minchy wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
minchy wrote:
As bad as this is, you can't blame the FIA or the circuit security measures if it happens outside the circuit! As others have said,the only people you can blame is the Brazilian government and the people who were responsible.
Slightly click bait thread title too. Hamilton wasn't involved and it was the tram bus, not his bus. Don't want to trivialise the issue, but I do wish people wouldn't sensationalise things. We get enough of that in the media already.
Sorry but I disagree with you 100% there.
IF this was a once off occurrence, maybe I'd agree with you. However, this is somethign that happens EACH AND EVERY YEAR and because the FIA and the circuit are well aware of it, it is incumbent on them to provide better security both inside and outside of the circuit as well as to and from the circuit on any major routes to ensure this type of thing doesn't
"continue" to happen.
Because we all know their government and local law enforcement are corrupt and allow this stuff to happen, the responsibility then falls on the event organizers because they are the ones making all the money from the event and they should only put on such an event, only if they are willing to at least try and better protect the people attending said event(s). I mean if the teams who participate int he sport aren't safe, imagine how much worse it is for the fans.
I say if this is being sold as "Just how it is" then the FIA has a duty to their fans to not hold races there or anywhere where similar dangers are "Just how it is".
I think my response would be look at your tickets to motorsporting events, FIA sanctioned or not, they all say something along the lines of - motor sport is inherently dangerous, serious injury or death could occur when spectating. By attending the event you are acknowledging the risks involved and the promotors, organisers and governing body take no responsibility to any injury you may sustain whilst attending this event.
If it is acceptable for them to have no responsibility for spectators at the venue, why do you think they are responsible for the teams and staff in transit to and from it? If they do feel they should make new arrangements for this, then shouldn't they also be responsible for each and every spectator not only at the venue but also when they are transit themselves?
Or maybe they should go the way that I have seen some American colleges going in the news when a speaker there may attract violent protests - the speaker, not the establishment, must pay for extra police presence/personal protection or they are not able to attend.
Looks to me like you don't know how that fine print actually works. While it is literally hard printed on the tickets, in the event something does happen and someone is injured, or worse, killed, the incident would be reviewed and investigated thoroughly to figure out why and how it happened to figure out if the end result was due to negligence to some degree. If and when an oversight or protective device failed to perform as it is said to, then the track and the FIA can and would get sued, and any judicial system would agree such a case would need to be heard in court.
The greatest example of this is Senna's death in how Italian law superseded whatever fancy speak was written in FIA and track documents and everyone was summoned to court. The only reason no one did time was because of the missing footage at the time the car veered off the road and immediately after. HAd that footage not been destroyed, there's a very good possibility, probability even, that either the team would have been found 100% liable, and someone would have done jail time. Mind you, this was a willing participant in the event.
That being the case, how well do you think those disclaimers are in protecting the FIA as well as the circuits? I'll tell you how well… Depends on the available evidence and how good the lawyers are.
I've been designing tickets and collateral for 2.5 decades now and you would probably be surprised to learn that the vast majority of them aren't even legal because they exceed the minimum font size allowable by law, so therefore all a plaintiff has to do is raise the point it was far too small to read, and if and when it is measured and found to be outside of the legal parameters, said party is in a heap of trouble. Here int he U.S. 7 points is the smallest allowable size, but companies cleverly circumvent this by utilizing fonts that exceed this minimum size even though they are set at the 7 point minimum. That's where a responsible designer needs to make a decision. Personally I always use the same font for disclaimers and I know it to be one of the fonts that set the benchmark along with Helvetica, so every disclaimer I've ever done is 100% in accordance to the law.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
