| Pages:
1
2 |
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Is it really fair to hold the institution or instructor completely responsible? Because unless there has been intentional negligence, the concept of
responsibility is really quite subjective. These types of accidents are often the combined indirect result of the actions and inactions of a countless
number of people (for example the chemical manufacturer or the student herself). Trying to determine what all those people should and should not have
done, and how much responsibility each should be held to as a result of their actions or inactions, is not a simple affair. The very fact that the
regulatory agencies exist is proof that the court system in inadequate to handle these types of complex problems.
Often when something goes wrong, everyone wants to conveniently point the blame somewhere, but this often results in unfair injustice.
[Edited on 21-1-2012 by AndersHoveland]
|
|
|
Neil
National Hazard
Posts: 556
Registered: 19-3-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
...due diligence...
|
|
|
Polverone
Now celebrating 21 years of madness
|
Thread Split
31-1-2012 at 20:42 |
aliced25
Hazard to Others
Posts: 262
Registered: 31-7-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
No, I would say criminal charges are warranted and seriously overdue. Causing death by engaging in or allowing others to engage in conduct which is
inherently and manifestly unsafe, knowing the likelihood of a bad outcome, while ignoring safety requirements and the rest, that is culpable.
There is a degree of acceptance of a known risk given the person knew what she was doing was dangerous, but supervision is required for a reason -
that being that people tend to do dumb shit without it.
I personally have a major issue with people bypassing, turning off and/or ignoring safety measures through apathy or just plain stupidity. If you
ignore safety requirements/measures and what they are designed to prevent happening happens, it isn't an accident - it's a fuck up. It would be an
accident if it were unforeseen as being a real possibility, if it were foreseen as being a real possibility, then choosing to do so (or allow someone
else to do so) is a case of piss poor judgement.
That the person would be killed might not be easily foreseeable, it doesn't have to be, everyone involved knew that fucking with pyrophoric chemicals
without regard to safety is a fuckup waiting to happen and fire was always a possibility. Doing so without elementary precautions like flame-resistant
outerwear near open containers of flammable solvent? You really cannot see the problem?
That this was "allowed" to happen, despite the lab and supervisor being aware of it, is what is being prosecuted. It amazes me, everyone knows that
the OH&S requirements exist, but how many know the penalties for failing to abide by them and to ensure that employees abide by them? Bugger all,
the laws aren't new, neither are the penalties, ignorance is no excuse nor is the fact that everyone else gets away with it. There is no excuse for
those in charge ignoring dangerous, stupid stunts or work practices, they are responsible for what is going on.
If I got in a vehicle stewed to the gills and ran someone over, I'd be jailed, yet not that long ago being drunk was an excuse for doing so. What can
be accepted changes and so it should.
[Edited on 12-3-2012 by aliced25]
From a Knight of the Realm: "Animated movies are not just for kids, they're also for adults who do a lot of drugs." Sir Paul McCartney
|
|
|
ScienceSquirrel
|
Thread Pruned
13-3-2012 at 05:23 |
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
