Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on October 15, 2016, 10:37:05 PM

Title: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Ben on October 15, 2016, 10:37:05 PM
I think the outcome here would have been a bit different:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-wont-prosecute-epa-worker-over-waste-spill-in-colorado-1476322057
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: 230RN on October 16, 2016, 06:57:19 AM
Subscribe or sign in.

Screw that.

Got another link?
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: dogmush on October 16, 2016, 09:39:23 AM
We do this everytime some one links a wall street journal article.  They don't let you direct link an article.

Paste the headline into google and click the first result.  Same article, less paywall.  But I can't post a link. (unless I use LMGTFY, which seemed mean spirited)

Also, having gone through.......a lot of environmental regulation training with the EPA, it has less to do with whose employee it was and more with how much in fines they stand to collect (or not).  The EPA rarely goes after the individuals that caused something, preferring to find some way to hang it on a company with deep pockets.
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: zxcvbob on October 16, 2016, 09:41:45 AM
We do this everytime some one links a wall street journal article.  They don't let you direct link an article.

Paste the headline into google and click the first result.  Same article, less paywall.  But I can't post a link. (unless I use LMGTFY, which seemed mean spirited)

That didn't work for me this time.  The google link still had the paywall.
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: dogmush on October 16, 2016, 09:44:31 AM
Weird.  That's how I got in. (Right click->search Google for...)
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Ben on October 16, 2016, 10:47:47 AM
The link I posted took me straight to the full article. You guys got a beef, take it up with the WSJ. :P

Otherwise, as Dogmush said, Google it. That takes me to the full article as well when I hit a paywall link at WSJ. Regardless, the first visible paragraph give you the gist of the topic. :)
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Ben on October 16, 2016, 10:51:03 AM
Also, having gone through.......a lot of environmental regulation training with the EPA, it has less to do with whose employee it was and more with how much in fines they stand to collect (or not).  The EPA rarely goes after the individuals that caused something, preferring to find some way to hang it on a company with deep pockets.

Agreed. The employee is a conduit to the employer (if the pockets are large and deep).
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Hawkmoon on October 16, 2016, 11:39:36 AM
Also, having gone through.......a lot of environmental regulation training with the EPA, it has less to do with whose employee it was and more with how much in fines they stand to collect (or not).  The EPA rarely goes after the individuals that caused something, preferring to find some way to hang it on a company with deep pockets.

So the EPA is going to fine the EPA? KOOL!
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Fly320s on October 16, 2016, 12:17:13 PM
So the EPA is going to fine the EPA? KOOL!

Yes, and our taxes will pay for the EPA's lawyers, the EPA's lawyers, and the EPA's fines.
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: dogmush on October 16, 2016, 12:25:55 PM
So the EPA is going to fine the EPA? KOOL!

More likely they will either completely ignore it (which seems to be what's happening), or find an obscure rule the mining company broke that allowed the EPA employee to open the release, then fine the mine.
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: 230RN on October 16, 2016, 02:10:54 PM
The link I posted took me straight to the full article. You guys got a beef, take it up with the WSJ. :P

<Segment deleted by poster>

OK, it could be forgiven if your equipment or WSJ arrangements went straight to the article and you didn't know it was blocked for others.  I'm keeping that in mind, but I'd have liked to have the full article before bitching about the EPA's or its employee's actions.

<Segment deleted by poster>

Terry
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Scout26 on October 18, 2016, 02:04:27 PM
It's not just the fine.   Guy won't be prosecuted much less fired for his *expletive deleted*ck-up.


Some animals are more equal than others.
Title: Re: If it were an Exxon Employee...
Post by: Firethorn on October 18, 2016, 03:12:41 PM
<Segment deleted by poster>

OK, it could be forgiven if your equipment or WSJ arrangements went straight to the article and you didn't know it was blocked for others.  I'm keeping that in mind, but I'd have liked to have the full article before bitching about the EPA's or its employee's actions.

<Segment deleted by poster>

Terry


As has been stated, the way WSJ does it's paywall, simply google for the article and you get in without it.  Stupid, yes, but the way it works.

Making it so that you can get in with a direct link just won't work without creating a security violation.  I'd have to create a method to force your browser tell WSJ that it's coming from google, not aps.