Sayreville teen dies after opening up bus roof hatch, striking head

[hh5]

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/08/sayreville_teen_dies_after_ope.html

A 16-year-old Sayreville boy riding on a double decker bus packed full of teenagers celebrating a Sweet 16 party died tonight after opening up the vehicle's roof hatch and striking his head on an underpass as the vehicle drove west along Interstate 95 in Fort Lee, a Port Authority official said.

[NotNoNever]

Well, that's what they call evolution.

[podga]

When I think of how ridiculously small the distance between a stupid impulse and actually acting on it often is when you're 16, it's a miracle most of us ever make it to adulthood. I can't imagine the pain his parents are going through right now. May he rest in peace.

[hh5]

The Bergen County Prosecutor's office will handle the police investigation going forward. Police said it was not clear whether any charges will be filed, or whether the teens were drinking.

 

A 25-year-old woman was killed as she fell from a moving party bus last month in Los Gatos, Calif., on her way home from a concert. In 2010, a 19-year-old died in a car crash after drinking aboard a party bus, prompting his father to speak out for tougher restrictions on so-called "booze cruises." As a result, a San Mateo lawmaker has proposed a California bill that would hold the bus drivers responsible for underage drinking in the vehicle.

[Andrea]

When I think of how ridiculously small the distance between a stupid impulse and actually acting on it often is when you're 16, it's a miracle most of us ever make it to adulthood. I can't imagine the pain his parents are going through right now. May he rest in peace.

 

Well said.

 

The amount of stupid things I did before I turned 18 was ridiculous.

[hh5]

aren't there highly skilled teens thats done so many stupid things and lived

 

Well said.

 

The amount of stupid things I did before I turned 18 was ridiculous.

 

[ashessnow]

This reminds me of Six Feet Under.

[hh5]

Yeah it does ... hopefully they will learn to put sensors on the hatches or exits so that the driver can be responsible

Drivers need to be held accountable and it was the parents fault to not have a chaperon.

This reminds me of Six Feet Under.

 

[Y_B]

If he wasn't cute, I don't care.

[NotNoNever]

I can't see why the driver can possibly be held responsible. What if he'd taken his attention off the dangerous part, i.e. driving the big heavy moving thing, and crashed and killed several of them? How much bitching would there have been then? People have to take responsibility for themselves to some extent. Chaperone's are all fine and well, but at some point parents have to let their kids go - do you imagine for one second young bobby wanted his daddy along making him look like a dork in front of his mates? The inevitable consequence of letting them have some freedom is that some of them will do something stupid. And, as already said, it's amazingly easy, but most of us manage it. Don't go blaming the driver for the stupidity of an out of control teenager. Nature didn't, and nature didn't punish him either. Nature punished the kid. It was the kid stuck his head above the parapet. It's his parents I feel sorry for.

[John Doe]

Yeah it does ... hopefully they will learn to put sensors on the hatches or exits so that the driver can be responsible

Drivers need to be held accountable and it was the parents fault to not have a chaperon.

 

I disagree. It is not the driver's fault for the stupidity of others nor should he/she (the driver) be held accountable. The kid has been told multiple times not to open the hatch by an adult. He did it anyway. Blaming the driver would be like blaming the driver for the death of a person who suddenly jumps in front of your car /bus to commit suicide.

 

Did the kid deserve to die? Some would argue yes for his own lack of judgment. I don't think so, people make dumb mistakes - everyone does. Making someone accountable is basically wanting to place blame and in this case, the driver was not to blame. The kid was. He had been warned not to open the hatch. It doesn't take a genius that the warnings were for saftey precautions. There are stories (the ones people tell each other and jokes about) all the time about people losing their heads in moving vehicles. In fact, I have one and it's not just a story as it happened to someone I know (though not well, but still makes me shudder thinking about it). Immediate decapitation.

 

Even if there were chaperon it seemed like this would have happened. The secuirty guard took one moment to tell the driver to turn up the ac and it happened in the few seconds that his back was turned. Unless there was a chaperon for each kid, this could may have happened anyway. When a kid is willing to disobey authority, even when said authority warned him multiple times, he won't likely listen to instructions even if it's from a different authority figure.

 

Hatches are typically there for emergency use on buses. They are typically labeled for emergency use. There was no emergency in this case.

 

It's just too bad someone die from their own stupidity before they can wise up.

 

I did a whole lot of stupid stuff when I was a teen. Some days I question how I even got here. I sympathize with the kid, his family and friends. But people have to take responsibilities for their own actions. Sometimes they can't because they die. In some cases, the responsibilities does lay in someone else's hand but not in this case. The driver doesn't need to be held accountible for this accident. The kid does even though he's dead now. RIP Daniel.

 

Edits: Corrected illogical words.

Edited September 2, 2012 by John Doe

[hh5]

Hey John it be nice to post a link to the updated story

http://www.google.co...51bed4e4a8c9765

 

I wonder how fast the bus was going ... it must have good shockabsorbers and stabilizers to allow dancing at highway speed ... I wouldn't dance on a NYC bus going at 10mph ... it might hit a pot hole. Even if it had great equipment, if the bus made a sudden jerk by slowing down or speeding up someone would fall. I would think partying would be at slower speeds or at parked location rather than on a highway. Must be some change in regulations somewhere. I would think its a safety issue to dance on a bus at highways speeds and going over a bridge.

 

 

65 kids is a lot to handle by one security guard on a double decker bus.

The bus company should have required some parents to be present to help chaperon or the parents should have paid extra for an additional guards

 

The good question did the driver\SG explain the rules of safety before moving on and allowing the party to commence

 

You forgot to mention the bus got hot and the teens was looking to cool off,

 

By default, the chaperon is the security guard.

He failed to take on that roll of insuring safety and taking control of the situation.

 

The driver and the SG should have done something to insure safety.

 

The SG should not have abandon the safety of the passengers by leaving his post (the second floor deck)

He knew that the teen presented a danger in this situation

He should have sent one of the teens to tell the bus driver its hot

But really the SG should have a radio device with the driver

 

Driver should have determined what went wrong with AC.

and then make an announcement to stop the dancing\party and ask the teen to take their seats

The SG should made sure the teens comply and have the teens drink something cold or take some ice cubes to cool off

The driver should have Pull over n vent out the heat

Call dispatch to see if they can send a replacement bus

or tell the Teens that the dancing is cancelled

 

Sure it be a major party disappointment but things happen.

But, somewhere the idea of "keep the party going" overridden the good sense of passenger safety

 

The SG knows the situation that the teens were not listening.

He should have stood under the hatch and then stop the party

He lost control of the situation

 

Sure there will be an investigation and perhaps a lawsuit by the parents and\or the state\city

The bus company and the security company will suspend those in question during the investigation

Somewhere law will review this perfect storm and make a ruling and award something

Insurance company or the bus company will pay for the death if ruled by the courts

The bus company may run into some trouble with their insurance and\or with the city\state

 

Now, even though the SG told reporters what happen ... he may have impeded an investigation and broke security company guidelines

 

The concern parties will find fault ... the Entertainment company will defend that it was an accident and complied with safety regulations

We don't know the backgrounds of the driver, SG, and the company ... that will surely come out in a future trial or hearing

 

The Question that might be asked :

Does the SG have background in dealing with adults and teens (most importantly)?

By telling the reporter the after fact of the accident that teens don't listen means he might have invited liability on himself.

And someone will support that he abandon his post where a present danger showed itself.

 

I disagree. It is not the driver's fault for the stupidity of others nor should he/she (the driver) be held accountable. The kid has been told multiple times not to open the hatch by an adult. He did it anyway. Blaming the driver would be like blaming the driver for the death of a person who suddenly jumps in front of your car /bus to commit suicide.

 

Did the kid deserve to die? Some would argue yes for his own lack of judgment. I don't think so, people make dumb mistakes - everyone does. Making someone accountable is basically wanting to place blame and in this case, the driver was not to blame. The kid was. He had been warned not to open the hatch. It doesn't take a genius that the warnings were for saftey precautions. There are stories (the ones people tell each other and jokes about) all the time about people losing their heads in moving vehicles. In fact, I have one and it's not just a story as it happened to someone I know (though not well, but still makes me shudder thinking about it). Immediate decapitation.

 

Even if there were chaperon it seemed like this would have happened. The secuirty guard took one moment to tell the driver to turn up the ac and it happened in the few seconds that his back was turned. Unless there was a chaperon for each kid, this could may have happened anyway. When a kid is willing to disobey authority, even when said authority warned him multiple times, he won't likely listen to instructions even if it's from a different authority figure.

 

Hatches are typically there for emergency use on buses. They are typically labeled for emergency use. There was no emergency in this case.

 

It's just too bad someone die from their own stupidity before they can wise up.

 

I did a whole lot of stupid stuff when I was a teen. Some days I question how I even got here. I sympathize with the kid, his family and friends. But people have to take responsibilities for their own actions. Sometimes they can't because they die. In some cases, the responsibilities does lay in someone else's hand but not in this case. The driver doesn't need to be held accountible for this accident. The kid does even though he's dead now. RIP Daniel.

 

Edits: Corrected illogical words.

 

Edited September 2, 2012 by hh5

[Cyhort]

Drivers need to be held accountable and it was the parents fault to not have a chaperon.

 

Wait, what? Why the hell should the driver be responsible for something stupid one of the passengers did? It's not his job to police the people on his bus, he just drives it. People need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of always trying to find someone to blame. The second part of that makes a lot more sense. Parents should be the ones parenting their kids. If you don't wanna blame the dumbass kid for being a dumbass, then blame his parent. Not the bus driver.

[hh5]

Found another article from the dreaded foxnews

 

Here an opinion of another party bus company

 

 

Safety precautions must be part of the package, though, too. For a group of 40 guests, Silver Star requires two adults be aboard if the group is made up of teens or children 18 or under.

 

"It's much more dangerous when you have a double-decker with 65 kids — because they're hard to control," said Darocha.

 

 

Other private transportation companies have altogether given up trying to safely entertain a bus full of teens

 

 

Design Limousines of New York, which operated the double-decker bus, did not return calls seeking comment on whether other chaperones were on board.

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz25M8sxCJz

 

 

There's complacency on safety. Its ok when there isn't an accident but when there is its an ugly issue

I wonder if there was a waiver of responsibility in the contract should a passenger uses a hatch or an exit in a non emergency situation.

"No matter how many times you tell clients this is an emergency exit — it's written on the glass — they still open it," says Darocha. "It happens all the time."

 

 

Even in limos, especially during prom season, "they open the sunroof after you tell them not to do this," he says. "They don't listen."

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz25MA5CwLi

 

Its sad ... its only a 20 minute ride over the bridge to their destination

Edited September 3, 2012 by hh5

[hh5]

lol its just an early opinion

 

I read an article of a similar case that stated that their city would hold the driver responsible

 

The other article stated that the SG was downstairs for 2 to 5 minutes ...

it doesn't take that long to go downstairs and tell the driver somethings wrong with the AC. It would take less than a minute.

The driver can then respond on the PA system.

It seems that the SG was involved in a short conversation with the driver.

That could be seen as abandoning his post when it comes to teens

Also it may be seen that the SG was distracting the driver.

( The driver maybe doubling as first deck security

In theory they might have video security camera on both decks to record the situation should an accident arise.)

 

I've heard an opinion of a teacher. "You can't take your eyes off of kids for one minute..."

 

But it might test the limo services contract about the client waiving liability if they use emergency hatch or door in a non emergency situation should there be an accident.

 

Its up to the courts to determine who responsible ... SG or Driver or BOTH or neither

 

But the driver is like the captain of the ship ... so responsibility would ultimately be his in theory

 

The parents would be seeing that they entrusted the safety of their kids in the limo service.

 

But we don't know this company's rules regarding chaperons vs SG

there is no reporting about other chaperons other than the SG.

I hope its not the case where the chaperons didn't make it and the bus decided to leave on schedule leaving the SG n driver to be responsible.

 

Yes I agree the respective parent may have to bear the blame for their kid ... now whether that's partial or full ... its up-to the courts

 

Wait, what? Why the hell should the driver be responsible for something stupid one of the passengers did? It's not his job to police the people on his bus, he just drives it. People need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of always trying to find someone to blame. The second part of that makes a lot more sense. Parents should be the ones parenting their kids. If you don't wanna blame the dumbass kid for being a dumbass, then blame his parent. Not the bus driver.

 

Edited September 2, 2012 by hh5

[John Doe]

I'm sorry. The SG and the bus driver are not at fault. As said, all roof top hatches are for emergency use only. I think it's stupid to protect the idiocy of people. Since when was it other people's job to be accountable for other folks. If you (the person, not anyone specific) fail to use common sense and listen and die it's no one's fault but you're own. It's because everyone always wants to blame someone else that this world is going to crap. No one ever wants to be held accountable for their own actions. If I give my friends a ride and someone slammed into us and all my friends die except me, I guess I should be held accountable since I didn't make them sign a waiver that they may die with me in my car.

 

So what if the SG went downstairs for 2-5 minutes, the kid was warned. This claims of SG or Driver being responsible makes as much sense as those folks suing fast food joints for spilling their hot drinks on themselves. Anyone can figure that a hot coffee would be hot. Or blaming the airline for someone opening the emergency hatch while the airplane was in the sky. Because it's surely the airline's fault for having the emergency hatch as it's the bus company's fault for having an emergency hatch. It's an emergency hatch. Don't use it if there's no emebergency. Simple as that. In fact, if anything the bus company should sue the kid for endangering everyone on the bus, if you're going to go that route (of sueing folks). Driver should determine what went wrong with the AC. Really? A driver's focus should always be the road and driving never anything else. It is his job to drive. Driving is not easy. You are already multi-tasking as is. But I guess he can put the bus on auto-pilot and go check the AC.

 

Again, those questions are a bit ridiculous. When people aren't held accountable for their own actions and people look for someone else for "accountability" what's to stop the next person from doing something stupid. Faulting others is letting those with stupidity or lack of common sense reign free with no self responsibility. I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic towards anyone who tries to blame other's for their own mistakes. This world would be a better place if everyone is accountable for their own actions, instead of placing blame on others. This kid was not innocent though I don't think he deserve to die. Just because he died doesn't mean someone is at blame. Sure I'll be more lenient if no one warned the kid or easpecially if the kid had mental issues.

 

I apologize HH5. I know you're just trying to make sense of this tragedy but I really hate it when self accountability is thrown out the window. Forcing fault onto someone else when it's obviously your own fault (such as this case) and not heeding the well tended advice of others is cowardly and disrespectful to everyone. I'm not annoyed at you, HH5, just the suggestion or idea. When people fail to take responsibility, they will never think anything is their fault. A shooter won't be responsible for the people he killed because it's the gun seller's fault. A college student caught cheating isn't responsible for failing because it's the professor's fault for not telling students to not cheat or taking measure such as caging each student individually. A person who died in an natural gas field because he decided to smoke there causing an explosion isn't at fault because it's the natural gas' companies fault. Having no self accountability paves the way for more problems not less.

 

Edits: I have relied too much on spellcheck. Ugh.

Edited September 3, 2012 by John Doe

[hh5]

This is a luxury double Decker limo bus ... it has the latest of everything ... depending on which model and year and custom requirements

 

Its easy to check the AC even you can do it ... its called checking your dashboard ... checking for any obvious problems ...

If the AC fails to respond via switches on the dashboard then The driver radios dispatch regarding the problem

I'm sure there is digital temperature readout to indicate upper deck n lower deck temperatures

 

Since its not a mechanical problem that stops the bus from getting to its destination - the bus may continue to its destination

( If the Limo company suppose to guarantee the "Sweet 16 package deal" then its up to dispatch to see if they have a spare bus

If there is a spare bus the driver returns back to port authority and unloads the passengers

Whatever the issue is - the father of the Sweet 16 Party will get an adjusted bill rather than the sad news of a death to a minor

)

 

the driver lets the SG know on the PA system the status of the AC on the bus and any other news

If the AC on the 2nd deck is not working and the first deck is working the SG orders the minors to the First deck

Assuming all 64 minors can sit on the first deck, if not he orders 32 of them to the first deck

 

The driver has no problems multi-tasking ... you should see women putting makeup on while driving - or a man shaving

 

At 6:30pm on a Friday on the W-Bridge (Labor Day Weekend) its bumper to bumper traffic

The risk of decapitation is small but death blow to the head is extremely likely

 

As I said it will be up to the courts to decide liability - I didn't say the death penalty - but then again that's also up to the courts(joke)

( It could be involuntary something but that's up to the courts and lawyers )

Perhaps the worst case someone may lose their job

A lesser thing - suspension of their position

Public record - I am not sure if it will read about about a death of a minor or what they put on the record

 

But its now news on the internet so everyone knows the SG by name but not the driver

 

Depending on the two (driver\SG) - its up to them if they will continue or quit their job - if they feel that much regret or not

Its not everyday someone teen dies on a party bus

 

The kids are all minors - underage 18 - they are put into the care of the limo company and security company for a 20 minute ride (approx)

 

If your arguing Job description then the SG shouldn't be going downstairs - he should be guarding the minors that's his job - he stays on the 2nd deck

The driver's other job is securing the first deck

If the company did require chaperons then they should be present on either deck, helping out

 

He is there to ensure the safety of a minor who can be a danger to themselves because of a lapse in judgement

He's not there for AC comfort ... that is a lapse in judgement thinking a minor would follow verbal instruction

A SG trained in guarding minors would know the difference between an adult and minor following instructions

A trained SG already knows a minor presents a danger to himself

He knows the bus is traveling in the lower deck of the bridge which has a low ceiling as well as overpasses with low ceilings

( If he didn't know this at the time under the bridge then that opens up to another problem

This is a first time a I ever heard a SG give an interview that might be a violation in the security manual

if this impedes an investigation ... more serious things might happen to him

what if the passengers says something to the contrary to the SG interview

what if there's more to the story

Its ok the students speaking out .. unknown if the parents like it or not or the lawyers

)

The SG could have explain it differently after the second time and give a graphic explanation

The SG failed to recognized that the teen wanted the thrill of sticking his head out of the hatch; venting the heat was part of the excuse. The "want" and the heat impaired the judgement of the teen from heeding orders.

 

If the minors can't take the heat then he orders the dancing to stops ... or even the party

( If the first deck AC is working and the driver says that on the PA system then the SG instructs the minors to go to the first deck )

 

he can allow one of the minors to go tell the driver the AC is not working during the first time AC is a problem

It all depends on limo company rules about going between decks - I presume its no problem

( the limo company should have an installed an intercom system - thats a cheaply built bus)

( alternatively the SG n Driver should have a radio if the bus doesn't have a intercom)

Its low class company to not have a way to radio or intercom each other

 

I will wait for the news to say what happens to either the driver or SG

 

Anyone saying what will happen is an opinion .. no hard feeling if your trying to share facts rather than EMO

 

A death invites a lot of inquiry and red tape that can result in different outcomes

You got Port Authority, the bus company, the security company, the city, the state NY\NJ, Insurance companies, the Courts, Medical Examiner, bonding, company history, driver\SG history, police reports, EMS reports, parents, etc.

Arguments will be heard like

* the hatch should have an alarm

* the hatch should have being locked

* why weren't there chaperons on the bus

* is the SG is trained in handling minors

* does the SG, driver, and companies have a clean record

* etc etc

There can be various outcomes from each of the above (Driver, SG, Limo Security Company, and parents)

 

The parents of the minor and the parents of the sweet 16 party will have somethings to sort out

 

Its not problem if you say nothing will happen to them or if someone else says something will happen

Its just an opinion ... proven by the publish results of the courts\news

 

I won't bother addressing the other examples your are specifying as that would be part of soapbox

Your extreme concerns in the other examples are also part of soapbox

 

But I won't rule out your opinions .. but be know we're not lawyers ... we're making our best guess and sharing it

 

we're not guaranteeing the results of what will happen or betting the outcome

 

No hard feeling for expressing your POV

 

I'm sorry. The SG and the bus driver are not at fault. As said, all roof top hatches are for emergency use only. I think it's stupid to protect the idiocy of people. Since when was it other people's job to be accountable for other folks. If you (the person, not anyone specific) fail to use common sense and listen and die it's no one's fault but you're own. It's because everyone always wants to blame someone else that this world is going to crap. No one ever wants to be held accountable for their own actions. If I give my friends a ride and someone slammed into us and all my friends die except me, I guess I should be held accountable since I didn't make them sign a waiver that they may die with me in my car.

 

So what if the SG went downstairs for 2-5 minutes, the kid was warned. This claims of SG or Driver being responsible makes as much sense as those folks suing fast food joints for spilling their hot drinks on themselves. Anyone can figure that a hot coffee would be hot. Or blaming the airline for someone opening the emergency hatch while the airplane was in the sky. Because it's surely the airline's fault for having the emergency hatch as it's the bus company's fault for having an emergency hatch. It's an emergency hatch. Don't use it if there's no emebergency. Simple as that. In fact, if anything the bus company should sue the kid for endangering everyone on the bus, if you're going to go that route (of sueing folks). Driver should determine what went wrong with the AC. Really? A driver's focus should always be the road and driving never anything else. It is his job to drive. Driving is not easy. You are already multi-tasking as is. But I guess he can put the bus on auto-pilot and go check the AC.

 

Again, those questions are a bit ridiculous. When people aren't held accountable for their own actions and people look for someone else for "accountability" what's to stop the next person from doing something stupid. Faulting others is letting those with stupidity or lack of common sense reign free with no self responsibility. I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic towards anyone who tries to blame other's for their own mistakes. This world would be a better place if everyone is accountable for their own actions, instead of placing blame on others. This kid was no innocent. Just because he died doesn't mean someone is at blame. Sure I'll be more lenient if no one warned the kid.

 

I apologize HH5. I know you're just trying to make sense of this tragedy but I really hate it when self accountability is thrown out the window. Forcing fault onto someone else when it's obviously your own fault (such as this case) and not heeding the well tended advice of others is cowardly and disrespectful to everyone. I'm not annoyed at you, HH5, just the suggestion or idea. When people fail to take responsibility, they will never think anything is their fault. A shooter won't be respinsible for the people he killed because it's the gun seller's fault. A college student caught cheating isn't responsible for failing because it's the professor's fault for not telling students to not cheat. A person who died in an natural gas field because he decided to smoke there causing an explosion isn't at fault because it's the natural gas' companies fault. Having no self accountability paves the way for more problems not less.

 

Edited September 3, 2012 by hh5

[NotNoNever]

hh5, there is only one word available to counter your arguments, since you seem unwilling to accept personal responsibility for a person going through the world: bollocks.

 

Hold the driver responsible because some idiot endangers his own life? bollocks

 

Expect the driver to sort out a situation by taking his eye of his main task and causing the other passengers to be exposed to greater risk. bollocks.

 

Have every human being commanded to move through the world in pairs so they always have a chaperone to ward off stupidity. bollocks.

 

You seem to want to apply the tenets of a ridiculous legal system to natural justice. Natural justice would suggest that it would not be appropriate for the driver's head to fall off when the kid's head went through the hatch. Natural justice would suggest that it was the kid's head got knocked off. And, oddly, that's what happened.

 

I don't know what constitutes an adult in your part of the world, but in mine it's sixteen years old. So, only one SG needed. I'd suggest you look at the age of criminal responsibility in the Sayreville area. That should indicate if a person is considered responsible for their actions at an early age or not. Sixteen is perfectly sufficient to be able to make judgements about opening a hatch and sticking your head through.

 

Atom Egoyan made a film called the Sweet Hereafter about who is responsible for accidents. The lawyer's pitch (they don't have opinions, btw, they only have a mouth to rent separate from any level of good sense) was that there are no accidents in life, somebody is always responsible by virtue of an act or ommission. A nut is not tightened here, a tree is not cut there, a path is not wide enough somewher. Bollocks stuff like that. I'd advise you to watch it. Egoyan is an extremely good filmmaker.

 

The point is this: The guy was responsible for his own actions. Neither the guard nor the driver shoved his head through the hatch, the guy did. Life taught the person responsible the lesson to be learned, not the driver, not the guard, not the guy who designed the hatch, not the guy who thought up hatches in the first place, not the designer or builder of the bridge who was obviously responsible by not building it high enough to avoid the daily, nay hourly, risk that some idiot in a double height bus would stick his head through a hatch he shouldn't have been, not the guy who mixed the cement, not the guy who laid the asphalt an inch too thick therefore raising the bus up, not the weatherman who forecast the sun coming up in the morning, not the parents who concieved the 16yo, not the grandparents who concieved the children who grew into adults and conceived the child who grew into the guy, not the guy who dug out the iron ore thousands of miles away to be smelted for the steel to build the bus, not the guy who elected the Pope who failed to commune with god to ascertain if such a risk was likely at x o'clock of x day of x month of x year.

 

No. The guy who was a stupid little idiot, like many of us have been, but wasn't lucky enough on this occasion to have got away with it. Now for heaven's sakes, please stop trying to hold the world and everything in it responsible for the individual actions of the world and everything in it, except for when it has a good outcome and the world and everything in it can bugger off and the individual can take the spoils.

 

The guy shoved his head through the hatch. He's dead. That's called cause and effect. End of.

[podga]

When you look at accountability, there are a couple of issues here:

 

1. Was the bus company breaking any laws? For example, is there a state or federal mandate to have x number of chaperones, or alarm buttons on hatches, or for the bus to only move when passengers are belted in, or whatever (and I can assure you hh5, dancing in the aisles of a speeding bus might not be very graceful or easy, but my friends and did it every time our school took us on an excursion and falling on someone's lap was half the fun). What other bus companies apply might be good practice, it might be common sense, but if it's not the law, then the bus company isn't accountable.

 

2. Did the bus company make any misrepresentations to the parents or the children themselves? Did they say there would be 3 chaperones when only 1 was present? Did they tell them (if even asked) that escape hatches cannot be opened on a moving vehicle? Again, if not, they cannot be held accountable. Even if they did, they can only be held accountable to the degree that what they misrepresented led to the kid's death.

 

One could argue that the bus company could have reasonably foreseen this might happen and didn't do enough to protect the passengers. But let's look at this a little differently, by taking some of the drama out of it: My parents told me never to stick my hand out of a moving car. They drilled it into me every chance they got. I'm sure most parents still tell their kids the exact the same thing, even in these days that back windows can be locked from the front. That's because we all know that bad things could happen. So now I'm 16 years old, my parents have long allowed me to control the back window like I want, the temperature in the car is fine, but I'm wearing a nice jacket and I don't want to sweat in it, so I open the window. And then, I unthinkingly stick my hand out, maybe to feel the cool breeze, or to do that airplane wing game, and I get stung by a bee. Is there any way my parents could possibly be held accountable?

 

If no laws were broken, no misrepresentations made, if there was a warning on the escape hatch not to open it unless in case of emergency, then this was simply a tragic accident, the result of extremely bad judgement at the exact wrong time. It might be an occasion to examine whether certain further safety measures could be reasonably applied (as is the case in airplane accidents), but nothing more.

[hh5]

I don't care about the popular consensus of the comments in the media about the issue.

which comes in a mixture of negative and minimal positive opinions

 

I don't care if the driver or SG or the company gets punished or not

 

Its their TITANIC ... the party bus of dreams

That's a consumer model ... the passion for profit ... the overlooking of safety for profit

There's a mini-series that appropriately names Titanic => BLOOD AND STEEL

 

It will be a serious review costing more money than putting in safety standards that exceeds industry and gov regulations

Have you all forgotten the TITANIC model?

Our society is riddle with it.

 

Your good at arguing for the company - as safety became complacent - and profit is the motive

Your good at arguing for a case if it was adult clients

 

You good at accepting substandard safety regulations complacent in this industry model.

 

But its not a good argument for minors or even young adults

 

Do you really want your children to receive substandard safety protocols of this industry?

 

Do you really look at this case from all angles in providing the best service and safety?

How to provide the best safety and service?

The answer is no - your coming from an outside viewpoint.

 

 

* You got a company that sells the public that they have over 30 years of experience

what does that represent when you hear that?

what does that mean to you when you book a party bus charter?

* You got a company that has actually under-rated its safety

The company as a whole only prides itself by meeting antiquated standards and regulations.

To pride with 30 years of service ... it means that they should exceed those standards where applicable

Other charters require chaperons because of the experience with handling minors

You have no idea what the parents thought about safety when planning this party and charter

Perhaps they hope that thirty years of experience is enough to insure the safety of minors for a 12 miles trip.

 

* You got an industry that is not motivated by safety concern but motivated by the profit model

* You got a company that has overlooked the safety issues of operating a Party Bus in the NY\NJ area

You have no idea when this company started using double Decker Party buses and what they did in evaluating safety concerns.

You have no idea if this company has check their area industry concerns about double Decker party buses to improve their operating procedures.

 

* The SG lost control of the situation - he facilitated the situation with the distraction of the AC discomfort complained by the passengers

He abandon his post and he distracted the driver from his periodic check of the security cameras.

Security was at Zero Percent coverage for 2 to 5 minutes

He opened up the situation to allow an unsafe issue.

 

* Your not looking things from point of safety that should be part of their pride of service

* It seems by this incident that the company has not had its operating procedures updated by outside efficiency and safety consultants.

* The guard does not seem to be experience in handling minors.

He told but he didn't get through to the minor.

He didn't get the minor to acknowledge the understanding of the orders.

He didn't engage in educating the minor about safety.

He had time to explain why but chose not to - this is where the lack of experience in handling minors.

He engage himself with servicing a complaint but not serving safety.

He didn't think the minor was worth his breath or concern for safety.

He follow low rated regulations of safety he did not follow the instinct and the experience of his job

We do not know his effectiveness rating with minors or his employment history.

We do not know how the company operates its personnel?

 

One way to get through the minor .. have him call his parents on the CELL

Explain the matter ... cancel the desire ... the parents will surely get through to him

Don't be lenient if you have to say it more than twice.

 

It appears the minor needs the same strictness as he is use to in his catholic school to get through to him.

 

* You obviously not familiar with that route from Washington Bridge to their destination

Its at least two to three miles before the bus would pass areas of safety for this incident to be a non-issue

 

* You don't know what safety introductions the company provided prior to departure or accepting passengers

This is a private charter. The planners of the party did not research the safety concerns of this new party bus fade,

 

I've had some experience with how bus charters are.

Its really bad. You forgotten when Greyhound has a serious national problems with the bus charters.

Why would you think the industry has improved?

 

If you want a politician and business man to sell you on what you all in agreement

go hire one ... who is willing to sell you TITANIC

where the unthinkable by the public was going to happen in Tragedy

facilitated by businessmen and paid off politicians

 

Minors love to explore things ... we all failed to educate them

 

Our society has sunk to lowest level of concern about the safety of minors by what I read from the comment of the media

They label this minor as something defective in the gene pool ... that's a party to racism

Please review the comments left by society about this situation see how deplorable it is.

 

The media industry would not be caught dead by making those remarks like that

They are design to educate or share with us about this incident and get us thinking how to best solve this TITANIC

 

In Titanic, the ship of dreams ... now the party bus

Minors are part of those dreams of their parent to wish them well in their future

until the companies like White Star Line ended most of those dreams

 

All those comments made by the public would you say them to your children

Would you think of your own children that way?

You would think of other peoples children that way.

 

You don't know who this minor really is and you don't want to know.

But your willing to attack this minor or placate the event

Your willing to say that this minor had no place in mankind history

Would you say the same thing about Jesus? or Jone of ARC etc etc

The 1200 people who died on Titanic ... think of how many third class minor died on that day

Are you willing to say that other people minors are third class and you have first class children?

 

This thinking is how we facilitated class warfare, racism and anti-gay events in our history

Now we extend this thinking to other people children?

Edited September 3, 2012 by hh5

[NotNoNever]

That's the problem with systems and regulations amd management of risk and hazard ... the great (British) public will ALWAYS fund a way ti break them. Give a child an unbreakable toy ... he'll have it bits inside an hour. This stuff just is not legislable for. That's why we have personal responsibility. That's why this guy was there ... he was celebrating one of the milestones of adulthood. At 16 he can make babies and be responsible for them, their health, and their safety.. But he needs his hand held on a party bus?

Edited September 3, 2012 by NotNoNever

[hh5]

BTW, thank you for your comments ... all of you ... I hope all of you will keep an open mind to the discussion

 

He's a young warrior ... but by WW2 standard ... he is not acceptable to be sent to war

From by the comments I've read they would up the age to like 24 before they would send a minor to war

 

Everyone matures at different rates we can't always say that because your 16 or 18 ... get out of house .. make your own life

Really people should be certified with a maturity rating and let the statistics studies speak for themselves

 

let say for example, because 10yo has an iq of 2000 ... he can be sent into adulthood

but really its no ... he still a child ... not fully matured

 

LOL, lets start a company, you wanna certify your service, let it be tested by legend of minors

They will break everything they can

 

But seriously, if we have to hand hold we should, our society\religion is all about lending a hand to lessor guy

That's what Jesus was about and that's the tenant's of what the USA was about historically

That's what our laws try to do but is complicated by politics and lobbyist and businessmen screaming to make a profit

with the "BLOOD AND STEEL" model

 

We should be as cruel as in the 19th, 18th, 16th .... centuries

 

People have commented the minors to be subjects of Darwinism ... the survival of the fittest

but that model goes against religion and everything else

 

In a financial planning, that's bad business ... a complete loss of reoccurring income and tax revenue

Downgrading adulthood ... its an unsustainable model ...

irregular income and high expenses ... hardship ... divorce ... loss of education etc

irregular reoccurring income and tax revenue bad for society

Social programs giving the false hope until we shut them down because of our economy

 

We be willing to toss children to the ugliness of society ... for trying to grow up too fast

We be forcing our gov't to pass various programs to help single mother, pregnancy, teen parenting, college help programs, etc etc

Because of our bad economic models ... we are cutting back on the charity ... we all once agreed to help

but we can no longer afford it because we allow various industries to be selfish

ie: Health Care and Capitalism ... toss in the word communism ... on Health Care not for profit

we taint the issue we're trying to solve .. one day only the rich will afford medical care like in the 18th century

the poor will be spare parts as they become available

 

We would be supporting the "Death and Taxes" business model

that idea would be an endless supply of procreation

we don't care about individuals any more

we'd support 1984 - big brother - the evil Utopian society

 

if we're instructing minors before a big adventure about personal responsibility and safety

.. sure that will help them to survive

but not all the parents did that ... if this was a school event ... there be some training

 

but we're calling his death ... personal responsibility ... how do you know he learn it? => by an expiration date of minorhood

not all schools teach early parenting and other social programs .. this is NYC ... we're overbook in schools

we've cut back on various programs and only offering basic education to support a large population of minors

 

in general

brit17yo = usa18yo

brit16yo = usa 17yo

etc

 

USA is #25 in the world education scale

 

a 17yo brit is way better equip than a 18yo USA

 

a 16yo brit is way better equip than a 16yo USA

 

mmm he is celebrating a girls milestone of being a on the road of a young womanhood

( btw, she was not on the bus ... she was to meet them later at the party

the father didn't want to upset her until she got a smartphone msg)

 

the true background of the story

 

The parents plan the party n book the charter

The minors plan what they want to get out of this adventure

The parents sign away and pay for event

Some parents assume things, some parents explain personal responsibility, some didn't explain it

The minors has their own of relationship .. their own world ... not always inclusive of parental supervision

 

Perhaps this charter is the cheapest in price and there is a lack of competition for double decker buses

but selling luxury with the lowest safety rating for DDPB

 

We have SG that is aware of some of these prom type antics

but ignores the escape hatch peeping thats very popular in the industry but a serious issue in the first three miles of the adventure

They SG didn't keep in mind of all the antics teens would want to get away with

You can call this pre-senioritus ... its a sign they are still minors

 

The death as tragic as it is will make them all grow up a bit sooner

that is if they all get counseling and reach out to support groups

some move on ... in the next two year go to college n life

 

some will not ,,, that's a sign of low maturity region

this be another spot for ppl to blame Darwinism n the gene pool

 

perhaps we will never know the inner drama among the minors that led to this tragedy

or maybe we will ... this event is still unfolding

 

That's the problem with systems and regulations amd management of risk and hazard ... the great (British) public will ALWAYS fund a way ti break them. Give a child an unbreakable toy ... he'll have it bits inside an hour. This stuff just is not legislable for. That's why we have personal responsibility. That's why this guy was there ... he was celebrating one of the milestones of adulthood. At 16 he can make babies and be responsible for them, their health, and their safety.. But he needs his hand held on a party bus?

 

Edited September 3, 2012 by hh5

[NotNoNever]

<sighs>

[John Doe]

You don't know who this minor really is and you don't want to know.

But your willing to attack this minor or placate the event

Your willing to say that this minor had no place in mankind history

Would you say the same thing about Jesus? or Jone of ARC etc etc

The 1200 people who died on Titanic ... think of how many third class minor died on that day

Are you willing to say that other people minors are third class and you have first class children?

 

This thinking is how we facilitated class warfare, racism and anti-gay events in our history

Now we extend this thinking to other people children?

 

This is the most laughable argument I ever heard. You are comparing different situations. The Titantic claim would make sense if those kids were placed in seat beat and some one crashes into them and the kids weren't allowed to take off the seat beat and then the bus explodes killing them all... would be comparable.

 

Jesus was preaching a religion unlike this boy who stuck his head out the window. It would be comparable say this kids was preaching to the other kids and the security guard didn't like and shoved him up through the hatch so the kid could get killed.

 

Joan of Arc was serving in a war. She was the casualty of war. Your arguement would make sense if the kid was leading and charging it's bus load of people to demonstrate and protest or fight a cause and the folks from the other side or even police came and pushed him through the hatch and thus had him killed.

 

Of course, with visions as diluted as yours you can always blame others. Because every circumstance is the same for you.

 

I guess someone just wants to world to be dumber longer, to teach our children to be idiots, and have no accountability, for they are "kids" and have no repercussions because it isn't their fault. So that more folks can die because they can blame other folks. People what you did wrong isn't your fault, it's someone else's fault. And when you are deemed "mature" enough you magically become smart, knowing, and retain common sense... it's not through personal experience and the experience of others... it's magic. So the next time you ride an airplane go open that emergency hatch and stick your head out into the sky because you derserve that curiosity. Enjoy it. Because if something happened, it's not your fault. It's the airline's fault. Go play with that locked up gun in your house. If you kill someone it's not your fault, it's the gun maker and sellers fault. When you fail your classes, it's not your fault, it's your teacher's and professor's fault. Because you are young and have no responsibility. Because you obviously can't make a choice.

 

Sorry. But I'm done here. This discussion is getting ridiculous and someone has this make believe sense that lacks all common sense to see the world as is. Always blaming others for your mistake just shows that Darwin should take you out of this world. I guess people should be sueing car makers and alcohol makers for drunk driving accidents. Or car makers for accidents period. Because they are capitalizing off of people, because you know they are forcing us to buy vehicles. Or scientists for engineering such possible feat because people weren't told that driving at a certain speed and crashing would equate to death. Because when people decide to drink and drive it's not their fault.Those people who get into wrecks its not their fault because the means were provided for them. They should be required to think and say," If I do this I can hurt other people."

 

So all those teen killers and rapist. Go tell their vicitims that it's not the fault of the murderer and rapist. The murderer and rapist weren't taught correctly. That they are young and don't know any better because you know as a human being we don't know at all that raping and killing is not wrong.

 

You're arguments may make sense to a person who lacks any self accountability. Who thinks whatever they do is right and never their fault. Your arguments are perfect for the people who start wars, racism, and homophobia because why should these people know any better. It's not their fault if they hate on gay peoples. They just were taught better so when they beat and tie a person to a fence post, they have no accountability. Someone else is at fault.

[hh5]

yeah your right ... <sighs>

the evolution in NYC is in the news we will watch it unfold

Some will reach out

some will watch it like a sports program

Some will be rowdy twitters of mankind

 

<sighs>