MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-03-22 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] in the hands of god, we are all...
|
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 01:47:29PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
>
> Quoting Ruben Safir (mrbrklyn-at-panix.com):
>
> > FWIW, mine doesn't have a battery.
>
> That seems very strange. It would silently fail to work during a power
> outage, then? (It functions only when AC is flowing?) I don't actually
> 'get' how that can even qualify as a smoke detector. Maybe you need to
> purchase some real ones. Mail order has those, among many other sources.
> Home Depot will ship to Brooklyn, even Williamsburg.[1]
>
> > But if the average joe keeps pulling the device off the wall and
> > putting it back, 2x a day, it will not work in short order.
>
> So, Don't Do That, Then. (You say that's necessary, but not why.)
>
> You never answered my question about what requires this switching-off
> treatment.
I'm relly struggling right now with funerals and kernels, but I thought
that it would be obvious that the reason for an off button was so you
could turn it off.... like when you are COOKING, and then turn it ON...
say like when you are sleeping and need extra protection.
It is about bending the device to the WILL of the user so that the user
doesn't use the thing like a frizbee because he didn't get layed the
night before and is hung over when the thing goes off after his toast is
burnt?
Nuh?
In houses the overwhelming number of deaths happen at night when people
are asleep...
So you make it a routine. Turn off the lights, lock the door, turn on
the fire detector?
Nuh? Brilliant? I think so.
Ruben
First Alert Model No SC9120B
> I can imagine moving to a more-compact house (have done that
> in the past) and living in a house with two storeys and a basement (have
> done that in the past) instead of my small one-floor ranch. I can
> imagine moving to a snowbelt region like the NYC tri-state area (have
> done that in the past, attending college in central NJ). Hypothetically
> carrying my five smoke detectors and one CO2 detector to that imaginary
> new residence somewhere near NYC, I expect I'd mount them on the walls
> high but within residents' reach, one in each bedroom, one in an
> upper-floor corridor, and one about 8-10' away from the kitchen.
>
> And, regardless of how I picture that turning out, I cannot currently
> imagine any scenario that would impel my family to switch off all five
> of my household's smoke detectors for any reason. Because then there
> would be nothing to wake me up before being asphyxiated by smoke during
> any nighttime fire.
>
> If they one near the kitchen goes off when I cook, I'd stride four steps
> over, yank it down to a waist-high shelf to shut it up, and put it back
> after cooking. If ones in upstairs living space went off when I cook,
> I'd have someone upstairs do the foregoing or open a window while
> cooking is going on. We're not Jewish, let alone shomer shabbes, but
> those remedies suffice and (I'm pretty sure) break no mitzvot even
> during Shabbes for observant families.
>
> Yes, I imagine that cooking isn't the sole problem. Two Shabbes candles
> during Kabbalat Shabbat and one for Havdalah doubtless sometimes set off
> a smoke detector -- but, move it temporarily to a lower shelf, and/or
> open a window temporarily. Those are not melakhot, right?
>
> Some of the greatest minds on the planet are Haredim or Modern Orthodox
> or Hasids. I'm having a difficult time believing nobody among those
> three groups of scholars has figured out a better solution than 'Switch
> all the smoke decectors off and leave them that way.'
>
> There are rumours that some yeshiva buchers can even use a screwdriver,
> and dexterity with 9V batteries is not out of the question even if Rav
> Josef Caro didn't mention them.
>
> Hypothetically if ones upstairs were driving me out of my mind with
> continually having to take those measures to shut them up, I might be
> driven the reduce the number upstairs, so only one upstairs required
> babysitting. But I can't imagine doing without one near the kitchen and
> at least one in living space.
>
> You say some large percentage of families get driven to switch all of
> theirs off. OK, feel invited to explain that, if you please. Or not,
> if you don't wish to address the key point and imagine that emotional
> tub-thumping rhetoric is somehow productive.
>
> > They are not designed well...largely because they are more concerned
> > with making money on mandates then producing usable goods.
>
> Once again, circular reasoning -- and impugning motives that aren't
> actually relevant to the subject.
>
> Maybe instead of continual haranguing and repeating your assertions --
> which you might some day realise never sways what people think who don't
> already agree with you -- you might address my question about
> specifically _why_ families would find it necessary and reasonable.
>
> > You can't reach my ceilings either, which is weird because they are
> > actually lower than my old house, but still much taller than my standing
> > on a tall bar stool. Are they 13 feet high ??
>
> One session with a ladder and screwdriver, and you can move the thing.
> If you're saying it's in an AC socket and has no battery (which
> contradicts the essential characteristics of a 'smoke detector', seems
> to me), then move it to an extension cord and mount it on the wall
> within reach. Or, better yet, buy a real smoke-detector replacement
> that runs on a 9V battery, like every single one *I* have ever seen, and
> get rid of any that cease to function during a power outage.
>
>
> [1] Speaking of horrors, even visited the Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument
> in Fort Greene Park? It's a reminder of how incredibly brutal the
> American Revolutionary War was. The British had almost no jails and
> accumulated tens of thousands of Patriot soldiers and suspect civilians.
> So, they just put them on sixteen infamous decrepit ships in Wallabout
> Bay and let them slowly die of disease or starvation -- or, if they were
> lucky, summary execution. Far more Patriots died there than in the
> war's battles put together: Captured Patriot soldiers didn't qualify for
> treatment as enemy soldiers because the USA government wasn't recognised
> and was by default treated as a criminal revolt, so its soldiers were by
> British law treated the way murderers and traitors would be treated back
> home. Also, until the Battle of Saratoga and surrender of Burgoyne's
> entire army to the Americans, General Howe and the other British
> generals had no fear of retaliation in kind to their own side. FWIW,
> General Washington ordered that all captured Loyalists, British
> Regulars, and Hessians be treated humanely from the very beginning.
> There was no reprisal for the prison ships.
>
|
|
