Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

When God endowed human beings with brains, He did not intend to guarantee them.


aus+uk / aus.legal / Re: Fire stair doors

SubjectAuthor
* Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
+* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
|`- Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
+* Re: Fire stair doorsMountain Magpie
|`- Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
+* Re: Fire stair doorsPhil Allison
|`- Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
`* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
 +* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |`* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
 | `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  +* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
 |  |`* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  | `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
 |  |  `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |   `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
 |  |    +* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
 |  |    |`* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |    | `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
 |  |    |  `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |    |   `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
 |  |    |    `- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |    `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |     `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
 |  |      `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  |       `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
 |  |        `- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 |  `* Re: Fire stair doorsPhil Allison
 |   `- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
 `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
  `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
   +- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
   `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
    `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
     `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
      `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
       `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
        `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
         `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
          `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
           `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
            `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
             `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
              `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
               `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
                `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
                 `* Re: Fire stair doorsMax
                  +- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
                  `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
                   `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
                    `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
                     `* Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed
                      `* Re: Fire stair doorsSylvia Else
                       `- Re: Fire stair doorsRod Speed

Pages:123
Fire stair doors

<ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4509&group=aus.legal#4509

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Fire stair doors
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:42:09 +1100
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net jg/8S9kQYOni4nJFkUl6cAqIucF7Fu1FEjAyUnl/m2ldmrIIvt
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KwmvlQO4B0cbLYXVyScForKhBqc=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Sylvia Else - Tue, 16 Nov 2021 05:42 UTC

.... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.

At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
way, it's a singularly bad idea.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<smvmkh$g7p$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4510&group=aus.legal#4510

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: max...@val.morgan (Max)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:29:21 +1100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <smvmkh$g7p$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="16633"; posting-host="JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Max - Tue, 16 Nov 2021 07:29 UTC

On 16/11/2021 4:42 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>
>
> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
> way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>

Didn't a man die at a shopping centre in Sydney because he went through
a fire door and no one could find him?

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivh6l1Ftd59U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4511&group=aus.legal#4511

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:58:25 +1100
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <ivh6l1Ftd59U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <smvmkh$g7p$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net uo3bJVhHqAypDCyq9D5/lQmo3/oLXKRdsGqtjrhKX/mlqEEV27
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xRafpKQrMMC8qGyJEKMN0ny31M8=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <smvmkh$g7p$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 by: Sylvia Else - Tue, 16 Nov 2021 07:58 UTC

On 16-Nov-21 6:29 pm, Max wrote:
> On 16/11/2021 4:42 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>
>>
>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
>> way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>
>
> Didn't a man die at a shopping centre in Sydney because he went through
> a fire door and no one could find him?
>

He was suffering from dementia. Otherwise he'd just have gone to bottom
of the stairwell and got out there.

As far as I can tell, where fire doors have locks, they must only
operate from the stairwell side. The idea being to stop people using the
stairwell to access floors in the building while still allowing people
to use the door to escape.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivj6daF8r77U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4512&group=aus.legal#4512

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: 3sist...@bluemountains.com (Mountain Magpie)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 23:02:16 -0000
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <ivj6daF8r77U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 1viXzLMhblQZWJ1dQDHYYQFsY6hfsqKgaz2JhAuCXQgCRmCHA=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hahw1f3UWF+1oBqaXR3FM4oTJ9g=
 by: Mountain Magpie - Tue, 16 Nov 2021 23:02 UTC

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:42:09 +1100, Sylvia Else posted:-

> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>
>
> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>
> Sylvia.

Would appear to be unlawful.

Have you pursued this any further?

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivjbbrFbjvnU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4513&group=aus.legal#4513

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 14:31:05 +1100
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <ivjbbrFbjvnU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivj6daF8r77U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net sqE6ERBg1xYd4KFP5HbQnQ5oCBkpl4afRCZufY5T8uVTCIWLzy
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5aUKKOBAbmKm+Bi28wiI+g2vaAc=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <ivj6daF8r77U1@mid.individual.net>
 by: Sylvia Else - Wed, 17 Nov 2021 03:31 UTC

On 17-Nov-21 10:02 am, Mountain Magpie wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:42:09 +1100, Sylvia Else posted:-
>
>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>
>>
>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Would appear to be unlawful.
>
> Have you pursued this any further?
>

Oh yes.

I've dobbed them in to the fire authorities, and informed the Sydney
Morning Herald and Ten News, since this might actually be a story
they'll pick up.

I was going to do an application under the Government Information Public
Access Act as well, to see whether they have a documented policy of
locking the doors, but further research shows that they're not actually
owned nor operated by the government, so that won't work :(

I'll stick with it.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<666b47b7-555f-4589-a354-58120ae557fan@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4514&group=aus.legal#4514

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:400d:: with SMTP id h13mr10542249qko.45.1637123270709;
Tue, 16 Nov 2021 20:27:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:d3:: with SMTP id p19mr13535149qtw.37.1637123270577;
Tue, 16 Nov 2021 20:27:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 20:27:50 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=124.170.230.190; posting-account=B_tJMAoAAAAmar-1r2H3x4CMhbFEou3n
NNTP-Posting-Host: 124.170.230.190
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <666b47b7-555f-4589-a354-58120ae557fan@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
From: palliso...@gmail.com (Phil Allison)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 04:27:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 11
 by: Phil Allison - Wed, 17 Nov 2021 04:27 UTC

Stupider than Anyone Else wrote:
============================
>
> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>

** Bet every nurse carries a key around with them.

...... Phil

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivjgrcFch7aU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4515&group=aus.legal#4515

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 16:04:43 +1100
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <ivjgrcFch7aU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<666b47b7-555f-4589-a354-58120ae557fan@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net R8QHMIqHA/bQFZQQSImdUgT1ZyKifAaNvZgnTQqvPobwRoeBMv
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GcMMWAvc4fxGU95MwGdP/cNJlaw=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <666b47b7-555f-4589-a354-58120ae557fan@googlegroups.com>
 by: Sylvia Else - Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:04 UTC

On 17-Nov-21 3:27 pm, Phil Allison wrote:
> Stupider than Anyone Else wrote:
> ============================
>>
>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>
>
> ** Bet every nurse carries a key around with them.
>
>
>
> ..... Phil
>

Perhaps, though receptionist at the consultant's clinic on the seventh
floor didn't.

And there were no nurses in sight, since patients are not actually being
treated there.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4553&group=aus.legal#4553

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 11:44:32 +1100
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 7CNfhZZDOf+j8Ue8fhci2QDHEl9eltToUXAXIkrYPlRAKLk6rY
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hIVhMw42UHfifj4m8YqVB5au3VI=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
 by: Sylvia Else - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 00:44 UTC

On 16-Nov-21 4:42 pm, Sylvia Else wrote:
> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>
>
> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
> way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>
> Sylvia.

I've been going through the National Building Code, which it turns out
is accessible on

https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/

You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of zeros.

Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it

"(iv)

is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the door
upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a FPAA101D
system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any other
detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1 installed
throughout the building, and is readily openable when unlocked; "

I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option to
be used, because it limits the availability of the exits to those
specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.

So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
imprisonment is.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4554&group=aus.legal#4554

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 13:41:06 +1100
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 3OHqoay/ZcE2jOhAsPNcIAj2snXV8GQU4yjW5jbitsr30l3Nk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:++whYcFGlT8y6AhAJpK7WSfQA3g=
In-Reply-To: <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 02:41 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
> Sylvia Else wrote

>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.

>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
>> way, it's a singularly bad idea.

> I've been going through the National Building Code,

Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.

> which it turns out is accessible on
> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/

> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
> zeros.

> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it

> "(iv)

> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the door
> upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a FPAA101D system)
> complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any other detector system
> deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1 installed throughout the
> building, and is readily openable when unlocked; "

> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option to be
> used,

You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.

> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific kinds of
> emergency, but there is no such requirement.

> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal offence
> at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of imprisonment
> is.

Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4555&group=aus.legal#4555

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 13:48:39 +1100
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net hNpLu9r1cOginEY0k+VIMg303DFxRseWxCXkpAhrPkHNKAf2jM
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cfSafSn/AKraA7y1mvh6QPAepUg=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
 by: Sylvia Else - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 02:48 UTC

On 21-Nov-21 1:41 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>> Sylvia Else wrote
>
>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>
>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>
>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>
> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>
>> which it turns out is accessible on
>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>
>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
>> zeros.
>
>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>
>> "(iv)
>
>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the door
>> upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a FPAA101D
>> system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any other
>> detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1 installed
>> throughout the building, and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>
>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option
>> to be used,
>
> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>
>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>
>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
>> imprisonment is.
>
> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.

It wasn't a system failure. There was a decision to stop the lifts, and
knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor. That
the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor there.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4556&group=aus.legal#4556

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 14:39:23 +1100
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net KIkBPxZpSXJj+GFxInZy0ATTvhx5IyZ1EnIDV4mauLSCMS4QY=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dELLGmbctKmHwQoTl7636mwadvk=
In-Reply-To: <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 03:39 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Sylvia Else wrote

>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.

>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful. Either
>>>> way, it's a singularly bad idea.

>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,

>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.

>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/

>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
>>> zeros.

>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it

>>> "(iv)

>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the door
>>> upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a FPAA101D
>>> system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any other
>>> detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1 installed
>>> throughout the building, and is readily openable when unlocked; "

>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option to
>>> be used,

>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.

>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific kinds
>>> of emergency, but there is no such requirement.

>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
>>> imprisonment is.

>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.

> It wasn't a system failure.

Yes it was.

> There was a decision to stop the lifts,

That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.

> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.

That’s bullshit.

> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor there.

Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal false
imprisonment.

Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
unlocking by a passenger.

Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4557&group=aus.legal#4557

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 15:21:42 +1100
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net ra32oIcXEvV35mlMbhYmKQvieFlP7/4l+dtz2DG0MBay4OGenB
Cancel-Lock: sha1:svmBF0yJi6IbfYIHC62XCRSuCcc=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
 by: Sylvia Else - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 04:21 UTC

On 21-Nov-21 2:39 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>
>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>
>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>
>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>
>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>
>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>
>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
>>>> zeros.
>
>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>
>>>> "(iv)
>
>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the
>>>> door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a
>>>> FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any
>>>> other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1
>>>> installed throughout the building, and is readily openable when
>>>> unlocked; "
>
>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option
>>>> to be used,
>
>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>
>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>
>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
>>>> imprisonment is.
>
>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>
>> It wasn't a system failure.
>
> Yes it was.
>
>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>
> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>
>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.
>
> That’s bullshit.
>
>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>> there.
>
> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal
> false imprisonment.
>
> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
> unlocking by a passenger.
>
> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.

The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4558&group=aus.legal#4558

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 15:43:26 +1100
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net GaIHXFiQlEXGGQOSV+Pvhw4z05lmFLAabGBihV67K9F0+UtJE=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dArKqSoiK93VRsLFckCgpivdJ/o=
In-Reply-To: <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 04:43 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>
>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>
>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>
>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>
>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>
>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>
>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
>>>>> zeros.
>>
>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>
>>>>> "(iv)
>>
>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the door
>>>>> upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a FPAA101D
>>>>> system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any other
>>>>> detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1 installed
>>>>> throughout the building, and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>>
>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option
>>>>> to be used,
>>
>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>
>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>
>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
>>>>> imprisonment is.
>>
>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>
>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>
>> Yes it was.
>>
>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>
>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>
>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.
>>
>> That’s bullshit.
>>
>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>>> there.
>>
>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal
>> false imprisonment.
>>
>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>
>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>
> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.

By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4559&group=aus.legal#4559

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 15:53:27 +1100
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net KHxJs9pxkLWfF5x1C7uelARqGdcJVOgMHBKguB8oDmffF4zH3i
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+urQbN1gFypg7vgxf/YPy/sYmeo=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
 by: Sylvia Else - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 04:53 UTC

On 21-Nov-21 3:43 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>
>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>
>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>
>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>
>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>
>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>
>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch
>>>>>> of zeros.
>>>
>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>
>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>
>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the
>>>>>> door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a
>>>>>> FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or
>>>>>> any other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS
>>>>>> 1670.1 installed throughout the building, and is readily openable
>>>>>> when unlocked; "
>>>
>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>
>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>
>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>
>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period
>>>>>> of imprisonment is.
>>>
>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>
>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>
>>> Yes it was.
>>>
>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>
>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>
>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.
>>>
>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>
>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>>>> there.
>>>
>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal
>>> false imprisonment.
>>>
>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>
>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>
>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>
> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.

We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even if
it was - so what? It's still implementing the will of the hospital
management.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4560&group=aus.legal#4560

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 16:38:13 +1100
Lines: 86
Message-ID: <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net B9QCEN0GVAIhUVE2aStjxwijE5Xd9abD+RrDAlNwvMugHYEhU=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w8SNyGfg2J9NMlOtgBIcmtdO2z8=
In-Reply-To: <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 05:38 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>
>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>
>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>
>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>
>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch of
>>>>>>> zeros.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>
>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>
>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the
>>>>>>> door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a
>>>>>>> FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or any
>>>>>>> other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS 1670.1
>>>>>>> installed throughout the building, and is readily openable when
>>>>>>> unlocked; "
>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this option
>>>>>>> to be used,
>>>>
>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>
>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>
>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period of
>>>>>>> imprisonment is.
>>>>
>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>
>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>
>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>
>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>
>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.
>>>>
>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>
>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal
>>>> false imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>
>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>
>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>
>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.

> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even if
> it was - so what?

If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.

> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.

But isn't criminal false imprisonment.

Re: Fire stair doors

<sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4561&group=aus.legal#4561

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: max...@val.morgan (Max)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 16:48:48 +1100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="20926"; posting-host="JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Max - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 05:48 UTC

On 21/11/2021 4:38 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than
>>>>>>>> a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke,
>>>>>>>> or any other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with
>>>>>>>> AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building, and is readily
>>>>>>>> openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short
>>>>>>>> the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>
>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>
>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>
>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh floor.
>>>>>
>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>
>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>
>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>
>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even
>> if it was - so what?
>
> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>
> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.

If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
imprisonment will occur in those circumstances, or were reckless or
negligent about the risk of it occurring, then they might be at fault.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4562&group=aus.legal#4562

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!lilly.ping.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 17:05:51 +1100
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>
<sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net RX6mW0q0hRm67L62W4eExwEFApjWMmlHrEeCHCGxfwC/shPfEZ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/loON5exbU3dfrhnQUY9PwGXTM4=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 by: Sylvia Else - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 06:05 UTC

On 21-Nov-21 4:48 pm, Max wrote:
> On 21/11/2021 4:38 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright
>>>>>>>>>> unlawful. Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other
>>>>>>>>> than a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or
>>>>>>>>> smoke, or any other detector system deemed suitable in
>>>>>>>>> accordance with AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building,
>>>>>>>>> and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short
>>>>>>>>> the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable
>>>>>> the unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>
>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even
>>> if it was - so what?
>>
>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>
>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>
> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances, or were reckless or
> negligent about the risk of it occurring, then they might be at fault.

The common law requirement for the mental element seems to be "intent",
with recklessness not being sufficient. But I don't think that ever
meant an intent for the specific outcome, or it would have been very
easy to avoid conviction.

Intent to perform the causing action, together with knowledge of what
the outcome will be, must surely be enough.

"M'lud, yes I intended to cut the tree branch, and I knew that Fred
would fall off, and likely die, if I did, but my intent was that the
branch fall, not that Fred would."

Most of the common law was devised long before automation was even
imagined, but I'd be surprised if one can avoid the intent element by
interposing an automated system that performs the action in accordance
with one's intent.

Sylvia.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivuaa8Feo2dU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4563&group=aus.legal#4563

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 18:20:35 +1100
Lines: 102
Message-ID: <ivuaa8Feo2dU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net> <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net MNh3ksgBTli0esMQQRv/xgjJoivboZwkjjaCyaPAzgX9aPYTk=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9vfodo9F20iPx3QuHEvizVvGm/w=
In-Reply-To: <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:20 UTC

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch
>>>>>>>>> of zeros.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the
>>>>>>>>> door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a
>>>>>>>>> FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or
>>>>>>>>> any other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS
>>>>>>>>> 1670.1 installed throughout the building, and is readily openable
>>>>>>>>> when unlocked; "
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>>>>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>>>>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period
>>>>>>>>> of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not criminal
>>>>>> false imprisonment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>>>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>
>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even if
>>> it was - so what?
>>
>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>
>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.

> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances,

It isn't imprisonment, its doing what is safer.

> or were reckless or negligent about the risk of it occurring,

Still not imprisonment.

> then they might be at fault.

But not guilty of criminal false imprisonment.

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivuasjFer2sU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4564&group=aus.legal#4564

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 18:30:22 +1100
Lines: 132
Message-ID: <ivuasjFer2sU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net> <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net rNsbV1GYOB+v4+qGs/RDBAhT3PHulkmD72WBEYrP8Korlm5u4=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7wF9g9BOFBTjHQEC8SVYpV+K8MI=
In-Reply-To: <ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 07:30 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
> Max wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a bunch
>>>>>>>>>> of zeros.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks the
>>>>>>>>>> door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than a
>>>>>>>>>> FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke, or
>>>>>>>>>> any other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with AS
>>>>>>>>>> 1670.1 installed throughout the building, and is readily openable
>>>>>>>>>> when unlocked; "
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those specific
>>>>>>>>>> kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a criminal
>>>>>>>>>> offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short the period
>>>>>>>>>> of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here nor
>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>>>>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false
>>>>> imprisonment.
>>>
>>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even
>>>> if it was - so what?
>>>
>>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>
>>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>>
>>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
>> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances, or were reckless or
>> negligent about the risk of it occurring, then they might be at fault.

> The common law requirement for the mental element seems to be "intent",

And there is no intent to imprison, so no criminal false imprisonment.

> with recklessness not being sufficient. But I don't think that ever meant
> an intent for the specific outcome,

Corse it does with criminal false imprisonment.

> or it would have been very easy to avoid conviction.

And is in this situation with your desperate
claim that its criminal false imprisonment.

> Intent to perform the causing action, together with knowledge of what the
> outcome will be, must surely be enough.

Nope, not when there was never any intent to IMPRISON.

> "M'lud, yes I intended to cut the tree branch, and I knew that Fred would
> fall off, and likely die, if I did, but my intent was that the branch
> fall, not that Fred would."

Irrelevant to the situation being discussed.
Their intent was clearly to make things safer
for anyone on that floor not to imprison them.

> Most of the common law was devised long before automation was even
> imagined, but I'd be surprised if one can avoid the intent element by
> interposing an automated system that performs the action in accordance
> with one's intent.

You still have the problem that there was
never ever any intent to imprison anyone.

The intent was to make things safer for those on that floor.

Re: Fire stair doors

<30383ad1-a5dc-4a20-8f7e-c80a61c48af7n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4565&group=aus.legal#4565

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1495:: with SMTP id t21mr21895013qtx.152.1637484067710;
Sun, 21 Nov 2021 00:41:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1a1c:: with SMTP id f28mr22341674qtb.308.1637484067580;
Sun, 21 Nov 2021 00:41:07 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 00:41:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=114.198.18.198; posting-account=B_tJMAoAAAAmar-1r2H3x4CMhbFEou3n
NNTP-Posting-Host: 114.198.18.198
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <30383ad1-a5dc-4a20-8f7e-c80a61c48af7n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
From: palliso...@gmail.com (Phil Allison)
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 08:41:07 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1396
 by: Phil Allison - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 08:41 UTC

Rodbot Bullshitting Speed Cop wrote:

=============================
>
> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either.
>

** No such charge exists.

...... Phil

Re: Fire stair doors

<ivuh8dFfuujU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4566&group=aus.legal#4566

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 20:19:04 +1100
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <ivuh8dFfuujU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <30383ad1-a5dc-4a20-8f7e-c80a61c48af7n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net iTAbLQ7KsT3q/TsPDqbfLQecqKAUU7muZZTKfjWJ0zvzgSw08=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9+Bcjz/VKNJgHlNWn1Bhv9O4PDM=
In-Reply-To: <30383ad1-a5dc-4a20-8f7e-c80a61c48af7n@googlegroups.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Sun, 21 Nov 2021 09:19 UTC

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either.

> No such charge exists.

Wrong under common law.

Re: Fire stair doors

<sneo46$4bo$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4567&group=aus.legal#4567

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: max...@val.morgan (Max)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 11:26:46 +1100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <sneo46$4bo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>
<sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivuasjFer2sU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="4472"; posting-host="JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.2
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Max - Mon, 22 Nov 2021 00:26 UTC

On 21/11/2021 6:30 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>> Max wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright
>>>>>>>>>>>> unlawful. Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other
>>>>>>>>>>> than a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or
>>>>>>>>>>> smoke, or any other detector system deemed suitable in
>>>>>>>>>>> accordance with AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building,
>>>>>>>>>>> and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how
>>>>>>>>>>> short the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable
>>>>>>>> the unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false
>>>>>> imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but
>>>>> even if it was - so what?
>>>>
>>>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>>>
>>>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>
>>> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
>>> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances, or were reckless or
>>> negligent about the risk of it occurring, then they might be at fault.
>
>> The common law requirement for the mental element seems to be "intent",
>
> And there is no intent to imprison, so no criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> with recklessness not being sufficient.  But I don't think that ever
>> meant an intent for the specific outcome,
>
> Corse it does with criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> or it would have been very easy to avoid conviction.
>
> And is in this situation with your desperate
> claim that its criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> Intent to perform the causing action, together with knowledge of what
>> the outcome will be, must surely be enough.
>
> Nope, not when there was never any intent to IMPRISON.
>
>> "M'lud, yes I intended to cut the tree branch, and I knew that Fred
>> would fall off, and likely die, if I did, but my intent was that the
>> branch fall, not that Fred would."
>
> Irrelevant to the situation being discussed.
> Their intent was clearly to make things safer
> for anyone on that floor not to imprison them.
>
>> Most of the common law was devised long before automation was even
>> imagined, but I'd be surprised if one can avoid the intent element by
>> interposing an automated system that performs the action in accordance
>> with one's intent.
>
> You still have the problem that there was
> never ever any intent to imprison anyone.
>
> The intent was to make things safer for those on that floor.

If the intent was to keep the fire doors locked then how is that making
it safer, if the person wants to get out?

Re: Fire stair doors

<sneo9c$4bo$2@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4568&group=aus.legal#4568

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.46.165.242.91.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: max...@val.morgan (Max)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 11:29:32 +1100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <sneo9c$4bo$2@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net>
<ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net>
<ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net>
<sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ivuaa8Feo2dU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="4472"; posting-host="JlFCL6lVhZ5rf6QIXhIVHQ.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.3.2
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Max - Mon, 22 Nov 2021 00:29 UTC

On 21/11/2021 6:20 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright
>>>>>>>>>>> unlawful. Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other
>>>>>>>>>> than a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or
>>>>>>>>>> smoke, or any other detector system deemed suitable in
>>>>>>>>>> accordance with AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building,
>>>>>>>>>> and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how
>>>>>>>>>> short the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable
>>>>>>> the unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false
>>>>> imprisonment.
>>>
>>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but
>>>> even if it was - so what?
>>>
>>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>
>>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>>
>>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>
>> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
>> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances,
>
> It isn't imprisonment, its doing what is safer.
>
>> or were reckless or negligent about the risk of it occurring,
>
> Still not imprisonment.
>
>> then they might be at fault.
>
> But not guilty of criminal false imprisonment.

If there is an intention that the fire doors are permanently locked then
that would be an intention to imprison the person in certain
circumstances, for no valid reason.

Re: Fire stair doors

<j008j0Fq6ctU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4569&group=aus.legal#4569

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:03:25 +1100
Lines: 148
Message-ID: <j008j0Fq6ctU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net> <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ivu5u1FdutlU1@mid.individual.net> <ivuasjFer2sU1@mid.individual.net> <sneo46$4bo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net /B1lFArk+Uob7LJ69he+mgKVmJf0QyesYkzgwhqSipvTWc+Iw=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5pDeA75+Idtt611bJCV9rXNOy6Q=
In-Reply-To: <sneo46$4bo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Mon, 22 Nov 2021 01:03 UTC

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>> Max wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright
>>>>>>>>>>>>> unlawful. Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other
>>>>>>>>>>>> than a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or
>>>>>>>>>>>> smoke, or any other detector system deemed suitable in
>>>>>>>>>>>> accordance with AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and is readily openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short
>>>>>>>>>>>> the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable
>>>>>>>>> the unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false
>>>>>>> imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even
>>>>>> if it was - so what?
>>>>>
>>>>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>>>>
>>>>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
>>>> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances, or were reckless or
>>>> negligent about the risk of it occurring, then they might be at fault.
>>
>>> The common law requirement for the mental element seems to be "intent",
>>
>> And there is no intent to imprison, so no criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> with recklessness not being sufficient. But I don't think that ever
>>> meant an intent for the specific outcome,
>>
>> Corse it does with criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> or it would have been very easy to avoid conviction.
>>
>> And is in this situation with your desperate
>> claim that its criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> Intent to perform the causing action, together with knowledge of what
>>> the outcome will be, must surely be enough.
>>
>> Nope, not when there was never any intent to IMPRISON.
>>
>>> "M'lud, yes I intended to cut the tree branch, and I knew that Fred
>>> would fall off, and likely die, if I did, but my intent was that the
>>> branch fall, not that Fred would."
>>
>> Irrelevant to the situation being discussed.
>> Their intent was clearly to make things safer
>> for anyone on that floor not to imprison them.
>>
>>> Most of the common law was devised long before automation was even
>>> imagined, but I'd be surprised if one can avoid the intent element by
>>> interposing an automated system that performs the action in accordance
>>> with one's intent.
>>
>> You still have the problem that there was
>> never ever any intent to imprison anyone.
>>
>> The intent was to make things safer for those on that floor.

> If the intent was to keep the fire doors locked

It isn't.

> then how is that making it safer, if the person wants to get out?

The lift is turned off by the system when the sprinklers or sensor detects
fire so you don’t get trapped in the lift with the building on fire. The
staff are sposed to unlock the fire doors but failed to do that, likely
because the receptionist fucked up knowing where the key was.

There was never any intention to imprison anyone, so no criminal false
imprisonment.

Re: Fire stair doors

<j008s0Fq7ujU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4570&group=aus.legal#4570

 copy link   Newsgroups: aus.legal
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rod.spee...@gmail.com (Rod Speed)
Newsgroups: aus.legal
Subject: Re: Fire stair doors
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:08:12 +1100
Lines: 123
Message-ID: <j008s0Fq7ujU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <ivguliFs0v2U1@mid.individual.net> <ivtj3gFamghU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtpu6Fbs6pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtqc8FbtncU1@mid.individual.net> <ivttbfFcf0pU1@mid.individual.net> <ivtvqmFcss6U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu13iFd405U1@mid.individual.net> <ivu1m9Fd75fU1@mid.individual.net> <ivu4a9Fdmi7U1@mid.individual.net> <sncmk2$kdu$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ivuaa8Feo2dU1@mid.individual.net> <sneo9c$4bo$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net x4Vs/b3UrC6kFK6jlyAlCQOXF7KA51Wz+Yu1rQv9cdCJG3GLY=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5B4UpufVSqnTiX2Ffl+xvPbjohI=
In-Reply-To: <sneo9c$4bo$2@gioia.aioe.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
 by: Rod Speed - Mon, 22 Nov 2021 01:08 UTC

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ... at Northern Beaches Hospital are all locked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment, that appears to me to be just outright unlawful.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Either way, it's a singularly bad idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've been going through the National Building Code,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Its far from clear that NSW hospitals have to comply with that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> which it turns out is accessible on
>>>>>>>>>>> https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You have to sign up, and it wants an ABN, but it accepted a
>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of zeros.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Turns out that a fire exit door can be locked provided it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "(iv)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> is fitted with a fail-safe device which automatically unlocks
>>>>>>>>>>> the door upon the activation of any sprinkler system (other than
>>>>>>>>>>> a FPAA101D system) complying with Specification E1.5 or smoke,
>>>>>>>>>>> or any other detector system deemed suitable in accordance with
>>>>>>>>>>> AS 1670.1 installed throughout the building, and is readily
>>>>>>>>>>> openable when unlocked; "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd have thought a compelling reason would be needed for this
>>>>>>>>>>> option to be used,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You'd be wrong and security is a compelling reason anyway.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> because it limits the availability of the exits to those
>>>>>>>>>>> specific kinds of emergency, but there is no such requirement.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So that just leaves the false imprisonment issue. It's a
>>>>>>>>>>> criminal offence at common law, and it doesn't matter how short
>>>>>>>>>>> the period of imprisonment is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your problem is that a system failure isn't false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It wasn't a system failure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes it was.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There was a decision to stop the lifts,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That was the system failure, having the sensor stop the lifts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and knowledge that there was no other way to leave the seventh
>>>>>>>>> floor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That’s bullshit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That the decision was motivated by some failure is neither here
>>>>>>>>> nor there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wrong, as always. That’s why it was a system failure and not
>>>>>>>> criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Same with the trains which after a crash need someone to enable the
>>>>>>>> unlocking by a passenger.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Failure of a lift isn't criminal false imprisonment either. Or
>>>>>>>> not being able to get out of a car after a car crash either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The lift didn't fail. It was turned off.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the system. not by a human, so it isn't criminal false
>>>>>> imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>>> We don't know whether the lift was turned off automatically, but even
>>>>> if it was - so what?
>>>>
>>>> If it was it isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>>>
>>>>> It's still implementing the will of the hospital management.
>>>>
>>>> But isn't criminal false imprisonment.
>>
>>> If the hospital management are shown to have any knowledge that the
>>> imprisonment will occur in those circumstances,
>>
>> It isn't imprisonment, its doing what is safer.
>>
>>> or were reckless or negligent about the risk of it occurring,
>>
>> Still not imprisonment.
>>
>>> then they might be at fault.
>>
>> But not guilty of criminal false imprisonment.

> If there is an intention that the fire doors are permanently locked

There isn't. If there was they would be bordered up, not permanently locked.

> then that would be an intention to imprison the person

Nope, just disable the lift so it isn't possible to
be trapped in the lift with the building on fire.

> in certain circumstances, for no valid reason.

There is a perfectly valid reason, so no one
is trapped in the lift with the building on fire.

And there is obviously sposed to be a key to unlock the fire door.

So no criminal false imprisonment, just a fuckup with the key.

Pages:123
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor