Why is the Gov't Telling Americans How We Can (and Can't) Build Our Homes?

[Newby]

This is America

I should be able to park my double-wide anywhere I damn please

This is America, I should be able to come home from treating Ebola patients from an Ebola infected region and roam around anywhere I damn well please.

You believe it for that scenario, it concerns the safety of others? What's the difference?

 

[Nosmo King]

You don't seem to understand the difference of government regulations that benefit society, and regulations which only serve to enrich political donors or even retard the competetiveness of small business in favor of large corporate donors.


Residential Building Codes have a long history going back 4000 years. The “Code of Hammurabi”, circa 1780 BC, contains what are generally considered the first written laws concerning building construction.

They provide the ability of people to have houses very close together while reducing the risk of citywide fires like those in Detroit and Houston.

However bullshit codes like those that force you to have certain capacity toilets, or that prohibit you from building at all because of some bird or a puddle should be a problem for any cognizant person.

Perhaps one man's bullshit is another man's lifeline. Consider the drought in the west. Water conservation is part of the solution. A toilet using 4 gallons per flush is waste defined.

Bulldozing wetlands always results in further degradation to the environment. That is a proven fact. Storm water management is crucial. But prying that information into partisan skulls is the most difficult part. Some folks believe that their rights extend to the right to wreck the surroundings for everyone else.

That's your lifeline I suppose, but in drought stricken areas water consumption is metered. There are also ways to reduce the capacity of your toilet to reduce your bills, and furthermore there are things called wasterwater treatment plants that return water to the system. I'm also not talking about "bulldozing wetalnds". I'm talking about cases where some fascist regulator literally see's a puddle, and declares your land a wetland and you have to fight for years and at great expense to use your own land.

Could you elaborate? What criteria are regulators using when wetland areas are identified and defined?

Do you believe that it can be as arbitrary as you describe?

Supreme Court Property Owners Can Challenge EPA NPR

Man jailed for collecting rainwater in illegal reservoirs on his property Fox News

Which criteria is used when wetlands are identified and defined?

 

[kaz]

Everyone knows that there are too many regulations, right?

Well, WHY is the gov't at all levels telling Americans how and where we can build our homes? There are requirements when it comes to the structure, and the distance between floor joists, and the wiring, and electrical outlets, and plumbing, and toilets, and drywall, and concrete/cement mixtures, and SO many other things.

Why shouldn't someone be able to build a home wherever he pleases however he pleases?

So, should all regulations regarding the construction of private homes be eliminated?

Please explain your vote if you choose to vote in the poll.

There are liberals, and there are anarchists. We can't have contracts enforcible in civil court or criminal courts for outright fraud, government has to tell them how many times to turn each screw. It's that or nothing, no regulations at all. Yeah, there are socialists and anarchists, that's always such a persuasive argument, I see why you keep going to that well.

Just keepin' it real.

I see, so that there are socialists like you and the rest of us are anarchists is "Just keepin' it real." Thanks for that insight.

 

[Siete]

You don't seem to understand the difference of government regulations that benefit society, and regulations which only serve to enrich political donors or even retard the competetiveness of small business in favor of large corporate donors.


Residential Building Codes have a long history going back 4000 years. The “Code of Hammurabi”, circa 1780 BC, contains what are generally considered the first written laws concerning building construction.

They provide the ability of people to have houses very close together while reducing the risk of citywide fires like those in Detroit and Houston.

However bullshit codes like those that force you to have certain capacity toilets, or that prohibit you from building at all because of some bird or a puddle should be a problem for any cognizant person.

Perhaps one man's bullshit is another man's lifeline. Consider the drought in the west. Water conservation is part of the solution. A toilet using 4 gallons per flush is waste defined.

Bulldozing wetlands always results in further degradation to the environment. That is a proven fact. Storm water management is crucial. But prying that information into partisan skulls is the most difficult part. Some folks believe that their rights extend to the right to wreck the surroundings for everyone else.

That's your lifeline I suppose, but in drought stricken areas water consumption is metered. There are also ways to reduce the capacity of your toilet to reduce your bills, and furthermore there are things called wasterwater treatment plants that return water to the system. I'm also not talking about "bulldozing wetalnds". I'm talking about cases where some fascist regulator literally see's a puddle, and declares your land a wetland and you have to fight for years and at great expense to use your own land.

Could you elaborate? What criteria are regulators using when wetland areas are identified and defined?

Do you believe that it can be as arbitrary as you describe?

Supreme Court Property Owners Can Challenge EPA NPR

Man jailed for collecting rainwater in illegal reservoirs on his property Fox News

Which criteria is used when wetlands are identified and defined?

if you're a RW'r, the parking lot at Walmart, watching geese going south eat popcorn your kids spilled ..

 

[Nosmo King]

Can anyone imagine what the premiums for homeowners insurance would look like for houses built without certification that they were inspected and met with safety codes?

And there it is! The best defense of building codes!

That and perhaps the family that burns up with the house that had the shoddy wiring three or four years after they bought it.

If the structure was properly inspected, there wold not be any shoddy wiring. In my professional experience, do-it-yourselfers with little or no working knowledge of electrical systems usually are the culprits in house fires caused by faulty wiring.

I saw one case where, instead of an approved junction box, a do-it-yourselfer used a Copenhagen tobacco can. Another case was where a 220 volt subpanel was installed for an electric dryer. The do-it-yourselfer used a cigar box. I failed a home with a fireplace where the fire box was only seven inches deep. A do-it-yourselfer addressed the problem by installing a range hood (the type of hood you would see over a stove in the kitchen) to the front of the fireplace.

All these mistakes, and tragedies, could be easily avoided by calling the local building code enforcement agency. But some folks seem to see "freedom" in making mistakes that ultimately endanger themselves, their neighbors and first responders. Stupid attitude, isn't it?

 

[Iceweasel]

Without building codes you'd have no idea what you're getting when you buy a house. For example, you want to trust the electrical work burried in walls by an electriction who didn't have to adhere to any building codes? I wouldn't.

Have a friend with an older home that predates some of the local codes. At the time it was built there were no requirements to have hot and cold shutoff valves under the kitchen or bathroom sinks, and ditto for all the H and C water pipes throughout the house. Thus if he wants to try to fix a leaky bathroom faucet he has to shut off water to the entire house.

Which would be easy to do if he put a valve in by the house. The street shutoff might be easy too, depends.

An unsuspecting buyer can inherit a nightmare and things were very loosy goosey back in the day, which prompted all the regulations. We do have a government for a reason and I suspect the real motivation for the thread is to broad brush it to include everything.

Regulations can go too far, I hear arc fault breakers will be 100% of the service instead of just the bedrooms. That's going to drive a lot of people nuts when they plug in something that creates a small arc, like a vacuum motor.

 

[Iceweasel]

If the structure was properly inspected, there wold not be any shoddy wiring. In my professional experience, do-it-yourselfers with little or no working knowledge of electrical systems usually are the culprits in house fires caused by faulty wiring.

I saw one case where, instead of an approved junction box, a do-it-yourselfer used a Copenhagen tobacco can. Another case was where a 220 volt subpanel was installed for an electric dryer. The do-it-yourselfer used a cigar box. I failed a home with a fireplace where the fire box was only seven inches deep. A do-it-yourselfer addressed the problem by installing a range hood (the type of hood you would see over a stove in the kitchen) to the front of the fireplace.

All these mistakes, and tragedies, could be easily avoided by calling the local building code enforcement agency. But some folks seem to see "freedom" in making mistakes that ultimately endanger themselves, their neighbors and first responders. Stupid attitude, isn't it?

"Properly inspected" meaning that you tell the realtor selling the home to go pound sand and find your own guy.

 

[Pete7469]

Can anyone imagine what the premiums for homeowners insurance would look like for houses built without certification that they were inspected and met with safety codes?

And there it is! The best defense of building codes!

That and perhaps the family that burns up with the house that had the shoddy wiring three or four years after they bought it.

If the structure was properly inspected, there wold not be any shoddy wiring. In my professional experience, do-it-yourselfers with little or no working knowledge of electrical systems usually are the culprits in house fires caused by faulty wiring.

I saw one case where, instead of an approved junction box, a do-it-yourselfer used a Copenhagen tobacco can. Another case was where a 220 volt subpanel was installed for an electric dryer. The do-it-yourselfer used a cigar box. I failed a home with a fireplace where the fire box was only seven inches deep. A do-it-yourselfer addressed the problem by installing a range hood (the type of hood you would see over a stove in the kitchen) to the front of the fireplace.

All these mistakes, and tragedies, could be easily avoided by calling the local building code enforcement agency. But some folks seem to see "freedom" in making mistakes that ultimately endanger themselves, their neighbors and first responders. Stupid attitude, isn't it?

OK...Fine.

However sometimes stupid people kill themselves. I don't have a problem with that. In a densely populated community I have no problem at all with strict code enforcement as long as it's done for public safety.

Protecting Biodiversity Smart Policy or BULLSHIT show on Showtime - Democratic Underground

"To put a human face on this they found some crippled girl who wants to build a house on some land she purchased near her parent's home. Que the sob inducing music! She can't build on her parcel because the big bad bureaucrats at the EPA say her land is the some of the last remaining habitat for an endangered bird. (Apparently they couldn't find a crippled woman who wanted to build on less sympathetic animal's habitat ... like a slug, or a beetle.)
Now the crippled woman could try to get a waiver from the EPA but it would cost money. Apparently she has money to build the house but no money to hire a lawyer to get the waver from the EPA."

Of course the fascist pig who wrote the article has more concern for the bird than the human, but it's no suprise to me. I'd encourage you to watch the show he's denouncing and decide for yourself.

 

[Mustang]

troll posts (another) absurd trolling thread.

What's absurd about it. Over-regulation is the mantra of conservatives these days from both a philosophical perspective and a practical point of view. The philosophical aspect of it is that regulation inhibits people from acting as free agents who know best about what is and is not actually in their best interest because regulation prevents people from making the choices they think is in their best interest.

From a more practical point of view, conservatives believe that regulation increases costs which means easing (or even ELIMINATING) regulations will spur an economic boom.

Consequently, this is a chance for you to argue your case. Take it or don't take it. That's up to you. But if you're not up to the task, perhaps someone else will step up to the plate in your stead.

 

[Pete7469]

Without building codes you'd have no idea what you're getting when you buy a house. For example, you want to trust the electrical work burried in walls by an electriction who didn't have to adhere to any building codes? I wouldn't.

Have a friend with an older home that predates some of the local codes. At the time it was built there were no requirements to have hot and cold shutoff valves under the kitchen or bathroom sinks, and ditto for all the H and C water pipes throughout the house. Thus if he wants to try to fix a leaky bathroom faucet he has to shut off water to the entire house.

Which would be easy to do if he put a valve in by the house. The street shutoff might be easy too, depends.

An unsuspecting buyer can inherit a nightmare and things were very loosy goosey back in the day, which prompted all the regulations. We do have a government for a reason and I suspect the real motivation for the thread is to broad brush it to include everything.

Regulations can go too far, I hear arc fault breakers will be 100% of the service instead of just the bedrooms. That's going to drive a lot of people nuts when they plug in something that creates a small arc, like a vacuum motor.

I'm glad I was an electrician and I live out in the country. Those damded AF breakers used to be like $50 I can't imagine what they are now. My house has well over 60 circuts.

 

[Pete7469]

troll posts (another) absurd trolling thread.

What's absurd about it. Over-regulation is the mantra of conservatives these days from both a philosophical perspective and a practical point of view. The philosophical aspect of it is that regulation inhibits people from acting as free agents who know best about what is and is not actually in their best interest because regulation prevents people from making the choices they think is in their best interest.

From a more practical point of view, conservatives believe that regulation increases costs which means easing (or even ELIMINATING) regulations will spur an economic boom.

Consequently, this is a chance for you to argue your case. Take it or don't take it. That's up to you. But if you're not up to the task, perhaps someone else will step up to the plate in your stead.

And under regulation is what you bed wetters are whining about. There has to be a happy medium, you just don't want anyone to regulate the power of your beloved nanny state.

 

[Nosmo King]

If the structure was properly inspected, there wold not be any shoddy wiring. In my professional experience, do-it-yourselfers with little or no working knowledge of electrical systems usually are the culprits in house fires caused by faulty wiring.

I saw one case where, instead of an approved junction box, a do-it-yourselfer used a Copenhagen tobacco can. Another case was where a 220 volt subpanel was installed for an electric dryer. The do-it-yourselfer used a cigar box. I failed a home with a fireplace where the fire box was only seven inches deep. A do-it-yourselfer addressed the problem by installing a range hood (the type of hood you would see over a stove in the kitchen) to the front of the fireplace.

All these mistakes, and tragedies, could be easily avoided by calling the local building code enforcement agency. But some folks seem to see "freedom" in making mistakes that ultimately endanger themselves, their neighbors and first responders. Stupid attitude, isn't it?

"Properly inspected" meaning that you tell the realtor selling the home to go pound sand and find your own guy.

Meaning inspected during construction.

 

[Nosmo King]

Can anyone imagine what the premiums for homeowners insurance would look like for houses built without certification that they were inspected and met with safety codes?

And there it is! The best defense of building codes!

That and perhaps the family that burns up with the house that had the shoddy wiring three or four years after they bought it.

If the structure was properly inspected, there would not be any shoddy wiring. In my professional experience, do-it-yourselfers with little or no working knowledge of electrical systems usually are the culprits in house fires caused by faulty wiring.

I saw one case where, instead of an approved junction box, a do-it-yourselfer used a Copenhagen tobacco can. Another case was where a 220 volt subpanel was installed for an electric dryer. The do-it-yourselfer used a cigar box. I failed a home with a fireplace where the fire box was only seven inches deep. A do-it-yourselfer addressed the problem by installing a range hood (the type of hood you would see over a stove in the kitchen) to the front of the fireplace.

All these mistakes, and tragedies, could be easily avoided by calling the local building code enforcement agency. But some folks seem to see "freedom" in making mistakes that ultimately endanger themselves, their neighbors and first responders. Stupid attitude, isn't it?

OK...Fine.

However sometimes stupid people kill themselves. I don't have a problem with that. In a densely populated community I have no problem at all with strict code enforcement as long as it's done for public safety.

Protecting Biodiversity Smart Policy or BULLSHIT show on Showtime - Democratic Underground

"To put a human face on this they found some crippled girl who wants to build a house on some land she purchased near her parent's home. Que the sob inducing music! She can't build on her parcel because the big bad bureaucrats at the EPA say her land is the some of the last remaining habitat for an endangered bird. (Apparently they couldn't find a crippled woman who wanted to build on less sympathetic animal's habitat ... like a slug, or a beetle.)
Now the crippled woman could try to get a waiver from the EPA but it would cost money. Apparently she has money to build the house but no money to hire a lawyer to get the waver from the EPA."

Of course the fascist pig who wrote the article has more concern for the bird than the human, but it's no suprise to me. I'd encourage you to watch the show he's denouncing and decide for yourself.

I appreciate the time and effort you put into your post, but you're still arguing from anecdotal evidence. And this argument also bears all the watermarks of a partisan argument.
I simply want to know what criteria is established in order to identify and define a wetland area. It's not as arbitrary as you want to believe.

 

[Iceweasel]

"Properly inspected" meaning that you tell the realtor selling the home to go pound sand and find your own guy.

Meaning inspected during construction.

You're a moving goal post. You were bitching about home owner modifications.

 

[Iceweasel]

I appreciate the time and effort you put into your post, but you're still arguing from anecdotal evidence. And this argument also bears all the watermarks of a partisan argument.
I simply want to know what criteria is established in order to identify and define a wetland area. It's not as arbitrary as you want to believe.

Sounds like you are determined to turn it into a partisan argument. And people's personal experiences don't matter to you? Who gives a ****?

 

[Nosmo King]

"Properly inspected" meaning that you tell the realtor selling the home to go pound sand and find your own guy.

Meaning inspected during construction.

You're a moving goal post. You were bitching about home owner modifications.

No. I'm making the distinction between shoddy contractors and shoddy do-it-yourselfers. Some contractor wires a bedroom with 18 gage zip cord and the drywallers conceal it, the only way to verify the wire matrix is to take out a switch or outlet and inspect the wiring. But, if some do-it-yourselfer tries the same trick, the problem will not be discovered until the fire marshal's investigation concludes.

 

[Nosmo King]

I appreciate the time and effort you put into your post, but you're still arguing from anecdotal evidence. And this argument also bears all the watermarks of a partisan argument.
I simply want to know what criteria is established in order to identify and define a wetland area. It's not as arbitrary as you want to believe.

Sounds like you are determined to turn it into a partisan argument. And people's personal experiences don't matter to you? Who gives a ****?

No. My argument is with folks who want to believe that they know more about home systems, their safety efficacy and sustainability than the trained professionals who are building inspectors.

Many of those folks claim personal freedom as an excuse to install shoddy work. But that 'personal freedom' does not extend to any type of 'right' to endanger neighbors, first responers and your very own family.

 

[Nosmo King]

I appreciate the time and effort you put into your post, but you're still arguing from anecdotal evidence. And this argument also bears all the watermarks of a partisan argument.
I simply want to know what criteria is established in order to identify and define a wetland area. It's not as arbitrary as you want to believe.

Sounds like you are determined to turn it into a partisan argument. And people's personal experiences don't matter to you? Who gives a ****?

There is a lot more to determining wetland status than eying up a 'puddle' and making a proclamation of wetlands.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Regulation is good; too much or not enough is bad.

 

[Iceweasel]

No. My argument is with folks who want to believe that they know more about home systems, their safety efficacy and sustainability than the trained professionals who are building inspectors.

Many of those folks claim personal freedom as an excuse to install shoddy work. But that 'personal freedom' does not extend to any type of 'right' to endanger neighbors, first responers and your very own family.

You can keep pounding your chest but
A: It isn't a partisan issue, left, right and middle of the roaders have been guilty. Libs like their freedom too.
B: Screwing around with the home afterwards has nothing to do with building inspectors.
C: The only way to prevent this is the have surprise home inspections, which ain't gonna happen.
D: When you buy a place use your own inspector because the realtor has an invested interest too and some of them (cough cough) are ethically challenged.