njlauren
Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: tj444
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: tj444
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
You mean to tell me, that the blaze that led to the explosion might have been arson? 
Wow. Imagine that. The entire West TX Fertilizer plant fiasco responsibility might not have been solely due to fuckups by the plant's management?!? Who would have thought?!?!? Oh. That's right. I did mention that it could have been arson...
Security is part of what management is responsible for (if not management then who???  ).. there were numerous instances of theft & vandalism and considering that this amonia stuff is explosive under certain conditions, it was management that should have done more to increase security & obey all laws regarding their operation..
quote:
ORIGINAL DomKen
Management was still at fault. they were storing massive quantities of a highly combustible material without the most basic of safeguards. The question is should the government be crushing this guy's balls in case he might know something?
What part of "[t]he entire West TX Fertilizer plant fiasco responsibility might not have been solely due to fuckups by the plant's management" escapes your understanding? At no point in time - on any thread about this - have I ever claimed that management wasn't responsible. And, I have never made any claim that they weren't the most responsible, either.
The ammonium nitrate didn't blow up because of how it was stored, or how much there was. It exploded due to the fire, which may have been arson.
And, to respond, Ken, no, we should not be busting his balls.
it was forseeable (thats what safety regs/laws and commonsense are for) so yes, it was on them.. regardless of if it was arson or someone smoking where they shouldnt have been smoking and flicking their lit cig where it could blow up the place... heck, one trespasser took his sweet time in the place and surfed porn sites on the secretary's computer..
So, if this was arson, there is no liability on the arsonist? The only thing I'm saying, is that not all the blame is on the Fertilizer company. I'm not saying they are exonerated. I'm not saying they are blameless. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be raked over the coals. I am saying that they may not be the only ones to bear responsibility.
Well, shit, if arson is foreseeable (which is what you're saying), what isn't?
Well, let's see. Texas is tornado alley, so having the building secured in such a way as to try and prevent the output of toxic chemicals if one hits is foreseeable. Buildings put up in earthquake zones like California are built to standards that help minimize the impact of earthquakes, and businesses with high risk (nuclear power plants, chemical plants) do things that in the event of an earthquake to try and prevent. If you have a plant with a toxic materials and also I might add at risk of being stolen by terrorists (pretty good explosive, ask Timothy McVeigh), it may take more brain cells then the ttypical denizen of Texas has, but it is wise to have security. I have worked in places where there is sensitive information, like M and A deals, and they had all kinds of policies and procedures to prevent unauthorized people from seeing them, because if it got out it would cause all kinds of headaches. In NYC, construction is done to minimize damage from fires spreading from building to building, they have codes governing fire stairs and have requiremens for regular fire and terrorist drills, because they know from history and experience what can happen, and they are ways to handle events they can forsee happening.
If you want to argue that the plant management never thought that what they had was dangerous, that precautions needed to be taken, that whether it was security to keep out an arsonist or a potential terrorist coming to steal an explosive substance, or whether it was supervision to make sure some moron isn't smoking where there are flammable things, then that is kind of ridiculous, that is arguing that since not everything is foreseeable, nothing is. You can't predict exactly how an earthquake will happen,but if you can prevent against as much as is known, or do the best you can, that is prudence. The fact that they had a plant with dangerous, explosive substances in it and had only a 1 million dollar liability policy tells the story, the management figured it didn't matter, that if they had an explosion nothing could happen to them, Texas certainly isn't going to put them in jail for negligence, and in terms of liability they can file for bankruptcy and screw anyone suing them....so why bother?
|
Was West, Texas explosion a domestic terror attack? - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread