Go cart death

There is nothing simplistic in what I have said, operators of venues like this go kart track are responsible by law for providing a safe environment for their employees and customers and if that means they stop some people from using their go karts because of them wearing unsafe attire then that is part of their responsibility as well.

A number of comments have derided and mocked this young lady who died because of her religious beliefs, this is offensive.

I have offered my opinions and experiences of the venue and now there is these comments about how the track staff might have been bullied by the Muslims, especially if the staff were youngsters.
Well if that was the case (which again is only supposition on others behalf) then they shouldn't have been put in that position by the owner in the first place and it shows they weren't mature or experienced enough to have been left in charge of a venue and activity like this.

What has been seized upon by some readers on this website is that she died because of her hijab which is a garment required in her religion. This in part became a discussion about the pros and cons of her religion not the fact that she died because of a piece of clothing getting caught around a axle. It should make no differences what religion she was this all happened because of a piece of clothing and the fact that she was allowed to wear it while in a hire go kart.

Would there have been the same feeling if she had been a young white mother wearing a scarf and the same thing had happened?

Regards,
Terry O'Neill

Have to agree with you that religion has nothing to do with it - the loss of life is a tragedy regardless of who it is.

However it has to be asked - would a young white mother be as likely to refuse to remove her scarf if requested to do so for safety reasons - or play the "prejudice" card if told that she could not use the go-kart while wearing a loose scarf ? I think not.

I have no problems with Muslim women wearing whatever articles of clothing they like, whether dictated by their religion or not. I have as very close friends a couple who are members of this religion, and she wears this type of clothing most (not all) of the time. However, there are times when common sense and safety, or other considerations like security etc. must take precedence over a religious edict - anyone who believes otherwise is a fool. I once had occasion to refuse to employ an Indian gentleman in a position in mining which required, for his own safety, that he wear a hard hat. This gentleman refused to wear a hard hat in place of his traditional head gear. Was I wrong ? I don't think so and I'd do it again. But I can understand some people, particularly teenagers, being intimidated in these circumstances.

Anyway - this is all pretty immaterial until an investigation is conducted and the real facts are made known. Until then, we are all guessing with no real knowledge of the facts.

Well said Terry. No one should die on a day out go-karting.

Years ago I worked at a very busy go kart centre on the gold coast - repairing broken karts and generally sponging off the owner... Whilst the punters have a responsibility to be dressed properly, the track-dudes are also supposed to make sure they are. Plenty of young girls had to be given sneakers to wear because they showed up in thongs etc... but rules are rules and the track-dudes always made sure people were good to go before sending them out on the track. I would think that the insurance people would require that kind of oversight, especially these days.

Making inflamatory statements about hypothetical situations that may have led to the incident is the job of ACA and TT - especially where the opportunity for racial sterotyping is present. :wasntme:

Cheers,

Adam

I really wasn't going to get into this, but....

It looks like the owners were not particularly concerned with the rules or their resonsibilities.
Fatal go-kart park running illegally | The Daily Telegraph

I think they'll probably be in a fair bit of strife over this. As a few have said now, the customers are not expected to be experts in the safety aspects of the activity. The operators ARE.

Thank you for responding BMKal and making the point you do.

The point you made about you not employing the Indian (more then likely Sikh) gentleman because of his religous head dress and how it would have had a safety impact in the work environment he was applying for is exactly the same as my point that she should not have been allowed to drive the kart because of safety concerns with the hijab, as it ended up being.

Regarding your comments about ..."However it has to be asked - would a young white mother be as likely to refuse to remove her scarf if requested to do so for safety reasons - or play the "prejudice" card if told that she could not use the go-kart while wearing a loose scarf ? I think not."

No one has shown that this was the case in this situation either, again this is just a supposition which is unproven but muddies the water of who had ultimate responisibility for allowing her to drive the Kart while wearing unsafe clothing. You acted correctly when you stopped the Idian gentleman from working in the mine because he wouldn't wear a hard hat.

I'll ask you this, whose fault and responsibility would it have been if you had employed him and then allowed him not to wear a hard hat and he had diead because he was hit by a falling object?

Everyone in this mess looses out, a husband lost his wife, two young children lost their mother and the circuit owners will more then likely loose everything they own and possibly go to jail.

Sorry Gaol.

Regards,
Terry O'Neill

Well done on the correct spelling of gaol!

Cant believe how this subject has gone south so quickly

Everyone is entitled to any belief they choose and should not be judged on those beliefs

but by there actions

And this persons beliefs had nothing to do with her accident it could have been a scarf a tie or even a fluffy dress

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DDdisco

I really wasn't going to get into this, but....

It looks like the owners were not particularly concerned with the rules or their resonsibilities.
Fatal go-kart park running illegally | The Daily Telegraph

I think they'll probably be in a fair bit of strife over this. As a few have said now, the customers are not expected to be experts in the safety aspects of the activity. The operators ARE.

---

Perhaps you can be accused of drawing conclusions. It seems they've been operating for 10 years without previous problems. It is possible they didn't know they had to be registered for amusement devices.

Ron,

I'd be surprised if they did do this on purpose but that is still no excuse for what happened.

I was told by a circuit owner only a few days before this accident that a go kart track owner in Victoria recently was fined 1.2 million dollars and received a goal term for allowing a patron to not wear a seat belt because it didn't fit. The patron then went out crashed the kart and was killed.

In NSW's unlike in Victoria and all other states around the country there are various acts of parliament that cover motorsport and activities like go karting etc.

Courts are usually not very understanding towards people who run / own businesses that break laws that cause other peoples death even if they were ignorant of the law.

Regards,
Terry O'Neill

Perhaps not deliberate, but it seems a bit odd that people who had been in the industry for 10 years don't know the legislation under which they operate. I don't know that they'd had no problems in 10 years, do you?
In any case, Workcover don't usually accept ignorance of the requirements as a defence, especially when somebody has been killed.