or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Citizen's Arrest - Page 2

post #31 of 84
Quote nolobolono, topic - Are there posses at your ski area "A student asked me yesterday to find out if there are any resort areas that have citizens' posses to help the patrol identify and apprehend skiers and boarders who are a risk to self and others. She'd like to volunteer to round up a posse and needs help presenting the idea to our area management... "

Why does she want to be part of a 'posse'? What about volunteer ski patrol? If she wants the authority to identify and apprehend 'offenders' will she accept the legal responsibility for accidents on the mountain? Who are these students of yours? What do you do?
post #32 of 84
Thread Starter 
I teach skiing. What do you do?

The student is a very good customer and supporter of the area, not a mean bone in her body. She would like her grandchildren to visit and for them to learn how to ski, but she has experienced being strafed and knocked down and she fears for their safety.

Each of our lifts has two pro patrollers assigned to it at all times. That's a lot of runs to patrol, and on weekends they are usually busy on triage. We don't have NSP at the area.

I will suggest she buy her grandchilden helmets and learn how to block for them.

Oh, by the way, almost all of my students are wearing helmets these days, as I said, not because they are afraid of hurting themselves, but because they are afraid someone might cause them a head injury. I choose not to wear a helmet, because I like hearing if someone's coming on fast so I can take evasive action if necessary. I also don't like giving or having the impression that we're in a roller derby instead of the great outdoors.

I ski very fast most of the time. No one stops me, because I stay out of traffic and I obviously am very comfortable. The skier or boarder who can't handle speed is fairly obvious too.
post #33 of 84
Thread Starter 
I sent my friend to epic to read the posts, thinking she might get some good information.

You might be interested in what she had to say. (She said I could share it.)

Wow! I've never been referred to as a nazi before. Or many of the other accusations. Sounds like some real radicals out there. However I do see their point.

Unfortunately there are a lot of busy bodies out there that might take such an assignment too seriously and get carried away.

Unfortunately, not knowing me or where I am coming from concerning this has allowed a lot of people to vent their anger. I agree it is better done by the ski patrol if they are willing, but unfortunately are not.

Your and my "out of control skier" did not mean the fast skier. There is nothing prettier than a fast skier who is good and in control. However, there is nothing more scary than a fast skier totally out of control. How many of us have had near misses from them or known someone who has been either killed or severely injured by such a person. These are the people you and I are referring to.

Skiing is a sport that should be able to be shared by all, no matter what level. It is sad when a good percentage of the season ticket holders feel they cannot ski on weekends or Friday afternoons because they take their life in their hands. What I had proposed was not due to my great desire to "police" and apprehend. It was and idea suggested to me by a member of the ski patrol to help them keep a safer mountain for all. Volunteer skiers would only be there in the position of reporting any totally out of control individuals to the ski patrol and to be visible to skiers in hopes this would make them think about their skiing. These people would be chosen only after a thorough course by the ski patrol and mountain management.

I don't understand the animosity this instigated. We are only trying to make the mountain a safer place for all, which benefits everyone. Any volunteer overstepping their position would be dropped from the program.

Too bad people do not ask for more info before they jump to conclusions and resort to sarcasm and name calling.
post #34 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your and my "out of control skier" did not mean the fast skier. There is nothing prettier than a fast skier who is good and in control. However, there is nothing more scary than a fast skier totally out of control. How many of us have had near misses from them or known someone who has been either killed or severely injured by such a person. These are the people you and I are referring to <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wouldn't you agree that this type of skier you refer to probably had no intentions of going that fast in the first place and is probably just as frightened by the situation as the people who witness this person go flying by? Generally most people consider the "fast skier" as being the out of control skier (i mean the general skiing public and not frequent skiers who actually know something), and the skier you are refering to as someone who simply needs a good lesson to keep from scaring themselves and others again. "Arresting" this person will only deter them from skiing instead of finding them help in order to improve.

Everyone has their own opinion as to who is skiing recklessly. In this case, I think that some people's opinions are a lot better than others. If a great skier is flying through a slow-ski zone using families and children as slalmon gates then I consider that reckless skiing. That person may be in control, but it is the people who ski in those areas that don't have as much control. Children and grown-ups in typical family areas have a tendency to make their turns at the most absurd time and a good skier can never anticipate when someone is just going to turn right in front of them at any time. This is why I stay away from these typical family areas as much as possible, and if I do have to venture into one, I bit my tounge and slow down.

At the same time, these family skiers have a tendency to seek out a little adventure and decide to take their little tots down a black diamond. This is an area where good skiers can let themselves go and not have to worry AS MUCH about unexperienced skiers deciding to cross their path. That forces good skiers to either wait at the top and let the "debris" clear, or go flying by them and at a safe distance and hope that somewhere at the bottom the angry "debris" doesn't try to chew us out. The reason I say safe distance is because I've generally found that even though these family skiers (debris) may only be taking up one half of the run, and there is more than ample space for a good skier to do what he wants on the other side of the run, the "debris" still gets the **** scared out of them and feels the need to take out their anger. Sorry if I offended of any of you family skiers by calling you "debris", but I'm assuming that most of the family skiers on this forum are good enough skiers to realize that I'm not refering to them because I'm sure they understand the unwritten rules of skiing and they understand that their are many families out there to have a great time, but don't understand these unwritten rules.

I've actually given up "cruising" because of all the hype lately on skiers going to fast. Now I just stick to the Tram and Challenger at Big Sky where even most of the family skiers know to stay away from. I agree with Geoff, and basically, you stay out of our areas, and we will stay out of your family areas. By the way, I consider these family areas any blue or green run on the mountain. The Ski Patrol is staffed with veteran skiers who I trust know what is fine, and what is reckless. Let them do their job and the "citizens" keep their noses out of the Ski Patorlers job.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 12:13 AM: Message edited 1 time, by 7 Mary 3 ]</font>
post #35 of 84
I got hit by a snowboarder for the 3rd time last weekend. He was coming out of the woods onto the trail, he was looking up hill the whole time, I was below him. I kept watching us get closer and closer, waiting for him to look where he was going, but he never did. I changed my line to avoid him, and ended up stopping on the side of the trail to look behind me and find my wife. He was still looking up hill and turned into me, hitting me from behind. He proceeded to tell me that I hadn't picked a very smart place to stop. I wish I had known I could have arrested him.

Actually he was very appologetic after I explained what had happened and he turned out to be a pretty nice guy.
post #36 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 7 Mary 3:
Wouldn't you agree that this type of skier you refer to probably had no intentions of going that fast in the first place and is probably just as frightened by the situation as the people who witness this person go flying by? ...snip...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wouldn't agree at all because you omitted any mention of the much too common 15 - 20 year old testosterone pumped boy who knows precisely how fast he is going, but doesn't adjust his speed in traffic because he doesn't have enough experience to understand that:

(a) People downhill from him do unexpected things like fall and make unexpected turns, so he doesn't allow enough margin for error; and

(b) A 35 mph skier hitting a 10 mph skier will likely cause a lot of damage to both individuals. Since he doesn't understand the concept of serious pain and suffering yet, he makes immature judgements about what risks to subject himself and others to.

This kid knows he can ski perfectly well at high speeds on an empty slope, but is completely clueless about how (or even why) he should modify his skiing as the slope gets more crowded.

So, the types of people that have to be dealt with are:

1) The good, experienced skiers.

2) Skiers who occasionally and unintentionally become out-of-control (by their own admission, and usually only for short periods of time); and

3) The kids I mentioned above that doesn't even know they are being reckless, and will protest mightily if anyone accuses them of this.

Its pretty easy to for everyone to identify type 1's and 2's, and I suspect that few people have problems with them.

The real problem is with type 3's. Their skiing may look identical to type 1's, but the judgement is lacking. The reason type 3's get offended when hollered at or stopped by the patrol is that their judgement is what is being questioned, and this is tantamount to 'dissing them (in their own minds).

This is the group that this thread should focus their attention on.

Just my $0.02,

Tom / PM

PS - Type 3's are *very* well known in the car insurance industry, so this problem is not unique to skiing.
post #37 of 84
nonolobono - The real problems at your mountain seem to be overcrowding and patrol not doing anything to promote the safety code. Packs of vigilante grandmothers does not seem to be the answer. I was merely passing on the experience of courtesy patrol at my area which was only concerned speed, and not any other aspect of safety and how they lost respect because of this.

Forgive me for thinking she did want to police and apprehend, this assumption was based on the 'citizens arrest' topic and mentioning setting up a posse to help patrol identify and apprehend skiers and snowboarders.

What is it with Americans colliding with each other? I have skied Colorado and Utah and never heard of this being a big problem. Is this an east coast issue?
post #38 of 84
Thread Starter 
If I had it to do over again, I would not have titled my original post "citizen's arrest" because I never had it in mind that citizens would arrest skiers in violation of the Responsibility Code, but that citizens would assist those designated to do so (patrol). We should be mindful that the program was suggested by a pro patroller who would appreciate having some deputies out on the hill feeding him information about accidents waiting to happen.

I titled it "citizen's arrest" because I thought it might pique some interest. I call the volunteers a "posse" because I live in Montana, home of Henry Plummer, the hanging judge, and his Vigilante Gang, so the reference is a homey one.

Mary, your intolerance makes you the Nazi on this thread.
post #39 of 84
Intolerance? I read absolutly no intorlerance in my thread. I'm simply saying it how it is. Your ignorance is the basis for comprehending intolerance in my thread. What exactly was I "intolerant" about in my thread anyway.

Physicsman, the skier that nolo was refering to in my quote and the skier you are refering to are two completely different types of skiers. The skier you are refering to might be a good skier, but is practicing reckless behavior. The skier nolo seems to be refering to is the skier I discuss. A person is is completely out of control, has no idea how to stop or how to turn and is flying down the mountain at mach looney. Nolo probably had in mind the skier you speak of Physicsman, but he didn't do a very good job of putting it into words. And Physicsman, I've witnessed people well over their 30's and 40's who have skied at 35 mph through crowded areas narrowly missing women and children, so don't stero-type 15-20 year olds.

And seriously nolo, how juvenile is it to call people "nazi's". You seem to resort to calling anyone (a.k.a. me) who disagree's with your opinion a Nazi. I realize that kiwiski used the term nazi, but it was quite obvious that it was in a joking matter and he and his friends probably feel that the speed police are a little over zealous with their power. He was neither calling you or your friend a nazi, but making the point that these citizens have a tendency to take on the role of a dictator when given the power. Seriously nolo, is it not possible to have a reasonable discussion without calling people names? Grow up. Just because somebody has a different opinion than you doesn't make them wrong.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 12:05 PM: Message edited 2 times, by 7 Mary 3 ]</font>
post #40 of 84
Thread Starter 
Oh, pardon me. You were the one who referred to other skiers as "debris." A dehumanizing term if I ever heard one. "Nazi" as in "feminazi" refers to intolerance, I believe.

What families venture onto a black diamond run unless it was a grievous misreading of the trail map? Empathy, anyone?

Elitism was a characteristic of the Nazi regime too. They thought only the Nordic blooded belonged there too.
post #41 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nolobolono:
What families venture onto a black diamond run unless it was a grievous misreading of the trail map? Empathy, anyone?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I was at Winter Park there was an experts only terrain park. The only entry was through a gate with a huge 6 foot square warning sign outlining the safety rules for the park and that it was stictly experts only. One day a father and his young daughter entered the park and started skiing down, they cut across onto one of the bigger table tops, stopped on the top and skied down the landing. Everone waiting their turn on the jump including myself waited to see them exit at the bottom. After a minute or two we were wondering what happenned to them so I skied down beside the jump to check the landing. There they were, sitting in the middle of the landing, admiring the view completely oblivious to the danger they were in. I screamed at them to get the hell out of there, which they did reluctantly. At the exit to the terrain park I tried to explain the danger they were in and asked about the fathers interpretation of the warning sign. He was incredibly indignant and accused me of ruining their day. I wonder how much a ski through the head will ruin their day next time?
post #42 of 84
Nolo - I do not see why you are calling 7M3 a nazi. The only thing I can see he is intolerent of is the stupidity of those who chose to put themselves in the way of danger on expert runs and then these families scream at the experts whizzing by. Black runs are there so the experts have an area to go fast without snowplowers getting in the way - and yes many families do venture on to these runs with their little tots - something I have seen way too many times and which I despise - not only because they get in the way but because half the time the parent is more interested in their own fun than watching their kid. Unfortunately I have seen all too many kids get hurt on these runs, with the parents a hundred meters down the hill not even watching.
post #43 of 84
I'm just of to Wall Mart to buy a weapon of mass destruction (and some candy bars) so I will feel safer.

Where does it end!!!

Would you teach your teenager to drive on an LA freeway in rush hour and expect everyone else to "look out"???

The responsible thing to do would be to find a safe place to teach the grandkids. There are plenty to be found if you seek with an open and accepting mind. Stop expecting everyone else to change. All that breeds is repressed anger manifested in the false hopes of "posse" forming citizens.

Perspective folks ... change it and make peace not war.

post #44 of 84
Thread Starter 

1. Out of control skiers and boarders are threatening to you and to me.

2. Out of control drivers are a menace on the highways.

3. On the highways, we have something called RADD.

4. On the slopes, something similar would stand to reason.

5. On the highways, the offense called a "basic rule violation" is a misdemeanor.

6. On the slopes, enforcement of the Responsibility Code would teach offenders that the mountain management does not tolerate basic rule violations any more than the highway patrol and the judicial system.

7. The patrol would do well to prevent accidents in addition to responding to accidents that have already occurred.

8. The Responsibility Code is the Golden Rule of the slopes. Courts and torts recognize its sovereignty.

9. Without the Code we don't have sport, we have the rule of the mob.

10. If you think lift tickets are pricey now with the Our Responsibility Code disclaimer, just imagine what they would be like without it.
post #45 of 84

First of all what is RADD? If this is painfully obvious to everyone else, I'm sorry. I can usually figure out all the ridiculous chat-room abreviations (I know this is not one of those), but I can't get this one. I assume it's "*something* Against Drunk Driving". I could be way off here, and I hope I am, because comparing Drunk Driving to ANYTHING that happens on the ski slopes would be a HUGE stretch.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nolobolono:
10. If you think lift tickets are pricey now with the Our Responsibility Code disclaimer, just imagine what they would be like without it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What does the disclaimer on the back of the ticket have to do with it's price?
post #46 of 84
can't help with RADD, though i imagine it's dangerous driving or something similar. you really should not argue with or against something before you're sure of what it means. it's a good way to put your foot in your mouth, i know this from experience...

edit: though it isn't a stretch at all. i've had several bad experiences with drunk skiers.

but the disclaimer is just that. it means that when little johnny breaks his leg the resort doesn't have to pay for the medical bill, unless the resort was grossly negligent....

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 05:57 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Auxcrinier ]</font>
post #47 of 84
nolobolono ... founding member of the Truman Ski Team.
post #48 of 84
Control is a relative thing. What if this 'citizen's arrest' thing or whatever you call it is a bunch of snowploying beginners? Then they will figure anyone going faster than them is out of control and report them. There is also room for abuse. "I don't like the way that boarder/teenager looked at me, I'm gonna report him". This likely won't happen, but how bout we leave this kinda thing to the patrol?
post #49 of 84
what prevents people from notifying the ski patrol when they see somebody being a 'hazard'? after being turned on to this person, they can observe and take appropriate action...? maybe somehow formalizing a system for registering a complaint w/ the ski patrol? the system should be convenient, but still inconvenient enough to filter out most of the petty, vengeful complaints. i don't particularly like the idea of posses, either, but it doesn't really seem to be what nolo is advocating. ski areas definitely should not encourage confrontation.

this might draw some fire, but what about making the ski patrollers/resorts a little more accountable for out of control skiers and subsequent accidents? not a great idea, but something along these lines would encourage stricter enforcement of the rules... widespread stricter enforcement would eventually discourage most from skiing irresponsibly...

edit: i know there are patrollers that frequent these boards...do they have opinions on this....?

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 07:03 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Auxcrinier ]</font>
post #50 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Auxcrinier:
you really should not argue with or against something before you're sure of what it means. it's a good way to put your foot in your mouth, i know this from experience... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, which is why I asked what it means. And considering you didn't exactly clear it up for anyone, you probably should have left the response up to the person I asked for it.

As for the disclaimer on lift tickets... I've been told first hand by Patrollers at Killington, VT that the disclaimer is basically a bluff to try to keep as many people as possible from even thinking about filing a lawsuit. They said the disclaimer would not hold up in court. Their words, not mine.
post #51 of 84
Wow--some strong opinions here! As always, everyone is entitled to his own opinion. But the law is really quite clear, and while it protects your right to HAVE an opinion, it will still lock you up if your opinion causes you to break the law!

ANY skier/rider/whatever who cannot avoid any other person in front of him is out of control. This is both the law and basic common sense. You can't expect someone to get out of your way--or not to do something, stupid as it may be, that gets them IN your way. Falling, stopping, sudden turns--these are all things that happen on the slopes, and all participants have a legal and moral obligation to allow those ahead of us to do these things without our running into them. Period.

And what about those families--or anyone else--who venture onto black diamond runs before they are "ready" (in someone else's opinion)? While we may question their judgement, is it not their right to decide for themselves what sort of "adventure" they want to experience? Did they not pay as much for their lift tickets as everyone else? They are no more "in the way" than any tree, rock, lift tower, or fallen-and-injured "expert" on the run! The person who cannot avoid them is the one out-of-control, the one who does not belong there!

If anyone missed it, you might be interested in the heated discussion we had last fall regarding
Nathan Hall, the lift operator at Vail who took air over a blind roll and caused a fatal collision. Hall was found guilty of a felony.

Yes, it is stupid to stop below a blind roll. It is stupid to make sudden, unpredictable stops and turns on a crowded run. It is stupid (arguably) to venture knowingly onto a run way over your head. But there is no law against stupidity! And there are plenty of other reasons besides stupidity that someone could be lying on the snow around that next bend....

"You turned in front of me" I've been told, after being hit from behind. "Of course I turned in front of you," I say, "I WAS in front of you. Where the Hell ELSE could I have turned?"

Best regards,
Bob Barnes

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 07:49 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Bob Barnes/Colorado ]</font>
post #52 of 84
frank: *yawn*

nice points, bob...

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 07:52 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Auxcrinier ]</font>
post #53 of 84
Thread Starter 
Yay, Bob!

Franklin: RADD is Report a Drunk Driver. However, since the driver making the report has no way of knowing if the driver is indeed drunk or merely reckless, I thought it might transfer to the discussion. And I have seen inebriates skiing, or at least they seemed to be inebriated by their actions.

I think we have done the Dickens out of this one.

God bless us every one! I hope you all have a happy holiday and your fill of turns in the New Year.

Now, before I go, let's review: on a slope, any slope, who has the right of way?
post #54 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by nolobolono:
Now, before I go, let's review: on a slope, any slope, who has the right of way?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i do
post #55 of 84
Like anything else in this country, if the people whose responsibility it is to enforce the law actually did their job. I was raised in an Italian neighborhood in NYC. We never needed police officers. A car with the sign "Assumption Society Security Patrol" would cruise the neighborhood at night You do not need to know the details.

I have NO problem whatsoever with fast skiers or boarders. I do not ski black diamonds, therefore I am not a hindrance to any expert skier.

I DO have a serious probem with newbies who refuse to take a lesson, and hit me while I'm sking a blue trail. I'm talking about my livilihood. I do not get to sit at the desk on monday and answer the phones for a living.

Last year, some bimbo tried to hold on to me to keep herself from falling. You do not need know the details.

When I first started skiing, Mark and i spent a weekend at Killington. We were skiing a green trail, and Mark gets hit by a boarder. A ski instructor, a mountan ambassador and a ski patroller witnessed it and did nothing. Later, when he complained to management, they said "well this is Killington".

In contrast, there s a 5 ft 2 100 lb female istructor at Sunday River who will chase somone down the mountain and rip off their lift ticket if she sees them run over a kid!

I do not think that citizen posses are the answer. But if ski patrollers and other mountain employees do not do their jobs, you will probably end up seeing more people taking the law into their own hands.
post #56 of 84
2. People ahead have the right of way.


Good point on the differences between resorts and individuals in resorts. There is no escaping the code in Vail. Yellow Jackets, Red Jackets & even the Sheriff can be found at major trail converges and high traffic areas. They do a great job and I am grateful that the company & town care enough to invest in Ski code education. The big emphasis is on separation of people and not speed per se. A sensible & reasonable company approach and the continual presence of an educated & friendly enforcement group have the desirable affect of calm constant education.

The message is that we are all responsible for each other’s safety. If your resort does not care enough for you then stop caring for them and go elsewhere.

Heads Up!

Oz [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #57 of 84
Exactly! Which is why we refuse to go to Killingotn.
Keep in mind that most vigilantism starts when people feel the law is not taking care of them. So having what oz refers to as a friendly, educated enforcement team is an excellent idea.

I still contend that most infractions do not happen because an expert skier is going to fast. Rather, its the newbie who thinks that they are too good for lessons, who skis a blue tral without any knowledge of how to turn that causes the trouble. But perhaps its the way we market the sport, and the equipment that makes people think they are better than they are.

Another issue, and this came up in the balance thread. If someone has very poor balance skills, they will be terrified of anyone moving quickly within 2 feet of them. Have you ever ran past a senior citizen? So someones PERCEPTION of endangerment might not always be acurate.

Another point: good thing I once learned, wasthat the sound of a snowboarder scraping behind you is actually the sound of them slowing down so they won't hit you.
post #58 of 84
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>... citizens would assist those designated to do so (patrol). We should be mindful that the program was suggested by a pro patroller who would appreciate having some deputies out on the hill feeding him information about accidents waiting to happen.

Why doesn't your resort utilize national ski patrol? That sounds to me like they're exactly what you're describing. And they're free labor, too.

Deputies? great... more damn cops...

i do

Wrong! ... I do!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 11:34 PM: Message edited 2 times, by Geoff' ]</font>
post #59 of 84
Bob, very good points. For the record I have never hit anyone, and will never hit anyone I can see. However if some day some idiot is sitting right beneath a knoll, or a drop or something like that where he cannot be seen, and I do hit him, I do not want to be held criminally responsable for his stupidity.

The skier's responsability code says not to stop anywhere where you are not visible, so all people should obey that! If someone is clearly visible and is hit, it is the other persons fault, however if some idiot is not visible and does get hit, it should be his fault.
post #60 of 84
Bob, I don't think anyone on here is disagreeing with you when you say that if the uphill skier hits a downhill skier, the uphill skier was out of control. Thats common sense to everyone. But from what I've witnessed on many black runs is that a good skier/boarder will be entirely one side of a run and a family of poor abililty skiers will be on the other side of the run. The good skier will go down the run at a good clip and the family of skiers will stop and complain to eachother and anyone else who is close that the person who just flew by was going much too fast and something should be done about it. To be honest with you, I have never had a confrontation with anyone on a ski hill except for some lady who budged in front of me in a lift line when I was 12 years old, but thats another story. However, I have witnessed numerous instances in which the exact sitution I mentioned above has occured. A good skier will go down the run, get nowwhere close to anyone else on the run, but some family who is having to take their merry old time getting down the run because it is too difficult for their abililty will complain that that skier/boarder was going way too fast and they want report them. If this happened on a crowded slope I probably wouldn't disagree with them, but I've seen it happen on difficult runs with hardly anybody on it much too often. I think the Patrollers would have a headache on their hands if they encouraged everybody who felt that they witnessed a reckless skier was to report them to the Patrol because someone who has been skiing for a week is going to have a much different opinion of what is reckless skiing compared to someone who has been skiing for 18 years.

By the way, thanks to kiwiski and Mike B for actually reading my post unlike nolo who seems to just "hear what he wants to hear" and not actually read what is written.

Edit: I would also like to add a situation much similar to kiwiski's involving a terrain park. Last season I was riding the lift above Squaw's Park and this mother, father and this little girl about 4 years old go through the gate at the top of the park and right by the gigantic sign saying Expert Skiers Only, and whatever else is said on that sign. Now, the first hit in the park involved a huge kicker with three different take-offs and one big landing. The family skied down the run on the one side of the run by the trees which were a long ways from the kicker. A snowboarder goes down and hits the jump with no problem, followed by his buddy a safe distance behind. About the time the next snowboarder is about to hit the jump the father tells the little girl to ski over to the landing area for the jump because it was stepper their. So the little girl skis straight for this landing area, at this point the boarder was committed to the jump as he was already going up the take-off ramp. He sees this little girl bee-lining straight into his approximate landing and we are sitting on the lift thinking "Oh God, this girl is screwed!" The snowboarder somehow at the last second manages to throw this backfip type thing in which his rotation allowed him to very narrowly miss the little girl. This was a case where the snowboarder had no choice, he was at a point of no return when this girl jetted into his landing, simply falling was out of the question because he would have hit the jump and then landed right on the girl, or slid into her. His only choice was this last second flip. The parents then had the nerve to scream at this snowboarder calling him insane and many other names. The snowboarder then (without swearing, which I thought was quite impressive because the family deserved to get ripped a new one) sternly told the family that they were the ones for allowing telling and allowing this little girl to do something so stupid. Of course the little girl didn't know what was going on, but I think the family then realized that the boarder had a point. There was a spotter at the jump, and the boarder knew as he was hitting the jump by the time he landed this little girl was going to be right under him, but because he was in control he avoided a disaster. There were two patrollers who witnessed the incident and told the family they were never welcome in the terrain park again with their little girl. In this case, the boarder was technically the uphill skier, but had something happened and it ended up in court, he would have had two patrollers and many witnesses from the lift on his side. In this case, I would have to say this family was practicing reckless behavior.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ December 22, 2001 11:58 PM: Message edited 1 time, by 7 Mary 3 ]</font>
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion