The band says they had permission. The club says they didn't have permission and the owners/managers had no idea pyrotechnics were being used. Four other club owners come out and say the band played at their clubs and never asked permission (and, unsaid, is that none of them stopped the pyrotechnics). Now, this morning, another band says they had played at the RI club with pyrotechnics and it was no problem.
What do we conclude from these apparently contradictory statements? No one thought about it. It never crossed anyone's mind that these were dangerous. Surprised? Don't be. Many of the survivors reported that, when the backdrop went up in flames, there were cheers as the audience members thought it was part of the show. Danger crossed very few minds. Even those who were quick to realize what was happening did not look at the pyrotechnics near the curtain and backdrop and expect danger until the flames started.
When was the last time fire safety crossed your mind? Now that we're alerted to the hazards of nightclubs, are you doing a quick survey of your surroundings when you walk in the grocery store? If fire broke out from one of those electric frypans used to hand out samples, would you know any exit other than the front door?
When you check in a hotel, do you check for sprinklers? What about when you go to the movies?
In our office building, the smokers often prop open the fire doors when they leave to smoke so they can enter easily. The Calblog husband consistently closes them, earning him an unsavory reputation. Fire safety is an inconvenience.
97 dead is a horrible outcome but I would have great difficulty sending anyone to jail when few of us pay any attention. Do you think the reporter who owned the club would have let a fellow reporter in to do a story on club safety if he thought he was cutting corners?
Posted by Justene Adamec at February 24, 2003 05:24 AM