|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 20, 2014 6:13:59 GMT
The same as me, a member of the community we all share, that has set rules of what we find acceptable. If other people wish to join, they abide by the rules. The more of us that say we are not prepared to allow people to break those common rules, the better.
Who are we?.. we are small voices in a crowd, ok, but we are voices, and if more of us decide to use that voice, the better the rest of the crowd understands. We must as a community learn NOT to sit in silence. We DO have a say in the rules. Rules can be changed, by common consent, not by force. But it has to be a free vote, not a riotous overthrow. That is democracy. Its what we fought for isnt it?.................
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Apr 20, 2014 11:35:17 GMT
Keep things on topic please.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 20, 2014 14:17:16 GMT
Keep things on topic please. right - lets see what the interwebz says about it... The interwebz says that all hair salons in the world have either "burns" or "fire" in their names - and there has never been a fire inside a salon. (I found one that had a fire in an exterior light fixture which was quickly extinguished.)
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 21, 2014 12:19:58 GMT
Keep things on topic please. Right... ok,... From what I know, and this includes the ADR dangerous goods supply of hair products from basic materials to the factories that supply the salons.... The biggest fear I would have of fire in a hair salon would be BLEVE in hairspray cans. From what I know, there are some very acerbic nasties that people put on hair to get effects, but by the time they get to a sensitive scalp, they are much diluted. I also know there is a limitation of how much product you could keep "on site" without it having to go into a locked fire safe.... Most of the supplies by the time they get to a warehouse are "LQ", Limited Quantity, and limitations on that are somewhat grey. So as for fire, there was a fire in a salon supply warehouse in Manchester recently... www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/jul/14/teenage-girls-held-firefighter-deathand this link www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-23309673One fire-fighter lost his life in that blaze, the whole of Manchester mourned his loss, and about half a tennis pitch of flowers laid out in front of his station showed just how much we will miss him. The investigation is still ongoing.... they have not yet released exactly what caused such an intense blaze... But, we can only assume, "Something" there was highly flammable.... Was that the products on site, or was it something in the buildings construction, or maybe the decorations of the hair salon..... I have no answers.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 21, 2014 14:35:20 GMT
Keep things on topic please. Right... ok,... From what I know, and this includes the ADR dangerous goods supply of hair products from basic materials to the factories that supply the salons.... The biggest fear I would have of fire in a hair salon would be BLEVE in hairspray cans. From what I know, there are some very acerbic nasties that people put on hair to get effects, but by the time they get to a sensitive scalp, they are much diluted. I also know there is a limitation of how much product you could keep "on site" without it having to go into a locked fire safe.... Most of the supplies by the time they get to a warehouse are "LQ", Limited Quantity, and limitations on that are somewhat grey. So as for fire, there was a fire in a salon supply warehouse in Manchester recently... www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/jul/14/teenage-girls-held-firefighter-deathand this link www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-23309673One fire-fighter lost his life in that blaze, the whole of Manchester mourned his loss, and about half a tennis pitch of flowers laid out in front of his station showed just how much we will miss him. The investigation is still ongoing.... they have not yet released exactly what caused such an intense blaze... But, we can only assume, "Something" there was highly flammable.... Was that the products on site, or was it something in the buildings construction, or maybe the decorations of the hair salon..... I have no answers. so, a salon caught fire, not a warehouse. critical difference on this side of the Atlantic. and yes, the line of duty death is tragic. hopefully the investigators can get it riddled out so they can prevent it happening somewhere else. truth of the matter, though is it may not have been anything unique to the structure or contents, and it was just that the firefighters failed to take notice of the warning signs of an impending flashover. mistakes happen in firefighting, too, and with our improved protective gear, it is quite possible to notice heat buildup too late.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 23, 2014 6:24:57 GMT
Just to muddy the waters to pea-soup, Pauls was a salon and warehouse. He supplied a lot of other local salons....
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 23, 2014 14:05:24 GMT
Just to muddy the waters to pea-soup, Pauls was a salon and warehouse. He supplied a lot of other local salons.... do you have the square footage of the storage space? that will help to determine how much bigger the supply of product was. most salons I have been associated with have a supply shelf or closet about the size of a coat closet.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 25, 2014 5:16:16 GMT
I do not have any details about the size of supply room on site. I never visited the place, all I know is what can be found via internet or local word-ofmouth, that claims it was a sizeable hair product supply warehouse, large shop, and salon. Not exactly thousands of square feet, but a couple of hundred?...
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 25, 2014 13:45:14 GMT
I do not have any details about the size of supply room on site. I never visited the place, all I know is what can be found via internet or local word-ofmouth, that claims it was a sizeable hair product supply warehouse, large shop, and salon. Not exactly thousands of square feet, but a couple of hundred?... just goes to show the media seems to be allergic to clear concise reporting.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 26, 2014 5:29:36 GMT
That is not the media, its the police and Fire service investigation not bending over backwards to the media and releasing such details during an on-going investigation.... Otherwise the Media starts playing junior Sherlock games and pre-guessing the result.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 26, 2014 11:22:00 GMT
That is not the media, its the police and Fire service investigation not bending over backwards to the media and releasing such details during an on-going investigation.... Otherwise the Media starts playing junior Sherlock games and pre-guessing the result. its both.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Apr 27, 2014 10:33:23 GMT
I suppose that may be right. The Police and Fire investigations will only announce to the media what they have any reason to know, as in as little as possible. If anything is found that may have relevance in later incidents, they will both make the decision to either change fire fighting tactics, or change the law to prevent such occurrences happening again... But the do not do that as trial by fire, if you can excuse the pun, trough the media.
The medi believe it is their job to set the agenda for change of law. That is not their position... The media should report the facts, they should be unbiased, they may report if laws have been broken, but is it their job to find laws that they "think" should be changed?.... "By any means"?... And if that means door-stepping some poor sod who hasnt got a pot of glue whats happening?... {Pot of glue - clue] Hacking into personal private confidential data?... Paying someone to "leek" information?... Surely having a paid mole in the investigation invalidates the whole investigation?... and for what?.. so rupert-the-barsteward-dirty-duck-murdock can make a few million in extra sales of newspapers?...
I witnessed a fire-fighter being door-stepped as he exited a still smouldering building by a reporter "Can you tell us how this happened?..", it was all I could do to prevent myself from rugby-tackling the reporter to the ground, but the fire-fighter with all due diligence patience and a whole lot of sarcasm that made me proud pushed her to ons side with a "Get the hell out of my way idiot, we havnt even put the fire out yet, what you want?.. you want us too let it burn for your camera's?... "....
(Why was I on the scene... I was next door, which was still safe-ish, in a chemical plant hitching up trailers and getting them the hell out of dodge in case the fire spread..... taking them to the far end of the industrial estate to a secure parking lot...)
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 27, 2014 13:46:21 GMT
I suppose that may be right. The Police and Fire investigations will only announce to the media what they have any reason to know, as in as little as possible. If anything is found that may have relevance in later incidents, they will both make the decision to either change fire fighting tactics, or change the law to prevent such occurrences happening again... But the do not do that as trial by fire, if you can excuse the pun, trough the media. The medi believe it is their job to set the agenda for change of law. That is not their position... The media should report the facts, they should be unbiased, they may report if laws have been broken, but is it their job to find laws that they "think" should be changed?.... "By any means"?... And if that means door-stepping some poor sod who hasnt got a pot of glue whats happening?... {Pot of glue - clue] Hacking into personal private confidential data?... Paying someone to "leek" information?... Surely having a paid mole in the investigation invalidates the whole investigation?... and for what?.. so rupert-the-barsteward-dirty-duck-murdock can make a few million in extra sales of newspapers?... I witnessed a fire-fighter being door-stepped as he exited a still smouldering building by a reporter "Can you tell us how this happened?..", it was all I could do to prevent myself from rugby-tackling the reporter to the ground, but the fire-fighter with all due diligence patience and a whole lot of sarcasm that made me proud pushed her to ons side with a "Get the hell out of my way idiot, we havnt even put the fire out yet, what you want?.. you want us too let it burn for your camera's?... ".... (Why was I on the scene... I was next door, which was still safe-ish, in a chemical plant hitching up trailers and getting them the hell out of dodge in case the fire spread..... taking them to the far end of the industrial estate to a secure parking lot...) our training, impressed into us by repetition (and the fact that being on the front page of the newspaper above the fold is ice cream and quoted in the paper is steak dinners (PIO is exempt for obvious reasons)) is "you will want to talk to the Public Information Officer, over there by the chiefs." but you might recall about a year ago, I posted a "what's wrong with these two stories" in, probably, how stupid can you be, showing how two different media outlets could print two completely different versions of the same press release. (which I knew were different because I had helped edit the original press release for publication.) addendum: in fact I had even supplied the "money shot" Attachment Deleted
|
|