I’m be curious to know how that storage method matches against the standard for storage.
I’m not in favor of removing a fine, get permitted dumbasses and all that, but if they at least followed the standard for storage then a small fine would be acceptable to me.
Permits also enable stuff like a regular independent inspection regime which might be a good idea for especially dangerous stuff.
It's not good enough (in my opinion) that they might be doing it right for now - they have do do what is necessary so that it can continue to be done right until the stuff is safe.
If they go out of business or sell the land or assets, the next people need to know what is where and how to handle it and have all the records and reports and so on. So a proper public record, rather than private would better.
Don't get me wrong, a spill is worse than a paperwok infringement, but
this fine seems trivial in relation to (what I think should be) the level of responsibility for handling and toxic materials - even just getting all the paperwork right.
Imagine if they did go out of business, and someone had to re-inspect the whole site to determine the risks with no reports to start from - could that be done for $14k?
Without having knowledge of the cost of inspection I can’t answer that question.
I’m also not arguing against permits or the fact that they fucked up by not getting permitted, I’m just curious if that storage method is on par with the standard.
If so, then in your scenario the inspection would be at or near it’s minimal cost because the inspector would check see everything they expect and life would be groovy. This is opposed to nonstandard methods where the inspector will have to figure out what impact their method did or did not have on the local environment which costs much more time (and money)
The photo that shows the trees is nuts. Good example of the power they have. Those trees were shredded from the debris tornados carry with them all whipping around at 125 mph.
We expect one to join the discord or matrix server, read the guidelines and communicate with us if they have any questions.
Aside from that it is just normal modding, clearing out reports and keeping the community clean. We will keep an eye out if you are not over or under-modding, and let you know if you are.
We started walking, and then a police officer told us not to pass there. We tried to explain that [another] officer asked us to go through there, but he just started kicking us." What followed was recorded by Turkish television.
Al-Haruf is seen continuously asking the police officer who had attacked him for his details and demanding other policemen who were pushing him and Abu Ramila to calm down. One of the officers then punches him in the head several times and walks away.
My man experienced the IDF telling him to go south and then bombing the south.
If the founders didn’t just want to stir the pot, they would call the club “free-will humanitarian anti-authority club”.
After a bit of prodding ChatGPT suggests: “Free Spirits for Global Empowerment and Liberty” (FSGEL), which is a million time better then invoking satan, just to get on people’s nervs.
I don’t quite understand, Satan is a contentious figure in Christianity (and maybe other Abrahamic religions? idk, not knowledgeable about it) and it’s reasonable to be worried or concerned as an adult about what interests the youth might have. And it really seems the opposition is simply speaking platitudes. They haven’t demonstrated 1. it is not a faith, and 2. it causes harm. The folks who are opposed surely can’t have their preferred beliefs determine the beliefs of others in areas where it’s clear there is not immediate harm.
Highlights religious indoctrination doesn’t really belong in schools. I can’t really speak to the organization ASSC and what they do, but that’s the point of including Satan in school. Trying to make a club for (just an example here) your Jedi church doesn’t have the same punch because Jedi haven’t been a part of culture for hundreds/thousands of years. Maybe I’m off base here, but it’s easier to make a legal argument in court that your religion is real if it’s been a part of culture for a while.
Gives kids who are athiest/nonreligious an outlet away from all the christian stuff. Christianity can feel very oppressive in school, depending on the location. Calling it the “free spirit” club or atheist club isn’t enough. Christians tend to go out and find non-believers to bother, so designing your club as a big metaphorical middle finger can help with that. It’ll keep the young evangelists out, and it’s a reasonable outlet for feeling rebellious.
Missing from the article is this group’s primary, unstated motive: they only attempt to create such clubs in schools that actively promote similar, religious clubs. This tactic only works in schools that have previously demonstrated their intent to promote religion.
Any school can insulate themselves from this tactic by not becoming a church.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.