So the answer is, ah, to scrap regulations and trust employers to self-police and the market after to adjust ?
Well you’re doing it out of ignorance. You couldn’t be bothered to research your smartass retort. It was a very small company.
Is anyone less dead?
If you have some sort of problem with me and/or my attitude, the Pit is open, round the clock.
No. The answer is don’t politicize a tragedy like this, especially when one doesn’t actually have any facts to back up the statements one is making.
It seems to me that indeed the OP has weak sauce there, but what Try2B Comprehensive linked to is making this really “spicy”.
More indication of the total incompetence of the Department of Homeland Security.
The company here is basically a retailer of fertilizer products to farmers, not a manufacturer. You would think it would be simple for the DHS to contact the manufacturers of ammonium nitrate and ask for a customer list and for DHS to systematically contact these customers such as this retailer. I would expect a substantial fraction of such customers would have a significant quantity in stock.
Why didn’t it? Because the DHS considers it more important to hassle disabled, elderly… airline passengers.
Um, my cite explicitly says DHS tracks these things for safety:
bolding mine. And we still don’t know what caused the disaster, or if proper DHS oversight might have prevented it.
C’mon, John. Ask yourself: What would Maddow do? 
You know when you have one of those thoughts and then go "No, that’s way too stupid! and then you go “Or maybe not…”
Is it possible that DHS operates under a different concept of “safety” than another regulatory body? That they focus on the security of the deadly shit in the sense of preventing unauthorized access, rather than preventing extreme forms of rapid expansion and air pollution?
Yeah, like we shouldn’t have politicized the massacre of those children in Newtown. I remember the right making noises about that. I think of such events as “teachable moments.”
I don’t really so how it wouldn’t have a political aspect. On the Federal level, we got questions about regulation and enforcement. State level, lot of the same. Local level as well, the city planning here seems to be below Sim City.
Now, I will say that given what we know so far, its hard to imagine an explanation that exonerates all responsible parties, but I’m willing to listen.
The “safety” they are referring to is ensuring the stuff isn’t made into bombs. DHS isn’t concerned with workplace safety.
Unless the place was hit by a meteor, someone is at fault. A workplace accident is always someone’s fault.
Sounds like it became a bomb, which rendered this part of the homeland unsafe. But I admit I don’t really understand what the DHS is about. It is worth noting that congresscritters felt that the DHS would have liked to have known about this place beforehand and did not through a failure of reporting. Not exactly the ‘deregulation’ Evil Captor is getting at, unless you want to get into a culture of contempt for regulation itself.
What do you think, is ‘deregulation’ a valid thing to point fingers at in this discussion?
Sure it is. Why do you think our regulatory agencies are so understaffed that they must rely on self-reporting by many businesses? Because it’s a defacto form of deregulation. The Job Creators must be allowed to work unfettered, untrammelled by ANY consideration. Underfunding an agency is a blessing, unless that agency is part of the defense department. Ever hear of “starve the beast”?
We simply do not have the evidence to know. Nobody has presented a credible case; in this thread, nobody’s even demonstrated they know what the hell they’re talking about, or even understand the relevant terms of art.
Still not the type of bomb the DHS would have done anything about, had they known how much fertiliser was stored at the unit. And as others in the thread have pointed out, it should have been simple for them to get to know, considering that other government departments did know. In other words, your cite is entirely useless in the context of this explosion and its causes, particularly as related to deregulation.
As, in fact, I think(?) you’re admitting here. Good for you if so.
Deregulation? Almost certainly not. Poor regulation? (Which is not always the same thing), perhaps.
I have a problem with your glib response regarding the size of the company. 9 employees. By all means, pit yourself.
No it’s not. It’s a defacto realization that there is only so much tax money that can be spent on regulatory oversight.
Going back to this… was it the ammonia on fire in the first place? I thought the fire started elsewhere in the facility, and this fire eventually caused the ammonia to go kaboom. Do we know for sure that there weren’t supposed to be sprinklers where the fire started/spread?
Yah well that’s why I asked you. Do we not know if this is a case of de-facto deregulation? Could it still be terrorist sabotage? Has anybody ruled out stupid people negligently setting things on fire?
If nobody knows anything, everybody ought to get off the anti-regulation high horse too.
ETA: Wait!!! Some people already KNOW that ‘regulation’ is always bad :eek:
By all means, enlighten us. Fighting ignorance and all that.