Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Authorities Arrest Activists Instead of Those Responsible For CA Gas Leak (inhabitat.com)

Posted by yaelk on from the who-would-have-thought dept.

MikeChino writes: The California State Patrol has arrested two people in connection with the massive methane leak in Southern California's Aliso Canyon. Instead of busting company executives and engineers that caused the leak, the CSP arrested protesters who had draped banners on the headquarters of the California Public Utilities Commission. The banners highlighted the lax regulatory environment that enabled the spill.

14 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. There is no "California State Patrol" by chispito · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think you mean the California Highway Patrol

    This suggests something about the quality of the source's and the submitter's fact checking ability.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    1. Re:There is no "California State Patrol" by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Informative

      > This suggests something about the quality of the source's and the submitter's fact checking ability.

      Check all of his submissions, they're all trying to astroturf his shitty 'news' site

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    2. Re:There is no "California State Patrol" by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Funny

      From the article: Headline (emphasis mine):

      Shockingly, authorities arrest activists instead of people responsible for the Aliso Canyon methane gas leak

      No, it's not "shocking" that authorities would arrest someone who knowingly committed a minor crime rather than investigate one who caused a large-scale industrial accident, even if negligence was involved. Because, you know, that would require some bureaucrat to get off their ass and do some work rather than rubber-stamping forms and collecting fees. And it might just inadvertently highlight some systemic corruption or incompetence within the department, and that could just get plain messy. No one wants that. The protesters are low-hanging fruit. I sometimes wonder why it is some people put so much faith in their government when they're every bit has corrupt and/or incompetent as these corporations that are vilified so much?

      But unbelievably, the activists are now the ones going to jail.

      This writer is quite easily flabbergasted, isn't he? Or he loves faux-outrage. Either way, it makes him sound ridiculous and juvenile. Don't misunderstand... I'm sympathetic to what happened to these poor people who had to move out of their homes because of this gas leak, but the "article" is laughably bad. Yellow journalism is apparently back with a vengeance.

      the CSP arrested two protesters who draped banners on the headquarters of the California Public Utilities Commission

      Oho... I think I spotted the problem here. They went and pissed off government officials. That's why the hammer came down on them. And when you piss off the government, they can send police after you to arrest you and cart you off to jail.

      P.S. If I get modded down as flamebait, I'm going to blame government officials with mod points for trying to silence me.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re:There is no "California State Patrol" by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it's not "shocking" that authorities would arrest someone who knowingly committed a minor crime rather than investigate

      And it is even less shocking that the police would arrest someone who is currently committing a crime in public while still investigating a potential crime committed by the officials of a company. As in, they can see the protesters committing the crime, but it may take a while to examine documents to determine liability in a corporate environment.

      Where did we get the idea that arresting protesters in the act meant that they were arrested INSTEAD of someone else who allegedly committed some other, corporate crime?

  2. Yes by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Instead of busting company executives and engineers that caused the leak, the CSP arrested protesters who had draped banners on the headquarters of the California Public Utilities Commission.

    Because the corporation has already been charged. What's your point here? You're saying if somebody does something illegal, everybody else gets a free pass to do illegal things to them? That's stupid.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Yes by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The corporation has been charged but none of the people at the corporation have been charged.

      Corporations can't go to jail. All they can do is pay fines or be dis-incorporated. Historically the fines charged tend to be minute - small fractions of the cost to make whole - and they are almost never dis-incorporated.

      Charging a corporation is like giving a warning to a person - it does nothing.

      If you want to truly punish wrong doing by corporations, you HAVE to press criminal charges and not at low level either. If the head of the corporation does not personally know the guy going to jail (or go to jail himself), he's just going to do the same old crap all over again.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    2. Re:Yes by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's time to introduce jail for corporations. In Japan corporations can be forced to shut down for a number of days. Staff sometimes get paid if they were not to blame, but otherwise the company can't do any business at all during that period.

      The longest shut down so far was over 100 days.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Yes by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sounds good. I do think that during that period corporations should be allowed to dissolve (but not go bankrupt). But how can you apply that to an international corporation? Especially not one incorporated within your legal bounds? Forbidding them to do business locally isn't quite the same thing. And what about rents due during that period on premises they occupy?

      I think that this would require an entirely new set of laws to be written. Does making a river poisonous count as 1 week, 1 year, or one decade "in prison"? Does it depend on who uses the river for what? Whoo! The idea has merit, but implementation would be horrendous, with many questions that have no obvious answer, and you know who would be pushing for minimal punishment.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  3. Is this Slashdot? by ichthus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What the fuck is this story doing on Slashdot? How is this, in any way, tech related?

    --
    sig: sauer
    1. Re:Is this Slashdot? by MrLogic17 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Can we just get a story category of "SJW"? That way it's easier to filter out these misleading flame baits.

  4. In other words, exactly the right people? by choprboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    The California State Patrol has arrested two people... instead of busting company executives and engineers that caused the leak, the CSP arrested protesters who had draped banners on the headquarters of the California Public Utilities Commission.

    In other words, exactly the right people? On the one hand you have "company executives and engineers" that are responsible for the loss of control over an industrial process; which has been clearly documented, who are currently the subject of state and federal investigation, and which is sure to lead to fines and punishment to cost hundreds of millions of dollars. On the other hand you have a bunch of self-righteous protesters, with no understanding of the real facts of what it takes to provide for millions of lives, who trespassed and possibly defaced/damaged private property. The local authorities have dealt with the local violations. The state/federal authorities are dealing with the state/federal violations. In other words, exactly what is suppose to be happening.

  5. there were Cal state police...1990's by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Informative

    There were in fact California State Police, but they were rarely seen outside Sacramento, the state capitol, as their duty was to protect the state buildings, and our elected officials. The California Highway patrol are tasked with patrolling the freeways and highways that cross county jurisdictions, with the stated purpose of traffic enforcement and assisting with incidents that cross county lines. There are also California State park police, aka Rangers, who are full on police but generally limited to, guess what, state parks and some county park/open space areas that contract to the state for such services.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  6. socialism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    socialism is public libraries, public healthcare, public roads, public schools, public parks

    if you are really a pure libertarian, all that should be private.

    or perhaps you are a little libertarian, and a little socialist, and you like some public services, but not all.

    There is no pure capitalist, libertarian or socialist government. Governments built on fixed ideology fail quickly.

  7. Here's a better article on this by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 4, Informative

    Pasadena Star News has a far better write-up on this. One, is was the California Highway Patrol. Two, the building they trespassed on is owned by the California Public Utilities Commission, which is a .gov so it's probably property belonging to the State of California ("after scaling state building" in the headline). Three, the protesters are quoted "we are occupying the PUC".