Recently a Minessota bridge collapsed. However, some unnamed officials keep getting their quotes published in media as, "this really wasn't anyone's fault. everything was done properly and the bridge was inspected and ruled safe". My question is, who is to be blamed and held accountable for the collapse? It is hard to believe that nobody is at fault. Is this the negligence of state or negligence at federal level?
2007-08-12 20:54:52 · 9 answers · asked by Math 7 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Safety
i think it was al queda, or a overly elaborate plot by president bush. Please disasters happens, all it takes is for one very miniscule stress fracture in a piece of steel.
2007-08-12 21:13:13 · answer #1 · answered by Corey the Cosmonaut 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Where in the world did you hear that the bridge had been ruled safe..................... All of the news stations stated the bridge had been ruled unsafe years ago!
Any state that has bridges - need to step up and do some thorough inspections and do the repairs necessary for us to travel on without worrying about one collapsing on us as we drive on it.
If a state is receiving federal money for bridge repairs and that same state does NOT make the repairs (and diverts the money to other projects) then the state is at fault.
2007-08-12 21:06:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was the fault of engineering. I believe Bush has an MBA and since the bridge was recently inspected, it has nothing to do with Bush. And no one knew it was a "failing bridge". And there is nothing to laugh at about this tragedy, friend. And the only thing to ponder is why someone would post a question like this.
2016-05-21 04:23:01 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Minnesota Department of Transportation is responsbile for all Interstate roadways and bridges. Minn DOT owns the bridge, and therefore assumes all responsibility for anything that happens on their roadways, the bridge included here.
2007-08-13 05:27:56 · answer #4 · answered by Zach 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The State of Minnesota, for failing to address a bridge that was "structurally defeicient."
2007-08-12 20:59:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gravity.
2007-08-13 04:12:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Gravity.
2007-08-12 21:02:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That won't be known until the investigation is complete. That could be years for that to happen.
2007-08-13 00:01:29 · answer #8 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
mother nature
2007-08-13 05:33:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋