@pushnpull Sorry! I was just doing ten things at once, I did know it was Robinson. I don't really understand why he's used to describe precarious situations, but thank you.
@jungleJ I did google the correct name! just when I came to ask about it I said the wrong one, sorry for confusion. I suffer from A.B.T (a bit thick) 
@ovahere sorry, I don't understand what you mean with that?
@notimagain that's likely exactly it. You can't break a law that's not even there. Can you imagine the parliamentary (or whatever) meeting 'Okay let's pass a law that it is not okay to get into a container made out of scrapyard findings and take very rich people to the bottom of the sea in it'..
The respondants would probably be like, 'Er, what?!'
And ask you've said there aren't any laws around things that (as far as legalities go) don't exist yet!
@EnthENd they realy really do! I am trying to imagine that CEO as a child! Sort of similar thinking to what @whatausername says. It's a similar (and much more tragic) situation to things like FyreFest and other events that have gone very wrong because people get above their station and let their desires rule their heads. I would also like to know when it was reported to the authorities. That must have been an awkward phone call.
I really really hope they don't die, I know the outcome is looking bleak for this. But Oceangate, they need to be bloody stopped!
@mommas that's more or less what I said. Having a lot of money doesn't stop them being as human as me or my next door neighbour or the bloke who works at Sainsbury's, in terms of how they or their families feel about love and loss and their lives. My life isn't less valuable than someone far less wealthy than me. And such a horrible way to die (unless it imploded before they knew anything was wrong and it was very quick, I suppose).
I do agree that others absolutely should not engage in very risky activities in order to save them though. We don't need any more people in this sort of situation.
I really think hope this is going to be one of those 'disasters' that is used to 'learn things from' perhaps not to let 'ambitious' idiots with ideas above their station do whatever they want, but it won't happen. We can't regulate things we don't know about and don't yet have laws for. Then again, as previously mentioned, without disasters like this, how would we ever learn anything? £ or not, these are just a few people in the great scheme of things (not that I think that way, I very much do not)!
Thank you for that information @bharath
@never I would never ever 'let' a relative of mine do this, even if they had more money than anyone else in the world I would do absolutely anything I could to make sure they didn't. I really am not just saying that because of this, I have respect for the ocean but am also terrified of it. It's so easy to forget we're animals at the end of the day, mere mortals who are here 'but by the grace of'. It's such a dangerous thing to do :(
@ellie I think you're right. It does make sense that they didn't get the funding and thought 'fuck it, this one'll do'.
@shelly and @crunchy I do feel that no matter whether it was a random and unpredictable failure or not, those other four men could easily turn on Stockton for 'putting them in that situation'. Of course they signed up for it knowing the risks but they'll be desperate and emotional.
@BreadInCaptivity thank you for that information. What irresponsible people [sad
@TequilaQueen well to be fair. for all we know it could have been the 19 year old's idea if he's fascinated with the titanic or such and his Dad may have just gone along to be with him. But I know what you mean-your idea seems a more likely situation. At 17 my Mum asked me to fly out to be with her in turkey and I just went, because it was my Mum. I trusted her even though I didn't want to go particularly. A lot of young adults do things because their parents want them to at that sort of age 