$, lobbyists, and politicians

[Danzig]

http://news.yahoo.com/homes-burn-fas...110543236.html


yes, indeed. the pols are looking out for their constituents, aren't they?


"When you start mandating a fire sprinkler system, you are going to price a lot of people out of these new homes," said Ned Munoz, vice president of regulatory affairs for the Texas Association of Home Builders, which lobbied heavily for anti-sprinkler legislation.


really? are you sure? because further down, one sees:

A 2008 survey by the Fire Protection Research Foundation found the systems add an average $1.61 per square foot, or $3,864, to the cost of a new 2,400-square-foot home. Some insurance companies offer policy discounts as high as 10 percent for homes with fire sprinklers.

so, a 10% discount...let's say you pay $2000 a year premium. at $200 a year, why, it would pay for itself in no time. and if it prevented a full loss, or more importantly, a death/serious injury-i'd say it's amazingly affordable. and personally, i'd rather spend the money on that than granite countertops!!!


and another question....wouldn't it be cheaper to install the stuff, than to pay scads of dough to fight installing the stuff??? common sense isn't so common, is it?

[Clip-Clop]

Kind of a reasonable idea in tightly packed fire rich areas.

That said, they only work for fires that are started inside the home, while most areas that could possibly benefit from the tech the fires are started outside the home.

Also the catastrophic failure and costs associated with just one sprinkler head failing in one home when no one is inside the house is remarkable.

This happened to one of my clients (forward thinking and installed even though he wasn't required to) and the lower level of the home was completely flooded and the cost to repair was around 300K. Fine for me since it destroyed my system and I got to replace it but a disaster otherwise.

[Riot]

Danzig, this is exactly the government folks in those cities and states have elected: very conservative, little to no government regulation.

That's what these folks WANT - no government rules and regs ordering them to do things to protect their homes and lives.

You can't have the government forcing people to purchase sprinkler systems or insurance.

Of course, that endangers the lives of firefighters when their homes catch fire, but those firefighter guys are just union thugs, living off the government teat, undeserving of salary, pension or benefits. Those firefighter guys need to be fired from the government and privatized anyways.

Again, this is exactly the scenario the voting public has chosen for themselves in those cities and states. Why you are blaming "pols and lobbyists" is beyond me. Pols and lobbyists don't arise out of nothing to gain power. Those are the "pol's and lobbyists" the citizens chose to run things.

The deaths of firefighters and fellow citizens ... well, Atlas Shrugged And Didn't Care - Every Man For Himself

Firefighters reported more than 1,300 incidents from 2006 to 2010 in which lightweight construction hurt their ability to suppress fires in single-family or multifamily homes, according to a Reuters analysis of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's National Fire Incident Reporting System, the nation's largest fire database. At least 90 percent of those homes did not have sprinklers installed. Twenty civilians were killed and at least 260 firefighters and civilians were injured in those fires.

An additional Reuters review of federal and local firefighter fatality investigations found at least nine firefighters killed since 2000 while battling residential lightweight construction fires.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://news.yahoo.com/homes-burn-fas...110543236.html

A 2008 survey by the Fire Protection Research Foundation found the systems add an average $1.61 per square foot, or $3,864, to the cost of a new 2,400-square-foot home. Some insurance companies offer policy discounts as high as 10 percent for homes with fire sprinklers.

so, a 10% discount...let's say you pay $2000 a year premium. at $200 a year, why, it would pay for itself in no time. and if it prevented a full loss, or more importantly, a death/serious injury-i'd say it's amazingly affordable. and personally, i'd rather spend the money on that than granite countertops!!!

I don't think the lack of this regulation steps on your personal and well thought out choice of installing a sprinkler system rather than granite countertops. However it would step on the personal decision of someone wanting granite instead.

Simply American's don't need a babysitter/parent by way of the government. If a citizen doesn't want sprinklers and is willing to pay an additional 10% on his home insurance policy so be it.

BTW How much did the pipefitters union and sprinkler association dole out to politicians to get this going?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I don't think the lack of this regulation steps on your personal and well thought out choice of installing a sprinkler system rather than granite countertops. However it would step on the personal decision of someone wanting granite instead.

Simply American's don't need a babysitter/parent by way of the government. If a citizen doesn't want sprinklers and is willing to pay an additional 10% on his home insurance policy so be it.

BTW How much did the pipefitters union and sprinkler association dole out to politicians to get this going?

not as much as the construction industry to fight it.

thing is, regarding codes, many of the others that are now just a part of building a home were once fought against due to cost. as for 'babysitting', do you object to the code telling your builder what size wiring to use? that it must be copper, and not aluminum? that p-traps must be put on all plumbing? that plumbing must be vented? what about standards on footings, walls, beams, etc? all put there to make sure builders didn't just build cheap and without regard to safety.
also, if you'll note, because of changes in materials, houses burn much more quickly than they used to, hence the reason i agree that a sprinkler system would be very useful. besides, the changes in materials are used because they changed the price being paid by builders-and yet, you don't see a correlating decrease in housing prices, do you? of course not. i wouldn't buy a new house that was built along with many others at the same time by a developer. those cookie cutters are done in a minimum of time, on the cheap. it's why drywall doesn't look at good as it used to, it's why you can feel your tub give when you're in it, it's why the toilets they install are the bottom of line model.
they are against sprinklers because it might slow things down just a bit on the front end during the build.

a house is typically a persons single largest investment they will ever make. it contains their worldly goods and prized possessions, along with something irreplaceble-people. when i see builders say 'look at the cost' and it's under 4k for a 2400 squ foot home, frankly, it makes me laugh. that's cheap!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Kind of a reasonable idea in tightly packed fire rich areas.

That said, they only work for fires that are started inside the home, while most areas that could possibly benefit from the tech the fires are started outside the home.

Also the catastrophic failure and costs associated with just one sprinkler head failing in one home when no one is inside the house is remarkable.

This happened to one of my clients (forward thinking and installed even though he wasn't required to) and the lower level of the home was completely flooded and the cost to repair was around 300K. Fine for me since it destroyed my system and I got to replace it but a disaster otherwise.

yeah, but i'd have to think sprinkler failure would be on par with a broken water line to the ice maker in the fridge, or back up of sewer (oh,and DT'ers, back up of sewer and drain is not typically standard on a homeowners policy, call your agent). not nearly as common as a fire, and probably not as destructive.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Danzig

not as much as the construction industry to fight it.

thing is, regarding codes, many of the others that are now just a part of building a home were once fought against due to cost. as for 'babysitting', do you object to the code telling your builder what size wiring to use? that it must be copper, and not aluminum? that p-traps must be put on all plumbing? that plumbing must be vented? what about standards on footings, walls, beams, etc? all put there to make sure builders didn't just build cheap and without regard to safety.
also, if you'll note, because of changes in materials, houses burn much more quickly than they used to, hence the reason i agree that a sprinkler system would be very useful. besides, the changes in materials are used because they changed the price being paid by builders-and yet, you don't see a correlating decrease in housing prices, do you? of course not. i wouldn't buy a new house that was built along with many others at the same time by a developer. those cookie cutters are done in a minimum of time, on the cheap. it's why drywall doesn't look at good as it used to, it's why you can feel your tub give when you're in it, it's why the toilets they install are the bottom of line model.
they are against sprinklers because it might slow things down just a bit on the front end during the build.

a house is typically a persons single largest investment they will ever make. it contains their worldly goods and prized possessions, along with something irreplaceble-people. when i see builders say 'look at the cost' and it's under 4k for a 2400 squ foot home, frankly, it makes me laugh. that's cheap!

All municipal codes and determined by the local code enforcement. Sprinkler install goes absolutely last prior to insulation to protect the pressurized lines from puncture.
In a lot of areas around the country there are no inspections or code enforcement at all.
My company has recently started installing outdoor fire sprinkler in NorCal, heat detection and perimeter high pressure outdoor sprinklers fed from rain cisterns. Very cool.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

All municipal codes and determined by the local code enforcement. Sprinkler install goes absolutely last prior to insulation to protect the pressurized lines from puncture. In a lot of areas around the country there are no inspections or code enforcement at all.
My company has recently started installing outdoor fire sprinkler in NorCal, heat detection and perimeter high pressure outdoor sprinklers fed from rain cisterns. Very cool.

yeah, that makes sense. god knows i've seen duct work and pipes drilled into, or nailed, screwed...we had to fix a guys plumbing one time...a previous carpenter had drilled into his main plumbing line in the kitchen, leaked for a few years before they finally started noticing the water damage that had been occurring behind the walls, cabinets, etc.
but what you bolded are other requirements in place, which was why i mentioned them to illustrate that regs and codes are long standing practices. and anyone buying new construction-i'm sure they'd like to know jsut how much more quickly their home would go up compared to mine, or other older homes with different building materials. when you consider that, you can understand why sprinkler or other suppression systems would be a good thing.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, that makes sense. god knows i've seen duct work and pipes drilled into, or nailed, screwed...we had to fix a guys plumbing one time...a previous carpenter had drilled into his main plumbing line in the kitchen, leaked for a few years before they finally started noticing the water damage that had been occurring behind the walls, cabinets, etc.
but what you bolded are other requirements in place, which was why i mentioned them to illustrate that regs and codes are long standing practices. and anyone buying new construction-i'm sure they'd like to know jsut how much more quickly their home would go up compared to mine, or other older homes with different building materials. when you consider that, you can understand why sprinkler or other suppression systems would be a good thing.

New construction does fly but is also more reliable. Engineered lumber (which is no doubt the fuel for these faster fires) does make things move more quickly but is a better solution.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

New construction does fly but is also more reliable. Engineered lumber (which is no doubt the fuel for these faster fires) does make things move more quickly but is a better solution.

yeah, engineered lumber is obviously structurally sound, and no concerns about tree size like with huge beams. but you don't much hear about length of time for fires vs previous types of joists, etc. same as plywood vs osb, engineered '2 x 4s' (i use quotes because they aren't really 2 x 4, they're 1 1/2 x 3/12) that are finger-jointed/glued short sections put together to reach 8' lengths vs studs.

osb is so quick and cheap to make (less people, machines, time, and no need to get perfect 4 x 8 sheets for the two outside layers, so no worries on tree size) but it's not equal to plywood. i hate the stuff. and uses a lot more glue than plywood, so it's got to be more quick to burn than plywood. if they want to use it as cladding on walls that's one thing, but i'd have a fit if they used it on the roof, or if a two story, as the decking on the second floor.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

not as much as the construction industry to fight it.!

Please provide proof!

You know instead of just making facts up a la Riot.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Please provide proof!

You know instead of just making facts up a la Riot.

Im pretty sure the original article shows the amounts paid by the lobbyists to keep phoenix from doing what scottsdale passed. And i dont make up stuff ala anyone.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

Im pretty sure the original article shows the amounts paid by the lobbyists to keep phoenix from doing what scottsdale passed. And i dont make up stuff ala anyone.

OK so the pipefitters and sprinkler companies have no horse in the race? Starting the race? They contributed nothing to anyone invloved?

You're not that naive!

Are you?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

OK so the pipefitters and sprinkler companies have no horse in the race? Starting the race? They contributed nothing to anyone invloved?

You're not that naive!

Are you?

dell, you're becoming tedious.

[SOREHOOF]

Why don't people just try to get a good price on a foreclosure? Lots of them out there! Screw the Govt. and their stupid Regs. PEOPLE! Vote these idiots out! All of them. Send a message.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by SOREHOOF

Why don't people just try to get a good price on a foreclosure? Lots of them out there! Screw the Govt. and their stupid Regs. PEOPLE! Vote these idiots out! All of them. Send a message.

Unfortunately those idiots will be replaced by a new batch and it has now
gotten to the point that a known idiot may be safer than an unknown idiot who will come up with even more insidious ways to screw you.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by jms62

Unfortunately those idiots will be replaced by a new batch and it has now
gotten to the point that a known idiot may be safer than an unknown idiot who will come up with even more insidious ways to screw you.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Danzig

But the problem is that they are not idiots, far from it. They want us to think they are idiots because it is better then the reality which is Grifters and flat out Criminals setting the rules for those supporting their campaigns or promise of future employment/consulting deals. We have evolved into a 3rd world government.