I'm not laughing about what happened, I'm laughing at you!LJ;714116 wrote:a kid died LOL
so funny
LOL
rock_knutne;714119 wrote:I'm not laughing about what happened, I'm laughing at you!
Like I said, go up there and find out who's responsible, since OSHA won't tell us.:rolleyes:LJ;714115 wrote:then he needs fired.
And once again (ugh, you don;t get it) OSHA does not investigate individuals, only companies as a whole.
rock_knutne;714121 wrote:Like I said, go up there and find out who's responsible, since OSHA won't tell us.:rolleyes:
LMFAO.......it was an accident, you make it sound like it was murder. Get off your high horse!LJ;714120 wrote:Laughing at me for wanting the person who was negligent, that KILLED a kid to be fired is funny?
Wow.
rock_knutne;714123 wrote:LMFAO.......it was an accident, you make it sound like it was murder. Get off your high horse!
Yeah, it was "gross negligence".:rolleyes: Get a clue!LJ;714127 wrote:It was gross negligence.
LJ;714125 wrote:OSHA DOES NOT INVESTIGATE INDIVIDUALS YOU FUCKING MORON!!!!!
rock_knutne;714129 wrote:Yeah, it was "gross negligence".:rolleyes: Get a clue!
rock_knutne;714132 wrote:Oh nice, name calling. Are you going to receive an infraction?
Again, I understand that so........go up there and investigate it yourself!
The Equalizer;714103 wrote:Weather is a difficult thing to predict as far as what it's going to do, how long it's going to last, etc. Maybe Kelly wasn't able to find the ones to partner with to handle such a difficult and complex situation and by the time he did it was too late.
Who was in charge of safety? Until you answer that question this topic is DEAD! The University hasn't fired anyone and they are installing a high priced custom made camera system to film future practices. To me, it sounds like everyone investigating and the involved parties agree that it was a tragic accident rather gross negligence.LJ;714134 wrote:Someone was in charge of looking after the individual's safety. they did not do that, and he died. By definition, that is gross negligence.
rock_knutne;714141 wrote:Who was in charge of safety? Until you answer that question this topic is DEAD! The University hasn't fired anyone and they are installing a high priced custom made camera system to film future practices. To me, it sounds like everyone investigating and the involved parties agree that it was a tragic accident rather gross negligence.
LJ;714136 wrote:You can't get an infraction for speaking the truth.
Shouldn't you be the one up in arms about this. This is the university you are a fan of. If this was OSU I would be pissed and wanting them to take action on the person responsible. There is someone that was tasked to be in charge of telling him to get down. The person who did not do that needs fired. PERIOD
LJ;714144 wrote:Uh, OSHA ruled it negligence.
Why do I need to know who was in charge of safety? It was whoever was in charge of the kid.
rock_knutne;714152 wrote:Then you should cite yourself for a lack of brain capacity.
Look, for the final time.........who's in charge of telling the kid to get down from that lift, if there even was someone in charge?
Yes, it saddens me that such a tragedy happened, especially one that certainly could have been avoided but it was an accident. You make it sound like the kid was forced to go up on that lift and stay there come hell or high water which anyone with common sense would realize this is simply not the case.
rock_knutne;714156 wrote:You're the one who's hell bent on having someone fired, wouldn't the person in charge be a logical place to start?
BINGO!LJ;714161 wrote:It's the proper place to start. But alas, I am not in charge, nor do I know who works there. My first firing would be his direct boss, who is directly in charge of and responsible for his workplace safety.
rock_knutne;714167 wrote:BINGO!
LJ;714169 wrote:??? That means I cannot want someone fired over this? You know, starting with the person who was directly the kid's boss?
Great logic you have
LJ;714158 wrote:They did not tell him to get down, which they were legally responsible for doing for being in charge of his safety. They did not, that is negligence. OSHA agrees with me. How can you not undestand this?
karen lotz;714172 wrote:Congrats you want someone fired. Who the hell are you? Nobody.
LJ;714169 wrote:??? That means I cannot want someone fired over this? You know, starting with the person who was directly the kid's boss?
Great logic you have
rock_knutne;714173 wrote:I do understand that but you didn't answer my question and I agree, ND was at fault. He was not forced to go up and stay up on that lift.
So then Kelly is at fault?I doubt Kelly has time to baby sit the guys filming practices.
Another infraction! Great example you're setting.LJ;714176 wrote:go fuck yourself
You don't have to be "somebody" to want justice.