Mombai building collapse

Mombai building collapse

 

On 14 March 2014, a seven storey building collapsed in the Santa Cruz region of Mumbai, killing seven people and injuring four. The building was called the Shankar Lok and it collapsed onto an adjoining building known as Catherine Chawl. Five of those killed lived in the chawl. The collapsed building was only constructed in 1982 and was declared unfit to live in after a structural inspection in 2008, when the authorities said it needed to be demolished and re-built. All tenants of the building had been given an eviction notice and most families, except for two, had left. The residents of the chawl had also been warned of the danger. It is difficult to say who is to blame for what happened. One of the families was related to a lawyer, who went to court to challenge the eviction notice. This caused the court to delay demolition. So, many people are blaming the lawyer for her actions. The builder may also be to blame as many builders use low quality materials, because building regulations in India are not strict and housing demand is high. The main ethical issue here is that if the people who lived in the building and the chawl had somewhere else to move to, then they would have not have been staying in a dangerous building. The poverty and lack of options for tenants meant that some had no choice but to live there.

 

Conclusion:

The building collapsed because it was unstable and should have been demolished. This was delayed because the lawyer had been to court to challenge the eviction and demolition. The tenants that stayed in the chawl would not have been killed if the Shankar Lok building had been demolished. If the building had been constructed correctly in the first place then it would never have deteriorated so quickly.

 

 

 

 

Reference

 

Bhavika Jain (2014). Seven killed in Mumbai building collapse. [ONLINE] Available  at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Seven-killed-in-Mumbai-building-collapse/articleshow/32029992.cms. [Last Accessed 2014].

Human rights

Human rights

The American Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The core of the American Declaration of Independencecircled around some ideas of great thinkers from the Explanation Era. One of these ideas suggested that all men are created equal by the Lord Almighty and every single person had the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. those slaves were denied their rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness while being torn away from their homelands and brought to a whole different place where they were not familiar to any of the aspects of the society. Moreover they were tortured by their white masters and were treated like objects and not human beings. Considering all these facts about slavery, the American Declaration of Independence sounded like a ridiculous irony that they kept making fun of which doesn’t represent the real comprehension of equality. It was quite an ironic declaration if one cared to relate these words by Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg address (November 1864) ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’ to the social and political mechanism of the American colonies.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau:

"Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains" That was the first sentence of Rousseau's "The Social Contract."

This was the concept of ‘the noble savage’.

Thomas Hobbes:

"In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently, not culture of the earth, no navigation, nor the use of commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Aluminium cans

Aluminium cans

Approximately 1 billion are produced in the USA each year. The first can was designed in 1958 by Kaiser Aluminium. This metal proved ideal as it was a lightweight, flexible material that allowed manufacturing of the bottom & sides of the can from a single sheet, leaving the top to be added after the can was filled.

The first cans were opened with a separate opener but this was inconvenient so Ermal Fraze designed a small lever attached to the can which was removed as the can was opened.

The design was workable but after a while it created an ethical dilemma:

in this case could cause injury on hands or feet when some body walk ,also it is cause more environmental

  

So in 1976 Daniel F. Cudzik invented a simple, stay-attached opener of the sort familiar today.

As improvements were made in the design & production of aluminium cans, various ethical problems arose concerning:

 

a.Human safety:

 

this new developments could make people to drink more soft drink which can make problem to thir healh

 

b. Environmental pollution:

 

 

many of people are dont care about environment which could they throw out the cans on the streets

c. Convenience:

 

the cans material type is difficulte to recycle it and which can make problem for municipality

d. Money:

the industy can take the used cans from the streets and everywhere and recycle it it will be cheaber than they made new cans