Interesting, sad. Reactions in the thread are interesting, perhaps for the wrong reasons, too.
What real alternatives might've been open to the business owner or to the EPA would be interesting to hear.
Whether it's an overreaction or not, the days of storing W.W.II era instruments including those with radium on massed racks are gone.
I don't know whether the site was a significant or minor risk to visitors or workers or not, but neither does anyone else posting here, I suspect. Certainly you wouldn't get me in a place like that these days. On the other hand, the numbers regarding doses and overdoses quoted in the video are, without better context, meaningless.
As per bdk's response, it may well be the chap in question simply got caught in the process of trying to get clean - or was trapped in a legacy business. Yesterday's acceptable trading (storage etc.) practices aren't futureproofed, and sometimes organisations get caught in the machine. Sometimes the organisations
deserve to be shaken down for negligence or wilful exposure of employees to risk - famously in Australia the James Hardie company asbestos cases.
The thing about health and safety is you just don't see the cripples about that you used to.
Cancer, obesity and heart disease are killing more of us because we
aren't getting killed in industrial accidents or by industrial diseases earlier. We're also pretty hopeless as a species at managing chronic risks as against acute ones. One reason we need governments and their health and safety arm is because of humanity's track record of urinating in it's own drinking water - quite often literally.
Those bemoaning regulation of private enterprise in these cases might like to review the Radium Girls story
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_GirlsA similar example of corporate murder and maiming, although using another poison, but one familiar to us all here, is the Ethyl Corp story; centred on probably the most poisonous man in history, the undelightfully amoral Thomas Midgely.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Midgley,_Jr.
Then for those pointing to these instruments in this case not being corporate maleficence in the same way, and rightly pointing out how in a single cockpit some of these instruments are not a significant risk might like to consider the delights by gathering many non-risks together - in this case by an egregious idiot - the radioactive boy scout:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn Interestingly, busted in 1995, Hahn appeared to be trying the same stunt all over again in 2007. I'd trust him, wouldn't you?
I've seen overreactions with plackarded /sealed cockpits on individual aircraft by national-level collections myself; and I agree they're
mostly overreactions.
A couple of aircraft parts collectors in Australia have decided to quit in recent years and sell up - as has been noted, this is often a pity or a problem, but is probably inevitable.
And a final thought. Though relentlessly unmechanical, I've been in a few situations in workshops where I've been able to say 'no thank you' to a risky work idea, and feel happy when invited to enter workshops under the expectation that regulations, training, oversight and culture are all conspiring to keep the staff and visitors alive and healthy. I can't think of a single corporate organisation I'd trust to self-regulate to that standard, in any country or industry I've encountered.
Regards,
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
