child proof recepts being required!?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
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...
iwire said:
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:
Click to expand...

The key here is "practical." Is it practical to force the installation of receptacles that are currently 100x more expensive? If there are 2400 deaths per year, what does this translate to mathmatically? (Or is it "practical" to assume that one day, the code will be revised to such an extent that there will be zero deaths per year?)

Is it practical to suggest that the CMP must adopt every revision suggested to it because it represents an added component of safety?

According to Wikipedia:
(Age structure: (2007 est.)
0?19 years: 27.4% (male 42,667,761; female 40,328,895))

83 million under the age 19. Statistically that's 4 million, three hundred sixty thousand of each age 0-19, or 43 plus million age 10 and under. (The targeted protection group.)

2,400 deaths among 43 million surrounded by approximately 860 million receptacles (I figure 20 exposed receptacles per household) reveals that the chances of death by an unprotected receptacle is so extremely rare so as to be statistically insignifigant.
 
I wonder how many kids have gotten hurt or killed opening doors they werent suppose too. how about installing knob covers on doors to non childproof areas!! this can be code too.

what about SiD (sudden infant death syndrome). they needs to be an anti soft bedding and toy alert signal so it wont be accidently left in the crib to harm the baby.

here check out the site, it give all good ideas on protecting children, things we can put in the Codes. :(

http://kidshealth.org/parent/firstaid_safe/home/childproof.html
 
TR plugs

TR plugs

The only ones I've used are the pass & semore TR recepts. They are quite hard to plug things into. The $5 price tag is rough too.
 
LawnGuyLandSparky said:
The key here is "practical." Is it practical to force the installation of receptacles that are currently 100x more expensive?
Click to expand...

100x? I don't think so, but they will not stay at the current price anyway.

But you don't pay for these, you pass the cost on to the customer. Now if you tell me $1,000 (or whatever it is) extra on a $100,000 + home is going to make home sales drop I will say your grasping at straws. That would be 1% of the cost.


IMO this is a practical requirement. :smile:

The rest of your post seemed to focus on the deaths I was more concerned with 2,400 hospital trips for burns.

But lets talk about the deaths.

A common subject on this forum is the 210.8(B) requirement for GFCIs in commercial kitchens.

Do you know how many deaths trigged that requirement?

As far as I know one death.
 
brother said:
I wonder how many kids have gotten hurt or killed opening doors they werent suppose too. how about installing knob covers on doors to non childproof areas!! this can be code too.
Click to expand...

But the NEC is not about doors and windows, the NEC is about electrical equipment.

It appears one particular piece of electrical equipment is causing 2,400 hospital trips a day and that figure can easily be reduced with the addition of this code section.

Hey lets take the seat belts out of cars, they add cost as well. :wink:
 
brantmacga said:
absolutely. and its not only our industry, its all of the regulated trades. the manufacturer's and cmp's are going help us all price ourselves out of a job. two places i always carry a bottle of KY w/ me to; 1)gas pump 2)supply house.
Click to expand...
I've found that Slide Glide works almost as well as the KY, but these days you sure need a big bottle!!
 
RayS said:
ok, here is a "checks and balances" proposal

"For every proposed code change that involves significant added cost and/or effort, the entire CMP must personally implement the change in their own homes/businesses and reconvene after one whole code cycle. If any are found to have not implemented, or to have altered or bypassed the new and improved features, the proposal shall be deemed to have failed due to impracticality"

:)

might also work for congress...
Click to expand...
I like this idea!
 
So the NEC artificially inflates the cost of doing business by implementing rules that only electricians have to follow at the time of initial installation..This is the only area that has total inspections in this state..no matter where you live what you do if you are an EC you must be inspected..Plumbers do not, GC do not, you are required to be registered as a GC but you do not need inspections unless you are in a city limits..Plumbers I feel sorry for anyone can do their work and not be licensed or inspected unless you are in city of 5000 or more..So now the lobbyists who get more money than we do who have never had to compete in business are dictating how we do business by numbers that are less than one percent of the population (minority control)..the numbers used in this statistical information are only hospital recorded numbers and only from a select portion of hospitals and the information does not separate from residential, commercial or institutional areas..Statistics are a wonderful thing and unless we can actually see the control group how are we to know how skewed the statistics are..I am personally not impressed by the numbers here and this code requirement will not change the statistical numbers very drastically..The thing I have learned through this process is that we as electricians are really not as much of the process as we should be and the NEC is turning into a total political process..the only thing we don't have is input due to the limited amount of info available to use, because unless you specifically seek it out you will not know what changes are even being looked at..So I believe the NEC is not communicating with the people who are trying to uphold their laws very well..This is only a residential requirement and the story I post previously about the child sticking the keys in the outlet at a commercial building not a residence and if the OCPD is working properly nothing happens.the child was uninjured and not scared..
 
iwire said:
100x? I don't think so, but they will not stay at the current price anyway.

IMO this is a practical requirement. :smile:
Click to expand...

OK, the 100x I threw in there for dramatic effect. :smile: But I disagree as far as this being practical. Practical doesn't cost money, and practical is not an object or device that can be purchased. Practical is an idea or a state of mind. Practical is a choice.

This code does nothing to safeguard against a child fiddling with the other 99% of the exposed hazard- a cord and plug, and the lamp or appliance it's connected to. What good is a childproof receptacle if there's a Cinderella night light plugged into it?

And sure, the cost will be passed onto the customer, but believe it or not for every 1000.00 you increase the price of a home, the fewer customers are able to purchase it.

To me, a more practical solution would be to put receptacles out of children's reach.
 
LawnGuyLandSparky said:
OK, the 100x I threw in there for dramatic effect. :smile: But I disagree as far as this being practical. Practical doesn't cost money, and practical is not an object or device that can be purchased. Practical is an idea or a state of mind. Practical is a choice.

This code does nothing to safeguard against a child fiddling with the other 99% of the exposed hazard- a cord and plug, and the lamp or appliance it's connected to. What good is a childproof receptacle if there's a Cinderella night light plugged into it?

And sure, the cost will be passed onto the customer, but believe it or not for every 1000.00 you increase the price of a home, the fewer customers are able to purchase it.

To me, a more practical solution would be to put receptacles out of children's reach.
Click to expand...


I agree whole heartily, I just would like to add that when i was mentioning about code for other things i was just using that to MAKE MY POINT about impratically about other codes. this response is to bob and seat belt comment.

I certainly hope that our AHJ do NOT adopt this code.
 
Best TR to use?

Best TR to use?

Forgive me if someone already mentioned this. (didn't feel like reading entire 22 pages of this thread) But let me ask, When you install TR recepts, what is least expensive and/or best value. I've used P&S TR in the past but the are almost $6 a pop. The decora style seem to be prefered.
 
(didn't feel like reading entire 22 pages of this thread)
Click to expand...

Are there studies to show how many children or DUMB adults are injured every year from standard receptacles?

The TR receptacles I saw operated from the ground prong on the male cord cap opening the gate. How will these work?

If they operate from a two wire cord cap what is the difference from a two wire cord cap and a stiff hair pin?

Lastly as the father of 4 children living in a house with all GFCI receptacles I believe in safety, but that was my choice and expense. Not sure this is all that beneficial.

I do get tired of hearing it is FOR THE CHILDREN, as we are shoveled another load of road apples, and cost escalate or some rights are given up to protect the children with V-chips, restricting video games, radio and TV shows, because parents cannot or will not PARENT.
 
Last edited:
S'mise said:
Forgive me if someone already mentioned this. (didn't feel like reading entire 22 pages of this thread) But let me ask, When you install TR recepts, what is least expensive and/or best value. I've used P&S TR in the past but the are almost $6 a pop. The decora style seem to be prefered.
Click to expand...


P&S has their entire line available TR now. The standard receptacle is $1.30 Ohh I know boo hoo. :roll:
 
brian john said:
Are there studies to show how many children or DUMB adults are injured every year from standard receptacles?

.
Click to expand...


Supposedly 7 children per day go to the emergency room with injuries from receptacle contact of some sort. How many more go unreported?

If true the extra dollar per recepracle is well worth it even though many here would rather see the child hurt then have the mean old government tell them what to do. :rolleyes:
 
What about mandatory locks on cabinet doors.
Mandatory gates with combination locks on all stairways.
Outlaw swing sets.
All bicycles must have training wheels (Adults also as a child might attempt to ride these).
No schools with stairs.
Outlaw trans fats (OH SOME STATES ARE ALREADY DOING THAT).
Outlaw cigarettes BAN THEM, kids might get a hold of a puff of smoke or steal a pack.
Outlaw liquor.
Ban conversation as the children might hear DIRTY TALK.

The reality of this is there are some things that should be done to protect society, some are ridiculous unfortunately the ridiculous are winning in some cases.


If there is substantiation to back this GOOD. I just feel the manufactures in their push for TR's are more concerned over the bottom line than some kids bottom.
 
brian john said:
What about mandatory locks on cabinet doors.
Mandatory gates with combination locks on all stairways.
Outlaw swing sets.
All bicycles must have training wheels (Adults also as a child might attempt to ride these).
No schools with stairs.
Outlaw trans fats (OH SOME STATES ARE ALREADY DOING THAT).
Outlaw cigarettes BAN THEM, kids might get a hold of a puff of smoke or steal a pack.
Outlaw liquor.
Ban conversation as the children might hear DIRTY TALK.

The reality of this is there are some things that should be done to protect society, some are ridiculous unfortunately the ridiculous are winning in some cases.


If there is substantiation to back this GOOD. I just feel the manufactures in their push for TR's are more concerned over the bottom line than some kids bottom.
Click to expand...



This has been my stance from the beginning.
The NEC is moving from a safety document towards a place the Manufacturers can place a proposal under the guise of "safety for the consumer" and then go to the annual board meetings and show how much the bottom line has grown. All at a cost to "save" the consumer.

I am very curious to see some of the proposals to the 2011 NEC.

P.S.
If the manufacturer gets smart, they will pay or figure a way to get a person who does not work for them to put the proposal in.

The only thing that may keep that from happening is their ego... :rolleyes:


Another thought.
The NFPA/NEC should let the installers install the TR recepts without a requirement or perform an independent "study" like what was done for roof top raceway installations, and then see the results. In part of the study, a cost analysis can be performed to see the results.... OH, wait a minute. That would cost the manufacturer money and change the "bottom line" for their next annual meeting. Lets just put it in the code and give the manufacturer a break this time.
 
Last edited:
Look I am not a code expert by any stretch of the imagination, I am a problem fixer. I have no clue on how code panels are weighted. But I was involved with another group involved with writing standards in the 80's and was surprised on how long the process took, and how the manufactures were heavily vested with professional standard guys whose full time job was to promote codes and standards in favor of their company. Large companies can expense knowing there is a pay off in the end. I could not afford the time off quartley then there was travel, motels and missed time at with customers and convincing my business partners this non-revenue expense was beneficial to them and the company.

Many of these professional standards guys are excellent men with very good ideas but in the end there is the company interest they need to push to a certain extent. This leads to the introduction of new codes for products that benefit many, others may lead to codes and standards that only benefit the company.

I am just concerned that the groups are getting more influence from the manufactures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top