Share.

12 Comments

  1. Quite interesting, it took just about a second to light up the foam.

    What i find also interesting is that a lot of people want to *solely* blame the bar owners due to violations of the fire safety standard (and fire safety guidelines associated with the standard). But these people seem to often forget that – no matter if/what (many) mistakes the bar owners (and potentially also the town and/or canton) made – the “helmet girl” *also* failed her duties under the fire safety standard:

    >Fire and open flames, heat, electricity and other energy types, flammable or explosive substances, as well as machinery, equipment, etc., must be handled in such a way that no fires or explosions are caused or can occur.

    *Source:* [*Brandschutznorm, Artikel 19, Absatz 1*](https://services2.vkf.ch/rest/public/georg/bs/publikation/documents/BSPUB-1394520214-57.pdf/content)

    Do I “morally” blame her? Not really.

    But if she was still alive, she would – legally – for sure be charged with the same offences that the bar owners are currently charged with.

  2. WillingnessFinal1411 on

    What’s with this swiss Eigenverantwortung? This word is so terribly abused in favour of the stronger one in relationship. It backfires when abused so strongly like in this case. It needs to, it should. 

    Until now media reported:

    the girl was guilty for carrying fireworks she was instructed to carry, 

    the servers were guilty to lock the doors they were instructed to lock, 

    the material provider was guilty for selling the flammable material but luckily provided evidence that he was threatened for reminding them about flammability.

    Nevertheless, the guests were guilty of being present?

    I have a feeling the Commune will be guilty for not checking, but then again, it’s reported they all knew each other so the guilt may be somewhere else entirely.

    So maybe all these Eigenverantwortungs combined, nobody carries responsibility, nobody’s accountable? Is that the swiss law? How about tens of victims’ lawyers and real costs? Will the real costs be transparent to citizens because they will be substantial and will come from somewhere (Ausgleich?).

    The word, it needs to go.

  3. Non la mousse a été changée par le Patron et etait inflammable pas du tout ignifuge!!! Les escaliers on été rétrécits aussi par Moretti , les extincteurs caches derrière le bar , la porte de secours verrouillée!!!!! La patronne a bousculé des enfants dans l’escalier pour passer la première ( mon avocat a les vidéos)!!!! Tout ceci avec le copinage des autorités et control de feu de Crans Montana!!!!!!
    Pas de contrôle de feu de normes depuis 6 ans, c est un après ski pour ados moyenne d âge 17 ans!!!!! Pas une discothèque!!!! Rien est au norme . Mon fils 18 ans est retourné tenter de sauver son meilleur ami et à cause de la porte de secours il en est mort!!!!!!!
    Imaginez ce qu il a du ressentir à cause de ça!!!! Il était mon plus grand amour , un ados d exception et son autopsie a révélé aucunes substances ( pas d alcool) et lui a eu les couilles de retourner et la patronne? Et c est pas le seul enfant à avoir tenter de sauver d autres!!! On a enterré 8 de ses amis !!!! Lui est enterré avec son meilleur ami pour toujours les plus beaux des anges.
    Un hôpital est entrain d être construit à saint Louis au Sénégal… il portera son nom il y fesait du bénévolat ses été depuis l age de 14 ans et voulait être médecin normalement… depuis je veux mourir je veux le rejoindre nos vies sont un enfer a moi au 40 autres morts et aux 115 brûlés

  4. What if pyrotechnic candles, shooting molten particles at over 1,200°C, were simply too dangerous to use indoors, no matter the venue’s materials or fire codes? I think we should ban these things. On top of the obvious fire risk, they’re a nightmare for air quality: PM2.5 particles and toxic metal fumes are terrible for the lungs and cardiovascular system..