Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Article from the Chicago Sun-Times

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I just can't help it.  I have to jump in on this part of this one.  I think
this "money for safety" issue points out a definite area of concern
regarding who is writing our codes.  I am much more comfortable having
building officials vote on the codes rather than having them in the hands of
a special interest organization (read NFPA) who has a vested interest in the
content of the code.  We all know that the plumbers like to put in sprinkler
systems and the NFPA code is their code, too.  We have watched this unfold
in California and it's not pretty.

Jim Persing, PE

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Turk [mailto:73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:42 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: Article from the Chicago Sun-Times
>
>
> It should not be the building code's position, nor should it be the
> structural engineer's position, whether or not it is
> economical to provide
> safety in a structure.  It should be our position to provide safety
> economically.
>
> A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
> Tucson, Arizona
>
> Scott Maxwell wrote:
>
> . > Money.  Money.  And more money.  It makes the world go around.
>
> . > Both sides want the requirements so that it is THEIR
> product that must be
> . > used, which means they make more money.
>
> . > And in case you propose that the requirements could
> require both, keep in
> . > mind that such a proposal usually brings in a third party
> (i.e. building
> . > owners) that will complain that they are being required
> to spend more
> . > money.
>
> . > Thus, money.  Money.  Money.
>
> . > Regards,
>
> . > Scott
>  > Ypsilanti, MI
>
>
> . > On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Roger Turk wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't see why there are people on two sides of a fence
> arguing this
> > question.
> >
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********