Search this site:


Categories:

February 2, 2005 12:51 PM

Broken: Connecticut emergency broadcast test

Contrary to the scrolling banner on Connecticut TV screens, there was no need to evacuate the entire state.

Comments:

It would seem that there isn't any approvals or failsafes built in if a miskeying can cause this.

Posted by: Carlos Gomez at February 2, 2005 01:32 PM

"evacuate the entire state?"

Options:

Yes

Yes to all

No

Cancel

Posted by: Dragon at February 2, 2005 01:41 PM

I wonder what sort of situation would exactly call for a state-wide evacuation. All the events I can think of would have most residents fleeing on their own.

Posted by: Maurs at February 2, 2005 04:41 PM

Shouldn't there have been plastic coverings over the "Evacuate the state" button, like over the "launch rocket" or "drop bomb" buttons in the movies?

Something to that effect would have worked, like having it behind a "break glass to evacuate the state" button.

Posted by: corhere at February 2, 2005 07:16 PM

I would evacuate Conn. anyway.

Posted by: rev_ty at February 2, 2005 08:42 PM

In the Video It says "... A Evacuation ...".

This is improper, it is supposed to say "An Evacuation"

Posted by: Cameron at February 2, 2005 08:49 PM

Well... to evacuate the entire state... perhaps something that we cannot normally detect, or something that wouldn't cause us to flee?

Like perhaps impending attack from some foreign enemy that we know nothing of, therefore, cannot run until a later time, when it shall be too late?

Or an impending nuclear meltdown?

Or perhaps the release of something poisonous that we cannot detect (carbon monoxide, whilst inappropriate for this situation, is one example methinks).

Plus, perhaps for those poor fools who are so vegetated on the TV they don’t realize what’s occurring…

And ‘dirty bomb’ always comes to mind.

Posted by: Liz at February 2, 2005 09:06 PM

at least connecticut is a small state!

Posted by: Carl Winslow at February 2, 2005 10:41 PM

I especially like that the evacuation was to be one hour long. What could require evacuating a whole state for ONE hour? A really nasty fart?

Posted by: Jarett at February 3, 2005 12:56 AM

Forget why the "evacuate state" code exists. I think it's concerning that these codes can be so easily miskeyed. What if it were a real emergency and the wrong instructions were sent out? How close together are codes that mixed up could change proper emergency instructions into instructions for certain death?

Posted by: figmentPez at February 3, 2005 08:22 PM

_@_v - they should scrap the emergency broadcast system entirely. all the e.b.s. ever does over here is tell us when a freakin 'severe thunderstorm' is on it's way, which of course is something i'd never figure out is coming and being indoors watching t.v. is something i really don't need to care that much about.

_@_v - ennyways where was the freakin e.b.s. guy on 9/11? every freakin' news service and their brother had a camera out that day but we never saw mister e.b.s.

_@_v - the emergency broadcast system has long outlived it's usefulness.

Posted by: she-snailie_@_v at February 6, 2005 10:07 PM

However... it is still fun for the occasional 'accidently evacuate the entire state insted of test'. -laughs-

:p

What they SHOULD do is replace the emergency text with "You have no chance to survive make your time".

Posted by: Liz at February 7, 2005 10:00 PM

Warning of impending nuclear attack translated from Japanese by computer: "You are on the way to destruction. You have no chance to survive make your time."

And then they could invade and transmit, "All your base are belong to us."

Posted by: Brian at February 23, 2005 09:19 PM

I tried this link but the article had been removed. So I guess it is now broken too.

Posted by: Ken at March 15, 2005 08:44 PM

At least all of the highways going into the state were not so congested.

Posted by: tim at March 22, 2005 03:05 PM

If I saw a warning to evacuate the state, I would experience an evacuation, but I don't mean "the state".

Posted by: Timm at January 4, 2006 11:52 PM

Comments on this entry are closed



Previous Posts: