Automatic fire sprinklers

Right, 20 people safe TODAY...

Want to tell me how many fatalities there were from those electrocution accidents 30 or 40 years ago before they became required ?

How far back did your statistical analysis go there Smitty ?

~~ Evan

On Jan 10, 1:10=A0pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote:

That is a perfectly legitimate exercise of the police power of the state. Not every state action that places a burden on an individual is rampant nannyism. If the state action is designed to protect it's citizens from each other rather than themselves it is a normal function of state government and indeed the entire reason that state government exists. "Your right to swing your arms ends were the other fellas nose begins." Justice Holmes

Requiring sprinklers is no different than requiring a non combustible roof. It is a measure to protect your neighbors from your carelessness so that when you have a fire; that 's right I said when. on average every American family has one accidental fire during the head of households lifetime; the cost of that fire will be born by you rather than your neighbors or your community. That is not nannyism but rather the legitimate exercise of the police power of the state. Fire protection is an exercise of the state's police powers that is carried out by the local governments of each state. The reason that firefighters make an aggressive interior attack on a fire in your home is so that it will not get large enough to become a threat to your neighbors homes who, at least at that moment, are not having an uncontrolled fire that could burn down their homes. When they attack the fire they cut large wholes in your roof and break out all of your windows even though that increases your losses. This is done to vent the superheated gasses that would cause injury or death to the firefighters and delay or prevent the attack on the fire. All of that is quite deliberate. The value of your home is sacrificed to keep the fire from spreading beyond the building of origin. The requirement for sprinklers is a decision by the state government to take advantage of the available technology to shift the cost of fire protection from the public to the owner of the building were the threat will originate.

-- Tom Horne

Perhaps you do not know how to read the Constitution nor how to interpret what is written there and how the Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted and clarified the document in the ensuing 223 years since it was written by the founding fathers and architects of our country...

The fact that you can *buy* anything is at the discretion of the US Congress which has the sole authority on the regulation of Commerce in the United States...

Article I, =A7 8:

-- "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"

(Commonly referred to as the "Commerce Clause")

-- "To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;"

-- "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

(Commonly referred to as the "Necessary and Proper Clause")

So it is written there, just not in the terms which you seem to need it to be so that you can clearly understand it I guess...

Unless you are building a log cabin using only locally available materials (meaning you chopped down the logs yourself) you are engaging in and benefiting from interstate commerce to procure your supplies and materials which had to move across state lines to arrive at the local store from which you purchased them... THAT gives Congress the power to decide on how those materials should be sold and used... Or to require any safety laws it feels are necessary...

It is my opinion that in the next few coming generations of the National Building Code that automatic fire sprinklers will soon be a nationwide requirement...

~~ Evan

I have been responsible for sprinkler systems in various structures my entire life and I didn't spend half a day each month emptying drum traps. That is only necessary in the weeks immediately after a system trip or the weeks just after commissioning a metallic pipe system. Once a system is properly charged there is no way for water to enter the piping system beyond the dry pipe valve unless the system trips or is charged from the fire department connection.

-- Tom Horne

Its not only Pa with sprinklers any state following ICC codes need sprinklers unless they have excluded itand some states did.

Also all new circuits installed in a any residence new or existing must now be protected by a Arc Fault breaker. at $35.00 a pop plus all electrical outlets must now be child tamper proof as of 2010 NEC Plus there are new insulation energy code costs and tests as well on average all the new code things will add 8-10 thousand to the cost of a new home.

You obviously know nothing about firefighting or automatic sprinklers. You offer no basis for your statements, which over forty years of fire service experience tells me are completely untrue, but you expect your readers to except them as gospel. Just how many times have you crawled down a long snotty hallway looking for other peoples children at 0dark30 in the morning? How much water does a modern interior attack line flow per minute? How many seconds of flow does it take to knock a room and contents that has flashed over? Do you have the faintest idea?

I have been on fire attacks were the fire flow exceeded twenty thousand gallons a minute and were the loss was limited to less than forty percent of the buildings value in spite of the fact that the de- watering operation took hours. I have been on many house fires were the fire flow exceeded five hundred gallons a minute and the loss was limited to less than a quarter of the buildings value. The amount of loss to the building of origin is immaterial though as long as the fire is held to that structure and does not spread to other properties the state has done it's job.

-- Tom Horne

Name one insurance carrier that will do that nick. Just one will do.

-- Tom Horne

Oh I see for the sake of the builders we should allow them to continue to condemn communities to the cost of manual fire protection for the life of each new structure. Umm I vote no!

-- Tom Horne

Smitty Requiring sprinklers is just a way to shift the cost of keeping your fire to yourself from your fellow citizens to you. The state is not trying to protect you from yourself. They are trying to protect you from your neighbors and your neighbors from you. Manual fire protection is far more expensive than automatic fire protection. That is a fact.

-- Tom Horne

Any state following ICC codes now need to follow sprinkler code unless they exempt it not just Pa. Also There are new energy and Electrical codes to drive up the cost.

All new circuits installed in new or existing homes must now be protected by GFCI or new Arc Fault breakers Add $1000.00 extra cost for this average new homes. all outlets in home must be tamper proof to prevent children inserting items in outlets . a new infrared energy test must be run to see if home is leaking air. also new energy codes require almost all new homes have duct work in interior walls only no more outside walls unless special duct work used. average cost to a new home between sprinklers and electrical and energy is $8-10 thousand and thats if additional items like a pressure tank for sprinkler is needed.

Sure, why not ban ovens or heaters

Neither should be

Seems to me it would be better just to ban outlets in the bathroom, even GFI's might still be dangerous wouldn't it?

That never stops bureaucracy

Perhaps you don't quite....wait.......BASS LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I "think" his point is this

Rich people buy nice houses and therefore are bad Poor people don't buy nice houses which is also bad Some people know many people who don't sign on to an socialist heath care plan because they aren't sick

I could be wrong

My biggest worry we put all these systems in homes which will probably not need them for 30-40 years and will they work when called on? But the real problem is existing housing what has been done to protect those who need it most. How many times in fatal fires no working smoke detectors and the same thing will happen with sprinklers the same people who need them the most will be the ones to turn them off and not maintain them. I wonder how many 100% sprinkled community's over the last 10 years I could walk into and find sprinklers turned off and smokes disabled. how many GFCI and Arc Faults will work???

Ya know ..... I think your on to something there.

That all sounds pretty reasonable to me.

That allows us to conclude that there's no difference between rich people and poor people. And since it's ok for the government to pass laws for our own protection .... if a law was passed that required everyone to stay healthy, there'd be no reason for any kind of health care plan ..... at all !

OHMYGOD! Why didn't you think of this before now?

Which is why the requirement for smoke detectors has changed over the years from requiring a smoke detector to requiring

Batteries seem to be something that people are unable to replace in life safety devices even if they are still *good* twice a year to ensure that the things will actually work when they are needed... Hence the evolution of the requirement...

As far as having sprinkler systems disabled in any building that requires such systems for permitting and occupancy -- well that is a totally different matter, that was an intentional act to disable the sprinkler system made by someone who deliberately chose to do so... Better hope no one ever dies in a home which is mandated to be protected by a sprinkler system... Those deaths would no longer be classified as "Accidental: Fire" and would be "Homicide: Criminal Negligence"... Depending on what your state laws are you could be up for a manslaughter charge and do 10 to 15 years or up on murder charges and do 25 to life for turning off a required life safety device...

~~ Evan

...

I recall the early 90's when Texas enacted a number of strict fire codes which resulted in a lot of homes that could have easily had basic fire protection but didn't because of the extra cost involved. Mandatory sprinkler systems sounds nice to a bureaucrat, they never have to deal with the aftermath

Even better, say your sprinkler system has an "accident" resulting in flood damage and the customer sues you when it may not be your fault. The end result of these "mandatory" safety laws is usually more lawsuits