I.C.C. Sprinkler Vote Tomorrow.......

[hwoods]

Anyone going to be in Baltimore for the International Code Council's meeting, including the vote on the plan to remove the Sprinkler Requirement that was mandated at the meeting in Minneapolis........??


The Mid-Atlantic area's Fire Services are expected to make a very strong showing in support of the Sprinkler Requirement...........

[shenry32]

I'm not going but have two from my office here in Ohio who are there all week.

Hopefully it'll stay, I wasn't a fan of how we got it passed, but its in there now, lets keep it in.

Cheers,
Scott

[hwoods]

I'm not going but have two from my office here in Ohio who are there all week.

Hopefully it'll stay, I wasn't a fan of how we got it passed, but its in there now, lets keep it in.

Cheers,
Scott

I did not attend the Minneapolis Meeting that put the Sprinkler requirement in place, but I supported it, totally.

I simply can not understand people in the Home Builders Organization who are working their Butts off to ensure that your Lawn is Sprinklered, but your Home is not. Grass before Human Life??.......... Idiots.....

[FWDbuff]

I'm not going but have two from my office here in Ohio who are there all week.

Hopefully it'll stay, I wasn't a fan of how we got it passed, but its in there now, lets keep it in.

Cheers,
Scott

If you are referring to the last 2 or 3 meetings being "stacked" lets not forget how the NAHB's committed the first act of "stacking the meeting" and then had the audacity to call "us" on it by filing a grievance and claiming that volunteer fire organizations should not have the right to vote!

[DeputyChiefGonzo]

I did not attend the Minneapolis Meeting that put the Sprinkler requirement in place, but I supported it, totally.

I simply can not understand people in the Home Builders Organization who are working their Butts off to ensure that your Lawn is Sprinklered, but your Home is not. Grass before Human Life??.......... Idiots.....

Bingo, Harve! They have no problem pushing commercial grade kitchen appliances and oh my God priced granite countertops, but neglect to protect them with a residential sprinkler system.

[haligan155]

I’m gonna get this party started.
I totally disagree with the requirements for sprinklers in the home. Here we are talking about putting restrictions on how a person can build his castle in a way that may bring undue financial burden. Now, I know I live in the sticks, and that we have a different independent view up here, but I can’t help to think that sometimes we over regulate.
This may be due to a recent run in with the fire fuzz, but I sometimes think that we work to hard at making this world too safe.
The world is a dangerous place, and if you can’t take a little bloody nose now and again STAY HOME.
We can manage to get fire sprinklers mandatory in someone’s castle, but we can’t guarantee health care for our citizens, feed our hungry or educate our young.
Don’t you find it a little misguided when we spend tens of thousands of dollars on huge disaster drill trainings, of which many of us will never respond to, but there are firefighters still using SCOTT 2a SCBA’s and responding in apparatus that were in service when Kennedy was shot?
I say forget about sprinklers, focus on reality
The world according to Matt…

[FWDbuff]

1. The costs for a residential sprinkler system in new construction is pennies on the dollar.

2. I am willing to bet that you have never smelled the lovely scent of burned human flesh and hair (which you never, ever forget as long as you live) much less have to help the coroner place the remains in a body bag........

3. If you guys in the boonies (at least here in Pennsylvania) had your way, ALL of the building codes would be tossed into the trash can.

[haligan155]

I have been a Firefighter and EMT for 10 years. And, in a previous life (’03-’04) I worked at a funeral home, so I have seen my share of death and destruction, and body bags…
I am also a huge proponent of residential sprinklers. You are absolutely correct with your facts and I couldn’t agree more.
What I am not a proponent of is over regulation. I think education is a better answer. Convince people to want to have sprinklers, don’t regulate them to death.
And the sticks are different then the boonies, close but not the same.
I also happen to be a Public Administration/Poly Sci. major at the University of Maine. So I am not a complete moron. Just opinionated….

[ChiefKN]

I’m gonna get this party started.
I totally disagree with the requirements for sprinklers in the home. Here we are talking about putting restrictions on how a person can build his castle in a way that may bring undue financial burden. Now, I know I live in the sticks, and that we have a different independent view up here, but I can’t help to think that sometimes we over regulate.
This may be due to a recent run in with the fire fuzz, but I sometimes think that we work to hard at making this world too safe.
The world is a dangerous place, and if you can’t take a little bloody nose now and again STAY HOME.
We can manage to get fire sprinklers mandatory in someone’s castle, but we can’t guarantee health care for our citizens, feed our hungry or educate our young.
Don’t you find it a little misguided when we spend tens of thousands of dollars on huge disaster drill trainings, of which many of us will never respond to, but there are firefighters still using SCOTT 2a SCBA’s and responding in apparatus that were in service when Kennedy was shot?
I say forget about sprinklers, focus on reality
The world according to Matt…

Are you also opposed to the wiring/electric code requirements in your castle?

Why is this different?

[johnsonizzle]

I built my own home in Frederick county, MD 2 years ago which requires sprinklers in all new construction homes. My house cost me roughly $300,000 The sprinklers cost me $3,800 or barely over 1% of the total cost. Not that big of a deal, especially when you break that cost over a 30 year mortgage... a little over $10 a month on top of a $2,000 a month mortgage... Well worth it for my family.

How about people who opt out of sprinklers don't get fire protection? If you don't want government regulation, you don't get government protection for your property considering they will be paying for the suppression costs should it go up in flames...

[MarcusKspn]

How about people who opt out of sprinklers don't get fire protection? If you don't want government regulation, you don't get government protection for your property considering they will be paying for the suppression costs should it go up in flames...

Or simply raise an additional "no sprinkler tax" to benefit the local FD

[haligan155]

It is different, because electric, when done wrong can directly contribute to a loss. Sprinklers only mitigate to loss, once it has occurred.
I am not against sprinklers, just regulation
Remember when you create a law; you take away part of your freedom.

[ThNozzleman]

What trips my switch is how the NAHB blathers on about how smoke detectors are protection enough against residential fires during their temper tantrums against residential sprinkler requirements, touting their life-saving performance as if it were their idea all along to include them in new homes.

[ThNozzleman]

I am not against sprinklers, just regulation

Ah...an anarchist.

[BryanLoader]

I’m gonna get this party started.
I totally disagree with the requirements for sprinklers in the home. Here we are talking about putting restrictions on how a person can build his castle in a way that may bring undue financial burden. Now, I know I live in the sticks, and that we have a different independent view up here, but I can’t help to think that sometimes we over regulate.
This may be due to a recent run in with the fire fuzz, but I sometimes think that we work to hard at making this world too safe.
The world is a dangerous place, and if you can’t take a little bloody nose now and again STAY HOME.
We can manage to get fire sprinklers mandatory in someone’s castle, but we can’t guarantee health care for our citizens, feed our hungry or educate our young.
Don’t you find it a little misguided when we spend tens of thousands of dollars on huge disaster drill trainings, of which many of us will never respond to, but there are firefighters still using SCOTT 2a SCBA’s and responding in apparatus that were in service when Kennedy was shot?
I say forget about sprinklers, focus on reality
The world according to Matt…

I can understand what you are saying Matt, and if you truly were living as
" A man is an Island" it would be fine. Problem is, if you don't follow the regulatory process, you still will benefit from all services put in place to protect people. Insurance, emergency services, medical, wildland, legal system, all could end up being involved in a fire in your home which could have been at least mitigated by a sprinkler system. If everyone used common sense, then fires would be way down, any fires occurring would be mitigated quickly, and the capitalist, stand alone system would work as it should. Unfortunately, "common sense" just ain't that common.

[owenscott]

I'm all for it and seat belt laws too. I wish we didn't have to have those laws but we do.

Tough to believe it has taken this long.

[ChiefKN]

It is different, because electric, when done wrong can directly contribute to a loss. Sprinklers only mitigate to loss, once it has occurred.
I am not against sprinklers, just regulation
Remember when you create a law; you take away part of your freedom.

But you don't deny that those electric requirements make the odds of dying in a fire less likely, right?

Remember, when you take away all the laws, you have Darfur...etc.

.

[CrazyFrank]

If you required residential sprinkles then, how many people will never get that system serviced? When it breaks or leaks will the home owner get it fixed or just turn them off? Then, when will the town/city you live in make a law that they need to have a fire inspection on your sprinkle system and charge you for that service?

[haligan155]

Now this is an argument! Much better than “you’re dumb” “no, you’re dumber”

I’m not opposed to regulation, just over regulation.

And yes, I will be installing sprinklers in my house when I build.

Keep up the great comments!

[MarcusKspn]

If you required residential sprinkles then, how many people will never get that system serviced? When it breaks or leaks will the home owner get it fixed or just turn them off? Then, when will the town/city you live in make a law that they need to have a fire inspection on your sprinkle system and charge you for that service?

Job security for the fire inspector!

But seriously, it's a good question. I guess one could argue that once the keys get turned over to the homeowner, they just assume responsibility and have to suffer the consequences of their actions. We don't go around and make sure people have batteries in their smoke detectors either. Nothing really keeps me from messing with the wiring after I move into the house either. Nobody in this neck of the woods forces homeowners to have their chimneys cleaned.

I guess putting sprinklers in the codes would ensure that a new homeowner has the best possible start at having a good chance of survival. But once you move in the monkey is on your back and you have to assume some personal responsibility.