I'm wondering what a lot of you weenies would do with a unicycle. Talk about danger...

Hahahaha, my sister knows how to juggle and unicycle at the same time.

Nice... for some reason that is hot.

That's too bad. They should stick to things that are actually a danger, like kite tubes.

Their charter is not to eliminate danger. Fortunately.

It is to restrict the sales of things that are "unreasonably" dangerous...a term that doesn't have a precice meaning. But when a bureaucrat needs to justify his existance, definitions suddenly becomes*very* stretchy.

That string there...it is unreasonably dangerous. You could choke on it, or trip over it. There's no warnings on the packaging at all...a death trap for the unwary consumer.


Edit to repair typo: "string" for "sting"

I think Bin Laden is using trial lawyers to lower America's IQ.

I can't figure out wtf their charter is really... there was no product at all in this instance.

All of you have a valid point, but honestly, it's not like swallowing 5 tons of molten steel and then taking a dip in the smelter. I'm not saying it's the kitemaker's fault this guy got hurt, but it's the kind of thing that could happen to anyone who isn't careful. This isn't a case of idiocy, it's a case of carelessness.

A lot of those advocating this crap sound a lot like Tipper Gore's music rant from the 80's... same lunacy.

Explicit Lyrics
 

I must say that, as a young male in the 80s, I was irrevocably damaged by the pernicious lyrics of rock music. It colored my perception of the world to the point where I acted out every death metal command I heard. Me and my like-minded friends burnt down houses, murdered, raped, and pillaged entire communities, and brought a hail of death and destruction upon all people who got in our way. That is the power of music and lyrics.

No you didn't. :lol:

MaggieL,

Tell me seriously You work for SportStuff huh?

Dave

No. I've been on The Cellar since the mid-1990s... so far you've been here a week and have posted twice.

Will you be back in another week to check on whether you got any bites here?
Which law firm are you shilling for again? You can tell us...

They told you if you sprinkled in some mispellings the astroturfing would look realistic, I see.

I read about that... are you still a preacher? :p

Kite Tube Banned by Corps of Engineers District
 

For all that have posted in opposition to the initial thread... Do you think there is any reason why the Army Corps of Engineers has banned these tubes on their lakes in Missouri and Arkansas? Kind of goes back to Daves initial thread eh?

Probably because they AREN'T safe. None of us said they WERE, as far as I know.

Is this just the Kansas City District banning these? I would think that the Corps would make it nationwide, rather than just one district.

I think we've all agreed that the things are dangerous, if not stupid. However, we have some disagreement over whether or not people should be allowed to either do stupid things or sue someone because they've done something stupid.

I'm just surprised the Kite Tube threads generated so much response. Who woulda thunk?

Me. Two types of people, those who believe they are better than others and should be allowed to force their opinions on them and those who believe in freedom.
Issues that touch on the difference between those groups always generate lively discussions.
Same as/for anti-anything, prayer in school and over regulation of any kind.

People have always been able to pray in schools. It's when the teachers or principal recites the prayer aloud where they begin to "force their opinion." I don't know if you would agree or disagree.

I'm a libertarian on some issues, like the freedom to do to yourself what you want (smoke weed, stick a screwdriver in your ear, go to church), but I also think we need to consider the impact of our actions on others and the environment. To be honest, I dislike the motorboats more than the guy breaking his neck with the tube.

"Prayer in school" was a title, I was not trying to be specific.
I am a Libertarian as well... protecting the environment does not contradict that. I grew-up skiing, but also like to canoe, just not on lakes.

Liberty
 

I think libertarianism can run into conflicts with environmentalism when it comes to "property rights" arguments. Like any ism, if it's taken too far it can be damaging.

There are a lot of neo-Randian libertarians around these days; they scare me.

I always had a problem with Ski Resorts; then I went skiing for the first time and had a blast! Mt. Okemo, in Vermont. Man that was fun. I suppose there's no good snow skiing in FL.

Water skiing is what I did... lol.
Thing is, as a libertarian, as long as what you are doing on your property ONLY affects you property, ever, I'm ok with not regulating it... outside of that, we need guidelines.

Welcome to the Cellar, champs.:D
The Corps banned them because stupid people will hurt themselves, and maybe others, causing the corps all kinds of headaches they don't want.

Hand grenades are banned too.....for the same reason. Yet thousands of people handle hand grenades every week without hurting themselves. And if they do hurt themselves it's not the manufacturer's fault, but Dave would probably sue anyway.

I think there's a little difference between the Wego and a hand grenade. It's much easier to hurt someone *else* with a grenade; with the Wego you're only hurting yourself.

Personally, I'd been debating getting one (I've already had the Manta for a while) and just recently ordered it while I still can :-)

Welcome to the Cellar velocityboy, :D

So, you're getting one to get in on the class action cash. Just kidding.

Yeah there are lots of differences between these things and hand grenades, but the fact remains they are not inherently dangerous. If you use some brains you probably won't get hurt, but there's no guarantees.

Thanks!

There are no guarantees in life. Personally, I like extreme sports (I ride fast motorcycles, too); all you can do is minimize the risk by being as safe as you can. I'm a firm believer that the government's job isn't to protect me from myself - the Declaration of Independence doesn't say "pursuit of happiness, as long as it's not too risky."

I view it as regret minimization. Yeah, I *might* get hurt and regret it. But I *know* I'll be cranky and regret it a lot if I let myself get too old without doing the things that really appeal to me.

And, BTW, I would never sue the manufacturer. With freedom comes personal responsibility.

Fark is all over this, this morning, and somebody had a vid of an accident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H0k9Uvt2os

You can watch any amount of it to see what it's like to fly in this thing, and then the last ten seconds to see what it's like to wipe out.

By the audio of "floor it" and "gun it" one may presume that the manufacturer's instructions were not followed.

Was there any indication of the aftermath (injuries?)?

Clearly, the speeds necessary to get the thing flying, rather than planing, are too high to be safe, considering the virtually zero level of stability. It isn't so bad if the thing rotates left or right if the water is a foot beneath the edge, but if the water is 15 feet beneath the edge, it is going ass over teakettle, and someone is gonna get squished.

Having seen this video, I am starting to at least appreciate a bit more the point of view that the nature of the advertising (showing people zooming through the air at impressive heights) of this product is contributory to its eventual misuse. Dude was fine when he was only coming a couple feet off the water.

He said he got a concussion and a bruised lung, and coughed blood for a week. Or something like that.

You know what I'd do if I were going to get sued for my obscure, dangerous-as-all-hell sporting equipment?

I'd deluge the internet with information about them (come on, how many brand-new users have to start threads about these before you get suspicious that something's up?), and get people to have endless debates over whether anyone could know how dangerous they are. Because then 9 months from now, when the case finally goes to court, it has become "common knowledge" how dangerous they are, and the people who were injured could reasonably be expected to know that and therefore have no case. [/cynic]

Damn, almost 12k tubing videos on there. Mostly regular tubing but more Kite Tubes than just the first page. :eek6:

I guess a lot of people here want off-road cycles banned, parasails, ultralights, parshutes... pretty much anything fun?

Hell, yeah! Because that'll make the world a safe place for kids to grow up in.

Oh, wait...

That's already true though. Look at the instructions.

I got injured minus the kite tubes, so my conculsion is that you can get hurt no matter what you're doing...if you're not doing it safely, or just being plain stupid while you're doing it. I don't think people should be able to sue due to their self induced injuries. I wouldn't be able to sue O'brien because I got a concussion while using their super screamer tubes, and I doubt I would be able to sue Sea Doo because I crashed a sea doo at 55mph and got whiplash, bruised bones, and a dislocated knee-cap. Or, would I?

That's the way you think it should be. But the reality is it just takes one judge or juror who views it as glatt does, and the instructions are irrelevant. But by saturating people with information about it, you are increasing the chances that your jury pool will have all heard about the dangers of these things before. The entire legal system is based on this nebulous concept of what a "reasonable person" should expect. A reasonable person knows that a car can be deadly because the information is out there. Once everyone has heard of these things, the defendants' case is much stronger.

Or less strong... just like Kinky... people know Sea Doos go fast, why doesn't everyone who gets hurt on them get labeled as a victim? Makes no sense.
It says to be careful in the instructions, that you could get injured... this is just sad. "gee I was being towed behind a boat, up in the air, fell off and got hurt... I'm so confused by that"... yeah, right. Just trying to cash in.
People who don't take accountability for their actions confuse me.

I get injured trying to get things out of blister packaging. Anyone know a good lawyer?

I don't have a link handy, but I think that may already have happened.

Just because a judge or juror violates their oath and ignores evidence because a big faceless company will cough up the money doesn't mean the evidence isn't there, it just means the process has been corrupted when we arrive at the point where the "reasonable man" standard doesn't include reading prominent warnings directing you to the instructions.

We do still have a long way to go on tort reform--until there's some serious *cost* to spin the judge/juror wheel-of-fortune. By the way it may only take one boneheaded judge, but it takes more than one juror in a civil action.

I just received my Wego in the mail today. The text warning that it can be dangerous or fatal if used improperly can be found:

- on the outside of the box
- on the printed owners manual
- on the instruction DVD
- on the tube itself

The instruction DVD and the printed manual go into great detail telling you what *not* to do.

In addition, the outside of the box contains what is essentially a EULA saying that by assembling the tube, you agree that it is dangerous and that you or your family will not hold the manufacturer responsible.

The only defense I can see that you didn't know this thing could hurt you would be if you were illiterate and had an I.Q. of 12.

And I agree with you on tort reform. It's way too easy to sue in this country, and the settlements are huge, which gives mega incentive for frivolous lawsuits. I've heard lawyers refer to this as "shake the tree and see what falls out."

We bought a Wego Kite Tube. We watched the video & read the warnings. I went first, lost control of the tube & almost dislocated my right shoulder when falling. I am very familiar with water falls from skiing and tubing. My 23 year old daughter went next. She slammed into the water & had the breath knocked out of her. She couldn't breath. I was so frightened for her I couldn't get to her fast enough to get her out of the water. She is a college athlete - in excellent condition and also used to water sports. We followed the manufacturer's instructions exactly regarding speed & use of the tube.

What troubles me is that the manufacturer says not to be used by children under 12 years of age. What 12 year old has sufficient judgement to evaluate the warnings properly and accordingly accept the risk? Almost all products have liability warnings on them (remember McDonald's hot coffee...). It is sometimes impossible to tell if a product is truly dangerous or if the manufacturer is simply issuing warnings to protect against litigation in the event something should happen (even if chances are remote).

I will not permit anyone to use the Wego Kite Tube. I saw first hand for myself that it is extremely, extremely dangerous and I am truly grateful that no one was permanently injured while we learned our lesson. We do not let 12 year olds drive cars, motorcycles, or jet skis for a reason. If someone wants to accept the risk then that person should be 18 or older.

I sincerely hope this product is recalled. I live on a lake and do not look forward to having friends and neighbors seriously injured on this product. From what I saw, it WILL happen, it is only a matter of time.

Welcome to the Cellar, Ollie.:D
Who's driving the boat?

What 12 year old has unsupervised access to a Wego Kite Tube and a boat to pull it? Duh.

Another question. If you got zapped on the first ride, why did anyone ever take the second ride?

Next contestant, please...

The McDonalds hot coffee lady received 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body, which required debridement and skin grafts because she was served coffee that was 180-190 degrees. Since most people drink coffee at 140 or so, no one should be expected assume that they'll be disfigured if they spill. I'm glad she got a settlement.

If you hurt yourself hot-dogging around a lake on a flying tube with warnings and skulls all over it, pulled behind a speed boat, I think you should be on your own with that.

Exactly. I wouldn't let anyone under 18 use mine; my own kid or anyone else's.

I tore my rotator cuff messing around with a power kite. Does that mean nobody should use them? I still do. If you can't take being beaten up a little, then don't use a toy that can beat you up :-)

Maybe it's different now, but I was driving a speedboat when I was 13. I drove while my brother skied and vice versa.

I think VB totally summed this all up in one sentence.

The driver read the warnings. Age limit = 12 yrs. Driver assumes okay for 12 yr old to try. Finds out too late (after injury) that 12 year old cannot control the tube. Driver has nothing to do with rider's control if boat is going at prescribed speed. Wind gust can suddenly throw 12 yr old 40 ft into the air. 12 year old does not have sufficient body strength to combat wind gust. Split second incident.

Regarding second rider. It is reasonable to assume that one bad experience does not predict all future experiences. Hence, try again with younger, more athletic rider. It is imperative to understand that two bad experiences in a row, with capable adult riders & boat driver = lesson learned. Third try would be inviting disaster...

Water skiing can be dangerous but typically danger increases with rider's pre-meditated decision to risk maneuvors. Rider does not have ability to make decision regarding maneuvors on kite tube. Rider makes the decision to lift into the air, and wind conditions determine subsequent height in a split second process. Rider can be 2 feet in the air and, with a sudden unexpected wind gust, can suddenly be 40 feet in the air with no balance control & subsequently slammed into the water with the kite tube on top of rider. Trust me, the instructional video does not show this type of occurance. When you watch the video, riders are perfectly balanced and only a few feet in the air. The warnings are there in writing, but one assumes, after watching the video, that they reference possibilities, not every ride probability.

If I were to buy a gun (yeah right), and the label on the gun said "WARNING, THIS WEAPON MAY UNINTENTIONALLY DISCHARGE EXCERSISE CAUTION ETC ETC ETC", and I put it in my mouth, or against my leg, or pointed it at myself or anyone else, and it went off, would "Well I didnt think it really MEANT that it could go off, I thought it was just SAYING that!" be a valid excuse? Sure, all the videos of cops and soldiers and people training with them dont show anyone getting hurt! When they point them where they shouldnt, the guns dont go off all by themselves! That warning is totally bogus!

I dont care if you're going five, fifty, or five hundred miles an hour, if you're riding a big piece of plastic, on the water, behind a boat, that is designed to fly, then it is YOUR decision to get on the big INFLATABLE PLASTIC TOY and ride it. If you cant control it, well, you should have thought of that before you got on.

I've had one outing on the Manta Ray (the Wego's competitor) with a friend. He fell off once, I fell off once. Both times we were fine. We used the tube in low, steady wind (as recommended) and nobody suddenly zoomed 40 feet in the air. If you had that experience, then the wind was too gusty. Constant boat speed + constant wind speed = constant airspeed = constant lift (since you can't really control the angle of attack too much). That's just physics.

And should have thought about it *twice* before putting a 12 year old on it.

CPSC Warns Consumers about Dangers of Tube Kiting
Two Deaths over the Past 3 Months Attributed to New Water Sport
WASHINGTON, D.C. – In advance of the July 4th holiday weekend, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is warning consumers about the possible dangers associated with a new type of water recreation known as “tube kiting.”

CPSC is concerned about death and injury reports associated with tube kiting. It is currently investigating two versions of these products to determine if there is a significant product hazard.

Tube kiting is a relatively new form of extreme water sport which is fast growing in popularity, but also extremely dangerous. CPSC is aware of at least two deaths associated with tube kiting this year. A 33-year-old Texas man was killed in late April 2006 while tube kiting, and a 42-year-old man died from injuries associated with tube kiting on June 26, 2006 in Wisconsin.

CPSC is also aware of 12 serious injuries associated with tube kiting. The injuries include a broken neck, punctured lung, broken ribs, broken femur, chest and back injuries, and facial injuries, such as jaw fractures. A 14-year-old girl who was tube kiting lost consciousness when it fell about 15 feet and struck the water.

Tube kites are very large, sometimes round, inflatable water devices that can be more than 10 feet in diameter. The tube is hooked to the back of a boat by a tow rope, and the tube rider pulls back on a rope as the boat travels at speeds between 25 and 35 miles per hour. The ride begins when the tube is lifted into the air trailing the boat. Possible reasons for incidents and injuries include: 1) rider’s difficulty in controlling the tube, 2) boat operator inexperience, and 3) how the tube reacts in certain weather conditions. The conditions of highest concern are wind gusts that can cause the tube to spin out of control, or sudden slowing or stopping by the boat operator, which can cause the tube to nose dive into the water. In some cases, the sudden stopping of the boat might cause the tube rider to continue past the boat and hit it or hit other boats or stationary objects, such as a bridge.

The National Park Service has banned the inflatable devices in at least one of its parks, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, which includes Lake Powell where there have been at least four serious injuries.

...And? None of us are saying they arent dangerous. What we ARE saying is that it's not the COMPANY's fault that ANYONE is stupid enough to ride a piece of PLASTIC intended to FLY behind a boat and NOT expect to bail and possibly get hurt, even AFTER all the warnings packaged with the TOY.

And, if you read the thread a little farther back, this very news item was already discussed, in terms of whether or not it's the right of government to protect citizens from themselves. You can guess where I stand.

Everyone knows cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. But we don't let 12 year old's buy tobacco (legally) and we don't actively promote tobacco to minors through TV ads, magazines, etc as a "fun but dangerous" product.

This product is being actively promoted as a "fun but dangerous" toy that can easily lure an inexperienced boat driver or rider into thinking that it just takes practice to master the ride.

I certainly did not completely understand the risk until actually experiencing the ride.

Let's put it this way. Almost all rides at amusement parks have warnings, some very serious. But, I do not assume that I WILL die or be injured if I ride the ride. I understand that there is a possibility that something could go wrong, but the likelyhood of it happening is low. This is how people are viewing the instructional video and manual that comes with the kite tube.

You must not be dead or seriously injured, you're still posting.

I've got nothing against limiting user age to 16 or 18. We have those rules for ATV's and Jet Ski's as well. I'd much rather see that than an outright ban.