatbelt?
If kids must play on dangerous playground sets, they should do so on the safer ones.
MiG, do you hear yourself? Playground equipment=Public enemy # 1
What was specifically wrong with the Westview equipment? Couldn’t they remove the allegedly faulty part only?
How old were the kids who died from similar equipment? Were those kids supervised if they were of a young age?
If you allow me another anecdote:
At a water park in the Kootenays, my daugther and I slid down a very wide but fairly short (10-12 feet) waterslide. It was designed to have at least two people sliding side by side. We came down together and at the bottom of the slide, she turned sideways and her little arm got squeezed under my weight. We had to bring her to the hospital to check it but it was only soft tissue swelling so she was ok after a day or two.
I took responsibility for that. I didn’t blame the water park. I blamed myself for not being careful and maybe for misjudging my control on the slide. This was the 5th or 6th times we slid down and nothing went wrong before that. Maybe the water park put up some warning after, I don’t know but it was me who made the mistake. That’s what I mean by taking responsibility and be reasonable.
If a lawyer would have seen this, I could have probably make money from this and that’s the bottom line with this issue. Someone made a huge amount of money with similar playground equipment as the one in Westview and the possibility of a lawsuit scared the people in charge so they are removing it.
To echo happy/sad, playgrounds are going to have posted information about the necessity to wear nerf suits and helmets before kids can play on a play ground. Good parents don’t let their kids play without a three inch thick rubber armour.[/quote]
I know my kids are going to get hurt playing its a matter of growing up, some kids loose teeth, break a leg or arm. some don’t, and I’m prepared for that, I’m not going to protect my children from exploring and having fun with in reason.
Their going to skin their knee’s; their going to get bumps and bruises; their going to fall while riding a bicycle or skateboard.
I’m not going to stop my kids from exploring their potential; some kids are risk takers some kids are not, I’m for sure not going to be the parent who sends his kids ice skating with a pillow tied to their ass just to soften the blow to their bum…
As a parent we want to protect our children;that’s a given, but taking down equipment and not replacing is not the answer.
It’s not about public enemy #1. It’s about removing equipment that is unsafe.
Again, does your kid ride in your car without a seatbelt or car seat?
That’s the same reason you should get rid of equipment that can possibly kill. Why have people accepted that it makes sense to spend all kinds of money on car seats, when 30 years ago, kids sat in the front seat, or probably on their fathers’ lap, while he drove down the highway?
So, to use your logic, teens shouldn’t be allowed in vehicles in New Brunswick. In the past 12 months we had about 12 young people motor vehicle deaths in this small province. Clearly this equipment can possibly kill teens so it should be either removed or teens should be banned from being passengers.
It’s obvious that my kids are riding in cars with their seatbelts. But there are kids killed in cars even with their seatbelts on. So, again using your logic, cars can possibly kill kids so we should get rid of them too.
So what was unsafe about the playground equipment? The tires? The fort itself? The surrounding pilings? The slide? I’m really curious here.