Thursday, March 11, 2010

Lifesaver or just plain old government interference?

Next year, Pennsylvania will begin requiring sprinkler systems in all residential new construction, becoming the first state in the nation with such requirements. According to a Pittsburgh Tribune Review article, the Uniform Construction Code requires sprinklers in residential new construction as of January 1, 2011, and Pennsylvania state laws follow the UCC. Builders and homeowners seem to be up in arms about the new law, claiming that the additional cost is an unreasonable burden. Fire prevention groups and fire experts insist that sprinklers will save thousands of lives, millions in property damage and reduce the burden on municipal services.



The article states, "Losses in sprinklered homes are about 45 percent to 70 percent lower than non-sprinklered homes," said Brianne Mallaghan, spokeswoman for the American Insurance Association in Boston . . . Further, the death rate of firefighters in sprinklered homes is 80 percent lower, Mallaghan said." Those numbers can't be ignored but at the same time, critics point out that such a law is likely unconstitutional. The government shouldn't be able to mandate something that is a homeowner's choice.


Surely Pennsylvania doesn't need more laws, although it would make sense to encourage homeowners to utilize sprinkler systems if the benefits are so great. Insurers should step in with a benefit for homeowners who choose to equip their homes with sprinkler systems. Should unbiased numbers truly support the claims regarding significantly lower property damage percentages, insurers should be happy to offer a sizable discount to those who choose the equipment. Should municipal savings be a benefit, communities should offer homeowners a property tax discount for having sprinkler systems in their homes. Partial reimbursement of such expenditure or a reward for making a supposedly safer choice would encourage people to use sprinklers without forcing the further nanny government on the people, which is always the right choice.


('DiggThis’)

No comments: