Should Honor really have been charged?

They most important issue, why the author is completely right, is that Harrington stands on the far sides of two millennia of advances on computational and theoretical advances advances in engineering practice. Matters that we might not support have centuries since been entirely solved. We see here a recycle of the argument over State Security using all software locks on their missile warheads at the time of Ooops! Our primitive ideas on engineering are not terrible significant.

I am reminded of a time when digital electronic radio keys for cars were ridiculed, but my retired colleague now has one for his Maserati, and views it so far as I can tell as far better and more reliable than a primitive mechanical substitute.

The whole field of OH&S can be contentious. I'm sure we've all seen photos of extraordinarily dangerous practices in developing countries. The current scandal is in Brazil where workers are dying while constructing soccer stadiums under unsafe conditions.

I've had experience with the other extreme though on a few occasions. One idiot grounded our Chinook helicopter fleet because field maintenance has to be done using fold down steps and our national industrial guidelines said we had to use scaffolding over a certain height (in active duty?), and another pointed out that employees in hazardous work circumstances MUST wear hi visibility vests - our SAS wanted to have a talk with him after he insisted they follow regulations. Both took special amendments to national law to shut them up.
On another occasion our F111 fleet was grounded because the briefing room may have had sewerage fumes present. As the CO said "These pilots were going out to fly at Mach 2 a few metres above the tree line and it was felt that a possible smell may have been hazardous".

In this instance I'm amazed that the topic was even considered, and believe that RFC was much more polite than I would have been in his place. His universe his rules, but, in our country as of now, once a section of a construction has been certified finished and safe there would be no thought of safety issues for visitors.

cthia wrote:Out of respect for the author, this thread is over.
Please!

Your the one that has been driving the thread. Asking everyone else to let the thread die when you wont... Well that just seems... silly...

Anyways!... i only skimmed the thread myself, but it seems that you want everyone to walk around with bubble wrap on while you pad every corner because of safety hazards. Somewhat sarcastic, but there it is.

Problem is there are too many sharp corners in the world. Cars can be very deadly, and in fact hundreds of people die every day because of them. Should we all go back to horse and carriages though?
Should we all walk to work wearing a helmet because we might slip on a pebble and crack our skulls open on a stray rock?

At the end of the day you minimize the realistic risks and you get on with your life.

Letting children under a finished section posed no more risk than putting modern day students on a school bus and driving them to school. Less in fact, looking at the number of traffic accidents we have.

And if the dome had been finished and children were allowed under it, it still would have eventually collapsed because of the sabotage. Even more children would have died. And it wouldn't have been an "Active" Construction site. All those OSHA safety regs would have done nothing to prevent it.


At the end of the day, crap happens, and no amount of bubble wrap will prevent it. The best you can do is live your life and hope not to get hit by lighting. And if it is your time to get hit by lighting, don't shake your first at the sky and try to press charges or sue.

Topic over.