One for record

CFAA (Canadian Fire Alarm Association) has a big shindig happening on May 5. One of the featured seminars is:

"The most common testing mistakes made by Technicians performing verifications to ULC S537, and how to perform them successfully", hosted by Mircom Technologies.

Damn near fell off my chair.

Reply to
Frank Olson
Loading thread data ...

"Frank Olson" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : 5juqn.31312$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe21.iad...

CFAA is a joke..

Reply to
Petem

Well... If you're a fire alarm technician in Ontario, I don't think CFAA is a laughing matter. You've got until July to take the upgrade course or you lose your membership.

Reply to
Frank Olson

Yup, in Ontario anyone can install anything.... thats why CFAA was able to have there certification an obligation... But still , it does not make CFAA less of a joke..

Reply to
Petem

I'm all for regulating fire protection technicians. I also think it's important that they stay abreast of the latest developments and I also think someone should be Policing their work. CFAA is not the solution however (at least in it's present semi-dysfunctional state).

Reply to
Frank Olson

Totally agree with you, here we have regulation, and let me tell you if the system is not done properly someone can kiss goodbye his spare times for a long time till the inspector is happy..

But CFAA.. the price they ask for there training is crazy!! and its not even worth 1/10th of it..

Reply to
Petem

Do I understand correctly that CFAA is a non-governmental organization of security industry members: i.e., manufacturers, distributors, dealers and installers?

Now your government wants to force you to take classes that CBFAA designs? I took classes in the USA equivalent many years ago. They were a joke.

Somebody is nuts!

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Bull eye

Some government of some province are thinking of it, and some does ask for the class to be folowed..

Reply to
Petem

This is kind of ironic when you think about it. In the USA a lot of people are upset about healthcare reform because they say the government is taking over private industry. (I find the very idea that medical treatment is an industry repulsive.)

At the same time, in Canada, private indiustry is taking over the government (CBFAA making the rules).

In reality, private industry has always owned the government here. Insurance companies, auto makers, import/export traders, etc., give big donations to polirical action comittees to make sure their candidates get elected. Once in power his vote on every issue remains in the pocket of whoever paid him off.

It's a nice system if you happen to be a congressman or senator. For the rest of us it's, well... not so nice.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Bob lets not forget, NFPA, BOCA etc... they make rules that the gov. adopts without input from the majority of the people it will affect.. (( all because the gov is too lazy or too stupid to create rules for all the people.. (imo))) RTS

Reply to
Rockytsquirrel

=BDthey make rules =EF=BF=BDthat the gov.

ate rules for all

It seems to me that the govenment has no reservation about creating rules. It has lots and lots of rules, laws, guidelines, etc. The problem is that they are "too lazy or too stupid" to do the research to find out if they're really practical, helpful or will do more harm than good. And of course, once the rules are made, chances of them ever being changed are pretty remote and if so, it takes years and years to do, at the personal expense of civilians via the courts, extensive grass roots movements or voting a politician out of office. Nowdays our national climate seems to be ruled by which ever special interest group happens to grab the publics attention. And unfortunately, with the availability of instantanious communication, the media has control of that. The sheeple only pay attention to whatever is put under their nose.

For instance, if you only put all the reasons that promote that global warming is due to the use of fossil fuel, in front of the sheeple, then that becomes reality. Never put a reason for fossil fuel NOT being the reason in front of the sheeple, then it's not true.

Likewise, if no one ever brings up the fact that by promoting the reduction of the world population, and that it would be a giant step towards being a remedy for reducing the use of fossil fuel, all natural resouces, help solve the world hunger problems, and reduce many of the reasons various nations are at war with one another. No one even thinks about it.

We can't keep increasing the population and then try to remedy that by creating "patches" like battery powered cars, nuclear power plants, CFL bulbs and creating other synthectics , that create other environmental problems, not to mention the inconveniences. China's at least got that right. They're on the right track with population control, as far as I can see. Just give them a few decades and they'll be out of their adolesence. At the rate we're going, the decisions that are being made, the special interests groups that the sheeple are letting lead them wherever they want, I think we're on a one way track ..... outta town.

Not that I would choose to live anywhere else in the world but it sure is frustrating to be an American citizen anymore. And I'm sure I wouldn't want to be living here 100 or so years from now. I don't picture the US remaining the premier world power it has been for too many more decades.

Reply to
Jim

Well, I agree with you on that one. In particular, I agree after what the devastating news I saw tonight. Apparently, the insurance industry already found a loophole big enough to drive an ambulance through.

I didn't catch the entire report but they *may* have found a way to ignore the prohibition on turning away children with pre-existing conditions.

It was disgusting watching their lawyer actually gloat, but not as disgusting as the thpought that in our haste to get it passed me may have allowed them to continue the same awful policy.

Sad.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

Gee do you think that would be there had anyone read the bill? And if I recall that's not a loophole it's stated that coverage wouldn't begin until 2014.

You gotta quit watching Ed Shultz

Reply to
mleuck

I've read portions of it. You can download it if you want to know what you're talking about.

As it turns out, the insurers backed off on it today so it's a non issue after all.

Among the MSNBC commentators, he's the only one I don't particularly care for. He's too loud. Both Kieth and Rachel are intelligent and funny, having between them a greater IQ than the sum total of the entire staff of the Fox Network.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

How do you know? Do you ever watch Fox? RW

Reply to
Roger W

Yes.

Reply to
Robert L Bass

More precisely, I *read* Fox News via their website. I spend far less time in front of the TV these days than even a few months ago... kind of a sub-conscious decision on prioities, I guess.

Anyway, the comment was meant as a joke against Fox. I'm well aware that many of them are brilliant. I just totally disagree with their politics and I believe that Rupert Murdoch is an... Well, OK, the new me has to stop there. :^)

Just to be clear: I like to argue politics but I don't want to cause anger here. It's not personal with me. I'm passionate about what happens to my country, but not

*against* you for saying I'm wrong. Fair enough?

Regards, Robert

Reply to
Robert L Bass

I didn't say you are wrong. I was just asking if you ever watch or listen to Fox news. Too many people criticize things they don't watch or listen to. Many people hate Rush but have never listened to his show. But they know they hate him. I know you are not one of them because you are a fair minded far left liberal and when I grow up I want to be just like you.

Since you are a loyal Fox news fan, what do you think of those fine looking blonde chick talking heads they got. RW P.S. I hope you're feeling better. :-)

Reply to
Roger W

No problem. I often am. :^)

Heh, heh, heh... :^)

I do try to be fair-minded, Roger. I would go so far as to call me a Fox fan though.

The new me tries not to stare. I haven't said anything here previously, but Angela and I are talking and...

Thanks. The past few days have actually been pretty good. There's also some *possibly* good news for me. I just learned of a clinical trial being done at the University of Colorado.

To get accepted the tumor's DNA has to have an ALK4 mutation and the patient has meatstatic Adenocarincoma. I had the DNA study done last year and I have the type of cancer they're testing. I called the oncolgist to find out if my tumors' DNA is a match. If so, I can get into the program. So far, several those who went through it have gone from Stage IV to NAD (No Evidence of Disease) in a matter of months.

Apologies to the newsgroup for posting so much personal stuff but your words are very kind and I wanted to answer. At any rate, at least there may be hope after all.

Regards, Robert

Reply to
Robert L Bass

At last... something to cheer about!!!

Reply to
Frank Olson

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.