To: yonif
Let me understand this????? This Christmas tree has to come down in a church, with a couple hundred students, because there is no sprinkler system YET the WTC, with 10's of thousands of employees, was allowed to be open for business with 'no' sprinkler system and no plan of evacuation in case of emergency.
4 posted on
12/10/2003 5:49:28 PM PST by
eeriegeno
To: eeriegeno
As if the WTC was brought down with a Christmas tree in the lobby. We are talking about a local ordinance in Virginia, not whether they must suffer the dangers of fire because the Twin Towers collapsed in New York.
To: eeriegeno
"Let me understand this????? This Christmas tree has to come down in a church, with a couple hundred students, because there is no sprinkler system..." Yes.
"... YET the WTC, with 10's of thousands of employees, was allowed to be open for business with 'no' sprinkler system and no plan of evacuation in case of emergency."
The WTC's were sprinklered. High-rise code is much more restrictive than assembly code. Of course, it also depends of which code is being used by the "authority having jurisdiction" at the time the building is built.
The fire code is written in blood.
10 posted on
12/10/2003 6:09:22 PM PST by
Jonx6
To: eeriegeno
**YET the WTC, with 10's of thousands of employees, was allowed to be open for business with 'no' sprinkler system and no plan of evacuation in case of emergency.**
Good point.
But I think they are thinking of the safety of children and parishioners here.
40 posted on
12/10/2003 8:25:50 PM PST by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: eeriegeno
You're wrong on both counts.
There was a sprinkler system at the WTC, but the planes tearing thru it rendered it useless. As a result there was plenty of water in the stairwells, but not at the fire.
There was also an evacuation plan in place after the 1993 bombing. It just didn't plan for the loss of the stairs.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson