| ▲ | uberman 9 hours ago |
| When I was a kid twisting a swing so you could ride it as it untwisted was something that happend dozens of times every recess. This was something every kid did. If your playground equipment falls apart as a result of the standard way kids use a swing then I think that is a manufacture issue not criminal behavior by a 10 year old |
|
| ▲ | GlibMonkeyDeath 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/pennsylvania-girls-10... "The borough also says visitors encounter its "Play Smart Rules" when entering the park, including a specific instruction: "Do not twist chains."" So the town buys crappy swings, knowing full well that kids are going to spin them (who hasn't done this a million times as a kid?) Then they slap up a sign telling the kids not to do that. Basically entrapment. Here's an idea for them: maybe the town shouldn't cheap out on unsafe equipment for children... |
| |
| ▲ | bluGill 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | My company makes dangerous equipment like lawn mowers. Because of this, I have to go through training on how to design equipment to be safe. And the rule is very clear. If there is any possibility of an issue, you need to redesign it so the problem can't happen, you need to put gaurds in place so the problem can't happen, or only if those two fail, are you allowed to put up a warning sign. That is an ordered list so if anything is possible in the previous step you cannot go to the next. In this case a chain that can take twisting is obvious and so the sign won't protect them from liability should someone get hurt from twisting the chains. | | |
| ▲ | spwa4 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | You're both right. What you're describing is liability. A warning does not guarantee safety from liability suits, that's why the other options are preferable (only being a Chinese or outside-of-the-west manufacturer guarantees safety from liability suit). But the problem with twisting chains is that it needs a warning. And so both putting in the law, and arresting the kid, are a way to protect the borough, a government organization, from liability when something goes wrong. |
| |
| ▲ | russdill 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Decent swing chains $250. Mass surveillance recurring cost of $5000/mo. Someone please help me budget this, I'm dying. | |
| ▲ | casey2 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If the town feels that arresting children is a good use of public money they that's their right. At some point the citizens have to actually care about how their town operates if they want it to get better. Most townspeople care about UX as much as f2p mobile shovelware developers. | | |
| ▲ | marcosdumay 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | > If the town feels that arresting children is a good use of public money they that's their right. TF? Doesn't your country have a Constitution? | | |
| |
| ▲ | chadgpt3 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As a reminder - if you put an unsafe swing on your property and just had a sign as the only thing stopping it from injuring a child and a child got injured, you'd be automatically liable under the "attractive nuisance" doctrine. | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
| ▲ | Avicebron 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why is a 3rd party company keeping videos of people's children? Why aren't the parents concerned about this? |
|
| ▲ | swader999 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Right? Growing up in the eighties we'd twist, stand on them, double up, back flip out of them. |
| |
|
| ▲ | rpdillon 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yep! We used to call it "twist and shout". Tons of fun. |
|
| ▲ | smalltorch 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It's marginally cheaper to install flimsy chains and surveillance than to pony up for a slightly thicker gauge chain get out of here with your common sense /s |
| |
| ▲ | bluGill 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Until someone gets hurt and the court find they are liable for millions because signs and cameras did not work and because they thought it would they apply punitive damages to make sure the message is sent. |
|
