• webghost0101@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tbf if its proven the titan wasn’t up to regulation it should 100% be the company that build the sub that needs to be held accountable. If not the bill should go to whatever got the rescue people involved. Then the insurance that covered such exotic and dangerous ride. (Just like i had insurance when i went to see the pyramids). If its not any above the above than it means the passengers took 100% responsibility and the families should pay up.

    Hundereds of immigrants died this week on a ship, no one gave a fuck. Not a penny spend.

    I am hoping someone more informed then me can do a comparison how long we could provide shelter and food to those immigrants with that amount of spend money. The internet cant enforce fair economic treatment between the classes but we can call out the hypocrisy.

    • pwnstar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There was already an article that basically said they will be immune from any lawsuits. They operated in international waters outside the scope of any laws or regulations on how the submersible needed to be rated. I hope they can find grounds to sue them and kill the company, maybe they will be open to civil lawsuits?

      • fsk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s nobody to sue. The CEO is dead. Oceangate is a bankrupt company with no assets.

      • Hogger86@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The submersible was a boat on a ship the ship.may be bound by imo or it’s flag star rules. I work in maritime software. regulation around Solas and imo rules are mental I mean we only moved ships off xp in last few years as the xp for embedded systems had been thoroughly tested and type approved, e.g. two 90day test runs

      • Mando@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Huh, interesting. Then what is the actual point of the liability waivers they had to sign?

    • Hogger86@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure coast guard did step in to help the ship, but the ship was hiding from authority. Once the call went up because was there. Like the RNLI rescue small boats in English channel. (Somthing some.idiots on the right are claiming is reason not to give to the charity)

    • knaugh@frig.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      As far as I know, there were no regulations the submersible company were obligated to follow, so the families of the billionaires, who signed waivers informing them of that fact, should be held accountable as well.

      • webghost0101@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “there were no regulations” In therms of building a specialized craft to take people to a landmark icon of history on the bottom of the ocean is the most disconnected elitism thing i have ever read. I can’t even jump in the ocean in the sea whenever/wherever i want because of regulations.