WAG Trampoline Parks

[Deleted member D3987]

more info for your viewing . this is from yesterday. please take the time to read the "comments" to this article.

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/jum...cle_0075b5ea-3284-5188-8ae1-9114711215c1.html

 

[AmandaLynn]

“ It’s just flat-out dangerous for anybody to be on a trampoline.”

And

“the message is: There is no safe way to put a kid on a trampoline.”

Gotta love uninformed generalizations.

 

[coachmolly]

This reminded me of a kid I knew who broke his back at a trampoline park in Arizona a few years ago. He's an incredibly fit/active/athletic kid who was 21 at the time of the accident, so likley one of the bigger ones at the park. He was paralyzed from the waist down and told he would never walk again, but has made a miraculous recovery and is back to not only walking but to biking and even skiing/snowboarding.
It's just amazing that with an incident like that happening so recently and in such close proximity to the place mentioned in this article that they even opened, or thought this type of business would be a good idea. And did anyone else happen to notice that all of the injuries listed in that article happened since this place opened in August?! That's a lot of injuries for 2 months!

 

[AmandaLynn]

Yep. We have both a trampoline park and a "bounce park" type thing (inflatables) that are popular birthday party destinations. They make me VERY uneasy and I cringe when my team kids mention parties at them.

 

[iwannacoach]

Personal responsibility is the bottom line, said Get Air manager...........

I'd say the subject of personal responsibility should be completely out of bounds. The trampoline park, were it personally responsible, would shut it's doors and not reopen them until there is a proven and effective means of conducting the business with a reasonable degree of assured safety, and a strict limit on skills.

Sadly, there is no way to accomplish that level of safety because there's on feature of trampoline use that cannot be eliminated..... they all adhere to the principle that what goes up, must come down. Not only that, it comes down with force equal to what propelled them, the strength and power of their legs multiplied by gravity. I'm not sure, but I think a jump that takes one second from the moment the tramp bed start to rise to the point of returning to the trampoline creates one additional G force. So ask yourself this.......

What prospects would you hold for a person in a slightly bent necked head stand being forced into the bed of a trampoline by a two or three hundred pound object. Another way to look at it is the impact is just the same as being stomped on by a person who weighs twice as much as you.

I know this is only my opinion, so consider it as you will. I view trampoline use in the context described in the article to be in the same category of play a spin the bottle version of russian roulette. The spin of the bottle determines which body part is put up as the ante and the hammer snapping down on the cylinder provides a real possibility of injury or death. I don;t care how many chambers the gun has because even if it had 499 empty chambers and 1 with a live round it can still end terribly.

So ask yourself, ala Clint Eastwood ....... Are you feeling lucky? .... Well are ya?

 

[profmom]

Here is a state law that I think is an excellent idea:

"Every covenant, agreement or understanding in or in connection with, or collateral to, any contract, membership application, ticket of admission or similar writing, entered into between the owner or operator of any pool, gymnasium, place of amusement or recreation, or similar establishment and the user of such facilities, pursuant to which such owner or operator receives a fee or other compensation for the use of such facilities, which exempts the said owner or operator from liability for damages caused by or resulting from the negligence of the owner, operator or person in charge of such establishment, or their agents, servants or employees, shall be deemed to be void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable." [emphasis mine]

The law would not void waivers signed with regard to instruction. It applies only to those purporting to exempt businesses from liability for recreational injuries based on signed or implied waivers. Anybody know any legislators in Arizona?