child proof recepts being required!?

Status
Not open for further replies.
stickboy1375 said:
Nope, this one is though...

(IMG)

Those child safety caps IMO are a real PITA to remove by the way....
Click to expand...

Damn that's cute. I'm hesitant to get one of mine in that pose, as she's almost 4 and has until this point has refrained from learning first-hand about line voltage. (without child-resistant outlets I might add) She knew how to hook up a VCR (@@@) by age 3, and I didn't teach her... :confused:
 
Last edited:
The entire substantiation for this change was posted way back in post #32

Here are a few selected high lights.

During a 10-year period, from 1991 to 2001 , over 24,000 children in the United States were injured when they inserted foreign objects into electrical receptacles. Every year an average of at least 2,400 children are injured when tampering with electrical receptacles.

The vast majority of injured children are under age 6. Victims age 2 and under represent 39% of cases, while those age 3 to 6 represent 50% of all cases.


The incidents occurred as the result of the child inserting an object into a receptacle. The following is a breakdown of the percent of incidents in which a child inserted a specific type of object into a receptacle:

Hairpin 32%

Key 17%

Body part(finger) 12%

Plug and cord 11 %

Wire 7%

Unknown 6%

Pin/needle/screw/nail 5%

Paper clip/staple 5%

Tweezers/fie/tool/knife 3%

Jewelry/belt buckle 1%

Open outlet 1%

Many of these objects are not perceived as dangerous by parents, perhaps explaining young childrens easy access to them and frequent rate of insertion.


The results of these incidents are very rarely fatal, but will result in electric shocks and mild to severe burns.

Most incidents are relatively superficial first or second-degree burns, where children are treated for reddened skin or blisters and released from the Emergency Room with topical treatment. Yet 8.7% - that is over 200 children per year - need to be hospitalized.

2% of all burns are 3 degree. These are burns so severe that they result in deeply charred skin and can require a skin graft if the burn is over 1 inch in size.

A study conducted by Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP) reported similar data. For example: almost 80% of the Canadian incidents occurred in the home (compared with 71% in the US), 40% were 3-6 years of age (compared with 50% in the US).

Should the NEC ignore 2,400 electrical injuries each year?

Keep in mind that the statistics only include those incidents that resulted in a hospital visit, without a doubt the actual number of children getting shocks is much higher then that.

I will add this from the report.

It is important to note that the NEISS report also includes the following four fatalities:

1991 - 2 year old male, Shawnee, OK, child placed key in electric receptacle

1994 - 23 month old male, Traverse City, MI , child stuck keys in electric receptacle

1995 - 3 year old female, Great Falls, MT, contact with electric receptacle , cardio respiratory arrest

1998 - 2 year old female, Springfield, MO, stuck unknown object into 110V receptacle
 
Last edited:
Bob, my point is they already make devices to protect kids from sticking things in electrical devices, which is great because now only the people that actually HAVE kids can purchase them... ;) You'll notice I have them installed in my picture above...
 
I agree with that..I only have grand kids at my house now and that is only part time I have some child proof outlets and they grow on you but mostly I just use them child proof inserts by the time they figure what they are they are big enough to know how to use them..Yet I shall live by the sword and Die by the sword..So install child proof I will and sell the benifits and will do it fully understanding it is an invasion on my personal rights..
 
Death is real...

Death is real...

I am not trying to minimize the death or injury of children, that is tragic. However, the code should not be a driving force for taking responsibility for your own and your childrens actions. If you, as a parent, feel that there is a safety issue with existing outlets, then you, not the NEC, should dictate what measures you will take to provide adequate protection. What about all of the existing homes? Will the 2011 code require retrofiting? Maybe we could go in and kick down doors for peoples own protection - Once again I think this is 100% profit driven. If you review the 11 positive and 1 negative vote for this change the negative is the only one who offers a coherent response to the submittal. NOT ENOUGH facts, the other 11 voted on a feel good measure! We had a leviton rep at our ECF meeting the other night, he was so nicely tanned, beautifully groomed nails, designer clothes and the biggest smile on his face you could ever imagine when this issue was addressed! Hey, 2008 is the year of his new Porshe! :mad:
 
When I read the substantiation, I begin to wonder about its accuracy when they tell me that 12% of the injuries were because the child stuck his or her finger into the receptacle.
Don
 
since there are over 21,300 baby walker hospital visits per year, the must be legislation for the parent to go and get a 'certification in baby walker watching " for watching their baby to sure they dont get hurt.

Better yet, how about banning them, or make it BUILDING CODE to installed automatic stair 'gates' to keep them in and from falling down the stairs.

http://www.cpsc.gov/CPSCPUB/PUBS/babywalk.pdf
 
So then how do we appeal this code? I think there is enough people here who feel it is wrong tell us and give us the forms.
Click to expand...
At this point the only way is a proposal for the 2011 code. It would be very unlikely that such a proposal would pass. The only other way is to lobby that the AHJ does not adopt the 2008 NEC, or adopts it with amendments. Given that this is an emotional safety issue, it is unlikely that an AHJ would delete this rule.
Don
 
cschmid said:
So then how do we appeal this code? I think there is enough people here who feel it is wrong tell us and give us the forms..
Click to expand...
I don't think we can appeal. The code Gods are going to put the pointed boot of the NEC up our asspirations and stand on the noble deck of "protecting the children " while doing it. We can however sooth our pained backsides with the knowlege that this was voted on!!
 
Horst1 said:
I am not trying to minimize the death or injury of children, that is tragic. However, the code should not be a driving force for taking responsibility for your own and your childrens actions. If you, as a parent, feel that there is a safety issue with existing outlets, then you, not the NEC, should dictate what measures you will take to provide adequate protection. What about all of the existing homes? Will the 2011 code require retrofiting? Maybe we could go in and kick down doors for peoples own protection - Once again I think this is 100% profit driven. If you review the 11 positive and 1 negative vote for this change the negative is the only one who offers a coherent response to the submittal. NOT ENOUGH facts, the other 11 voted on a feel good measure! We had a leviton rep at our ECF meeting the other night, he was so nicely tanned, beautifully groomed nails, designer clothes and the biggest smile on his face you could ever imagine when this issue was addressed! Hey, 2008 is the year of his new Porshe! :mad:
Click to expand...
I sometimes get a little crazy worrying about liberty when I know what is realy important is that the Leviton guy gets that new Porshe!!
 
cschmid said:
So then how do we appeal this code? I think there is enough people here who feel it is wrong tell us and give us the forms..
Click to expand...

1- We need a good lawyer, connected to a prestigious firm.
2- Said lawyer needs to appeal for class action status including but not limited to contractors, new home builders and new home owners.
3-At this particular time of mortgage crisis, (despite the fact that it's a self-made mess) sluggish home sales, and much of the economic indicators hinged on new housing starts, the political wind couldn't be more favorable.
4-A feature segment on 20/20 or 60 Minutes wouldn't hurt either.

The crux of a suit could be, that manufacturs developing new products are using a private codemaking panel to force a false demand for their products, for profit-driven motives and with questionable results.

As morbid as it is, every modern convenience has to be cost/benefit weighed against human life. Using carbon based fuels causes deaths. Building fast cars causes deaths. Eating cheese causes deaths, and the use of electricity causes deaths. But nobody outlaws high-fat cheese, or limits our use of gasoline, or forces cars to top out at 65.
 
LawnGuyLandSparky said:
1- We need a good lawyer, connected to a prestigious firm.
2- Said lawyer needs to appeal for class action status including but not limited to contractors, new home builders and new home owners.
3-At this particular time of mortgage crisis, (despite the fact that it's a self-made mess) sluggish home sales, and much of the economic indicators hinged on new housing starts, the political wind couldn't be more favorable.
4-A feature segment on 20/20 or 60 Minutes wouldn't hurt either.

The crux of a suit could be, that manufacturs developing new products are using a private codemaking panel to force a false demand for their products, for profit-driven motives and with questionable results.

As morbid as it is, every modern convenience has to be cost/benefit weighed against human life. Using carbon based fuels causes deaths. Building fast cars causes deaths. Eating cheese causes deaths, and the use of electricity causes deaths. But nobody outlaws high-fat cheese, or limits our use of gasoline, or forces cars to top out at 65.
Click to expand...
This could well be post of the week.
 
chris kennedy said:
This could well be post of the week.
Click to expand...

Dittos. My wife was in the motgage business until recently. We are both needing more work. Laws which artificially drive up the cost of building new homes are evil.
 
Last edited:
90.1 Purpose

(A) Practical Safeguarding. The purpose of this code is the practical safeguarding of persons and property from hazards arising from the use of electricity.
Click to expand...

Now given that purpose of existence how could the CMP members ignore 2,400 electrical injures a year all the result of a specific piece of electrical equipment?

It would not make any sense at all for them not to do something.

Reading the entire substantiation made me change my mind on this requirement.

Some people have said they don't want the NEC raising their kids, well I don't either.

They would not be, you would still be raising them the same way. Just like the required GFCIs do not change your parenting or the required grounding around a pool does not change your parenting or even the fact the NEC requires cover plates on devices does not change your parenting.

Tamper resistant receptacles are not going to change how you raise your kids.

Heck, unless your building a new home you will not even have to install them if you don't want to. :smile:
 
I bet "postwise" it is not even close. However the OP "poopypants" started this whole thing off almost 10 months ago.

1. I had never heard of Mike Holt

2. I don't see Poopypants posting anything useful to draw this sucker to a close.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Is this one of the longest threads in the history of the forum. I would love to know what the longest is or has been.
Click to expand...

Here's one with 381 responses:
http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=82386

I think someone posted a link a while back to one with over 600 posts. Maybe I'm wrong. My memory's not what it used to be.


And, I think the most was over 600 posts, but my memory isn't what it used to be.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top