Re: "Central Station Service" Poll

["Bill" <bill190nospam@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm more familiar with electrical codes, and in that case, you need to buy
the code book to read the codes (so far as I know). Some small town
libraries can't afford to buy the latest codes each year.

There are a lot of people these days who seek information on the internet. I
feel it would be better if people could read the codes on the internet for
free.

I guess the funding for these organizations comes from the sale of the code
books?

Anyway I feel that more people would follow the codes if certain sections
could be quoted on internet forums.

Then after quoting the code, the person requesting the information will say
"That's a silly rule!".

Then other more experienced people can at that point say "Hey, that rule is
in place because x number of people have died in the past due to not having
that safety feature in place, etc. And that these codes are in place to
protect YOU basically, etc.

Some of these people do not get permits or get their work inspected, but
when it is pointed out *why* they should follow certain codes, I think they
do so for their own safety.

So I think if the goal is protection of life and property, then the codes
should be very accessible to the public at large (internet).

Perhaps funding for these organizations could come from another source such
as a surcharge or tax on building permits?


"Jackcsg" wrote in message
> No Bill, there's nothing wrong with it. You have to understand, these
> codes,
> and the other code books, are guidelines. They're not the hard core
> directives...but they can be. Perception often can get taken out of
> context,
> and some people can often refer to them as mandated. The biggest problem I
> see in the Fire Alarm Industry is not the NFPA, but the failure to
> communicate with local AHJ's. They need that warm and fuzzy, and
> rightfully
> so. There are a lot of idiots out there installing equipment with no clue
> of
> even what the guidelines are. Perception, and assumption can be dangerous
> words in this environment.
>