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.
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:
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.