[HeyBub[_3_]]

The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...-dryers/376786

[Stormin Mormon[_7_]]

I'm amazed. We have people crossing the border, including plenty of OTM
(Other Than Mexicans). The deficit is going to kill us all, we have illegals
driving with out licenses, and killing US citizens.

And, we're waging a war on hair dryers? Somebody tell me this is a spoof?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a "substantial product hazard"
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...-dryers/376786

[Robert Neville]

"HeyBub" wrote:

"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."

Unbelievable BS. The decision to put GFIs onhairdryers was an industry decision
because they were afraid they'd get sued by the relatives of some idiot who
decided to dry their hair the the bath tub, not any kind of federal law.

The problem is that GFI outlets have been required in bathrooms for over 40
years now, and stacking GFIs on appliance cords adds absolutely no additional
protection. So everyone gets to pay a GFI tax on the millions of hairdryers sold
each year so one idiot living in substandard housing doesn't fry themself.

But thank goodness the government is out there protecting us from hairdryers. I
mean it's not like terorists are trying to get through the border or anything.

[Oren[_2_]]

On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:05:39 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



"...adequate immersion protection" ??


http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...-dryers/376786

[Pete C.]

Oren wrote:

On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:05:39 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



"...adequate immersion protection" ??

No GFCIs I expect.

[Harold[_2_]]

On 2/15/2012 6:34 PM, Robert Neville wrote:
wrote:

"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."

Unbelievable BS. The decision to put GFIs onhairdryers was an industry decision
because they were afraid they'd get sued by the relatives of some idiot who
decided to dry their hair the the bath tub, not any kind of federal law.

The problem is that GFI outlets have been required in bathrooms for over 40
years now, and stacking GFIs on appliance cords adds absolutely no additional
protection. So everyone gets to pay a GFI tax on the millions of hairdryers sold
each year so one idiot living in substandard housing doesn't fry themself.

But thank goodness the government is out there protecting us from hairdryers. I
mean it's not like terorists are trying to get through the border or anything.

Not to worry though. Bargain hunters will still be able to find this
model at China Harbor Freight.

[J Burns]

On 2/15/12 6:05 PM, HeyBub wrote:
The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...-dryers/376786


I'm glad the government stepped in. Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the bathroom.

They had a wholesale value of about $1.70 but sold retail for about
$15.30. That's more than a lot of models with the legally required GFI.

[J Burns]

On 2/15/12 6:05 PM, HeyBub wrote:
The electrical kind.



"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."



http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...-dryers/376786


I'm glad the government stepped in. Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the bathroom.

They had a wholesale value of about $1.70 but sold retail for about
$15.30. That's more than a lot of models with the legally required GFI.

[J Burns]

On 2/17/12 12:48 AM, DD_BobK wrote:
On Feb 16, 2:08 pm, J wrote:

...... Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. ........

???

Please explain.

I know a local house wired and inspected in 1981 with no GFI. The NEC
required GFIs for bathrooms as of 1975. Evidently the local code hadn't
yet adopted that.

THE GFI outlets I've seen require a grounding wire. My bathroom would
have to be rewired from the breaker box. The NEC didn't require
grounding wires in bathrooms until 1962. In many areas, the change may
have come years later.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.


Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.


They had a wholesale value of about $1.70 but sold retail for about
$15.30. That's more than a lot of models with the legally required
GFI.

So what? That somewhere in the supply chain, a vendor gives up three dollars
in profit?

[J Burns]

On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote:
J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. You must have overlooked it.


Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.

They aren't often left on bathtubs where children bathe. Hundreds have
been electrocuted. Wherever a hair dryer is used, it will probably
contact a wet head. The NEC and the UL have required GFI in hair dryers
more than 20 years.

[The Daring Dufas[_7_]]

On 2/17/2012 3:49 AM, J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 12:48 AM, DD_BobK wrote:
On Feb 16, 2:08 pm, J wrote:

...... Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. ........

???

Please explain.

I know a local house wired and inspected in 1981 with no GFI. The NEC
required GFIs for bathrooms as of 1975. Evidently the local code hadn't
yet adopted that.

THE GFI outlets I've seen require a grounding wire. My bathroom would
have to be rewired from the breaker box. The NEC didn't require
grounding wires in bathrooms until 1962. In many areas, the change may
have come years later.

Around here, the city electrical code can be stricter than The NEC.

TDD

[The Daring Dufas[_7_]]

On 2/17/2012 7:45 AM, J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote:
J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. You must have overlooked it.


Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.

They aren't often left on bathtubs where children bathe. Hundreds have
been electrocuted. Wherever a hair dryer is used, it will probably
contact a wet head. The NEC and the UL have required GFI in hair dryers
more than 20 years.

When I left college I went to work for an electrical supplier and we
would hear all the electrocution stories from around the area. Some
idiot was using a power saw in his backyard while standing in a puddle
of water. He had it plugged into the ground fault receptacle for the
outdoor power and the safety tripped whenever he pulled the trigger on
his saw. Well, the Darwin Award contestant opened his bedroom window,
dropped an extension cord out the window, plugged in his saw, pulled the
trigger once and was killed on the spot. He won The Darwin Award!

TDD

[Bud--]

On 2/17/2012 3:49 AM, J Burns wrote:

THE GFI outlets I've seen require a grounding wire.

It certainly would be nice to have a ground at a bathroom receptacle.

But no GFCI requires a ground wire.

The code allows them as replacements where there is no ground. (They
need a label if there is no ground.)

--
bud--

[[email protected][_2_]]

On Feb 15, 6:34*pm, Robert Neville wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote:
"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a “substantial product hazard”
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. *"The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."

Unbelievable BS. The decision to put GFIs onhairdryers was an industry decision
because they were afraid they'd get sued by the relatives of some idiot who
decided to dry their hair the the bath tub, not any kind of federal law.

The problem is that GFI outlets have been required in bathrooms for over 40
years now, and stacking GFIs on appliance cords adds absolutely no additional
protection. So everyone gets to pay a GFI tax on the millions of hairdryers sold
each year so one idiot living in substandard housing doesn't fry themself..

But thank goodness the government is out there protecting us from hairdryers. I
mean it's not like terorists are trying to get through the border or anything.

There are still plenty of bathrooms without GFCIs,
many millions of them. I have no problem
paying the small incremental cost of putting GFCI
protection in hair dryers. How many hairdryers do
you buy? I also would not characterise anyone
living in a house or apartment without GFCIs as
an idiot. Could be some poor person renting for
example.

[[email protected][_2_]]

On Feb 17, 8:45*am, J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote: J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. *You must have overlooked it.



Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. *Some could not have them added without rewiring. *A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.

They aren't often left on bathtubs where children bathe. *Hundreds have
been electrocuted. *Wherever a hair dryer is used, it will probably
contact a wet head. *The NEC and the UL have required GFI in hair dryers
more than 20 years.

UL or some other authority may require it, but it's not
the NEC, which has nothing to do with hair dryers

[J Burns]

On 2/17/12 10:22 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 2/17/2012 3:49 AM, J Burns wrote:

THE GFI outlets I've seen require a grounding wire.

It certainly would be nice to have a ground at a bathroom receptacle.

But no GFCI requires a ground wire.

The code allows them as replacements where there is no ground. (They
need a label if there is no ground.)


Thanks, Bud.

[piper]

"Robert Neville" wrote in message
...
"HeyBub" wrote:

"U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers
recently that were determined to constitute a "substantial product
hazard"
under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection," DHS
announced. "The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified
through a
nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial
Targeting
and Analysis Center (CTAC)."

Unbelievable BS. The decision to put GFIs onhairdryers was an industry
decision
because they were afraid they'd get sued by the relatives of some idiot
who
decided to dry their hair the the bath tub, not any kind of federal law.

The problem is that GFI outlets have been required in bathrooms for over
40
years now, and stacking GFIs on appliance cords adds absolutely no
additional
protection. So everyone gets to pay a GFI tax on the millions of
hairdryers sold
each year so one idiot living in substandard housing doesn't fry
themself.

You speak 1/2 truths. There's no GFI police going door to door, citing
people for no GFI's. True, new homes must have them, but not everyone must
upgrade.


But thank goodness the government is out there protecting us from
hairdryers. I
mean it's not like terorists are trying to get through the border or
anything.

You'd be better off not listening to hate radio. The fear factor took over
any common sense you may have had.

[piper]

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.


Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. Some could not have them added without rewiring. A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.


They had a wholesale value of about $1.70 but sold retail for about
$15.30. That's more than a lot of models with the legally required
GFI.

So what? That somewhere in the supply chain, a vendor gives up three
dollars in profit?

Great, another idiot caring about cheap Imported products.

[Robert Neville]

" wrote:

I also would not characterise anyone
living in a house or apartment without GFCIs as
an idiot. Could be some poor person renting for
example.

Nor would I. What I was refering to was someone choosing to use an electrical
application while standing in a shower, sitting in a bath, standing on a wet
floor or any other unsafe manner.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote:
J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. You must have overlooked it.

No, I gave your post all the attention it deserved. You stated you were glad
the government stepped in without a scintilla of a reason why you thought
the government stepping in was a good idea.

[[email protected][_2_]]

On Feb 17, 1:34*pm, J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 11:11 AM, wrote:





On Feb 17, 8:45 am, J *wrote:
On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote: *J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. *You must have overlooked it.

Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. *Some could not have them added without rewiring. *A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.

They aren't often left on bathtubs where children bathe. *Hundreds have
been electrocuted. *Wherever a hair dryer is used, it will probably
contact a wet head. *The NEC and the UL have required GFI in hair dryers
more than 20 years.

UL or some other authority may require it, but it's not
the NEC, which has nothing to do with hair dryers

According to the Federal Register, NEC Article 422-24 (1990 Edition)
requires hair dryers to have protection against electrocution from
immersion with the switch on or off. *It surprised me to read it.

It's described in the Jan-Feb 2004 issue of the International
Association of Electrical Inspectors Magazine.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You're right. I just looked at the 2008 NEC and it
says hand-held hair dryers need to provide protection
from electrocution when immersed whether the switch is on or off. For
all practical puposes that means they
need a GFCI.

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 05:37:46 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Feb 17, 1:34*pm, J Burns wrote:
On 2/17/12 11:11 AM, wrote:





On Feb 17, 8:45 am, J *wrote:
On 2/17/12 7:36 AM, HeyBub wrote: *J Burns wrote:

I'm glad the government stepped in.

Explain why you're glad the government stepped in. And no, it is not
self-evident.

I'm sure I explained in my post. *You must have overlooked it.

Many houses do not have GFI
outlets. *Some could not have them added without rewiring. *A person
could get a hair dryer wet while plugged in somewhere besides the
bathroom.

As he could with an electric drill, vacuum cleaner, weed-whacker, TV set,
trouble light, computer, clock, microwave, lamp, or thousands of other
electrical implements.

They aren't often left on bathtubs where children bathe. *Hundreds have
been electrocuted. *Wherever a hair dryer is used, it will probably
contact a wet head. *The NEC and the UL have required GFI in hair dryers
more than 20 years.

UL or some other authority may require it, but it's not
the NEC, which has nothing to do with hair dryers

According to the Federal Register, NEC Article 422-24 (1990 Edition)
requires hair dryers to have protection against electrocution from
immersion with the switch on or off. *It surprised me to read it.

It's described in the Jan-Feb 2004 issue of the International
Association of Electrical Inspectors Magazine.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You're right. I just looked at the 2008 NEC and it
says hand-held hair dryers need to provide protection
from electrocution when immersed whether the switch is on or off. For
all practical puposes that means they
need a GFCI.

What power does the NEC have in this area, though? It's *not* federal law.

[diy savant]

On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


What power does the NEC have in this area, though? It's *not* federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally binding
regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their enforcement
of safe electrical practices within their respective jurisdiction. In
some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may even be rejected in lieu
of regional regulations as voted on by the governing bodies of any given
locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations into
a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire Codes
series published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and
while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly mandated by state or
local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with these
minimum standards.

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:41:13 -0500, diy savant wrote:

On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


What power does the NEC have in this area, though? It's *not* federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally binding
regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their enforcement
of safe electrical practices within their respective jurisdiction. In
some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may even be rejected in lieu
of regional regulations as voted on by the governing bodies of any given
locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations into
a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire Codes
series published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and
while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly mandated by state or
local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with these
minimum standards.

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? It certainly
wasn't the NEC. What is the NEC doing with plug-in appliances, anyway. It's
not their bailiwick.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:41:13 -0500, diy savant wrote:

On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


What power does the NEC have in this area, though? It's *not*
federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally
binding regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their
enforcement of safe electrical practices within their respective
jurisdiction. In some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may
even be rejected in lieu of regional regulations as voted on by the
governing bodies of any given locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations
into a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire
Codes series published by the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA), and while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly
mandated by state or local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with
these minimum standards.

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? It
certainly wasn't the NEC. What is the NEC doing with plug-in
appliances, anyway. It's not their bailiwick.

It's useful to note that heat guns do not have GFI protection.

[Hugh Jass]

On 2/18/2012 8:15 PM, HeyBub wrote:
zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? It
certainly wasn't the NEC. What is the NEC doing with plug-in
appliances, anyway. It's not their bailiwick.

It's useful to note that heat guns do not have GFI protection.



It's also useful to note:

1. Most safety devices are designed to protect the abnormally stupid.

2. Heat guns are used mostly by the adult male.

3. The largest user of hair dryers are teenage girls.

Draw your own conclusions.

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 19:15:59 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:41:13 -0500, diy savant wrote:

On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


What power does the NEC have in this area, though? It's *not*
federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally
binding regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their
enforcement of safe electrical practices within their respective
jurisdiction. In some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may
even be rejected in lieu of regional regulations as voted on by the
governing bodies of any given locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations
into a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire
Codes series published by the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA), and while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly
mandated by state or local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with
these minimum standards.

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? It
certainly wasn't the NEC. What is the NEC doing with plug-in
appliances, anyway. It's not their bailiwick.

It's useful to note that heat guns do not have GFI protection.

....and they'll sure curl your hair!

[[email protected][_2_]]

On Feb 18, 5:15*pm, "
wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:41:13 -0500, diy savant wrote:
On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, wrote:

What power does the NEC have in this area, though? *It's *not* federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! *DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally binding
regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their enforcement
of safe electrical practices within their respective jurisdiction. In
some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may even be rejected in lieu
of regional regulations as voted on by the governing bodies of any given
locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations into
a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire Codes
series published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and
while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly mandated by state or
local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with these
minimum standards.

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? *It certainly
wasn't the NEC. *What is the NEC doing with plug-in appliances, anyway. *It's
not their bailiwick.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I didn't think the NEC was involved with hair dryers either, but
per Mr. Burns citation, they are. You on the other hand have
another good point, which is that whatever the NEC says, it's
not federal law and you would not think it had anything to do
with shipments of products coming into the country.
I guess state XYZ or city ABC could adopt
the NEC without that part, in which case those dryers would
be OK there. My guess would be that there is some other
law involved that lead to the confiscation, but I don't know.

[The Daring Dufas[_7_]]

On 2/18/2012 7:29 PM, Hugh Jass wrote:
On 2/18/2012 8:15 PM, HeyBub wrote:
zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? It
certainly wasn't the NEC. What is the NEC doing with plug-in
appliances, anyway. It's not their bailiwick.

It's useful to note that heat guns do not have GFI protection.



It's also useful to note:

1. Most safety devices are designed to protect the abnormally stupid.

2. Heat guns are used mostly by the adult male.

3. The largest user of hair dryers are teenage girls.

Draw your own conclusions.


Years ago, I thought it would be a good idea to make products as
dangerous as possible. The purpose would be to thin the heard of
of the stupid humans. I wanted to see vehicles made to explode and
burn to a pile of ash that would blow away with the wind except for
a small indestructible tag to identify the destroyed vehicle and its
owner so the records could be updated. No protective safeties on power
equipment for industrial and consumer use so the stupid and inattentive
would be maimed or killed. The only problem for me is when it comes to
children whom I'm very protective of. Stupid people don't need to
reproduce but it's usually the intelligent and curious children who get
hurt. Many parents are inattentive and don't properly supervise their
offspring who in many cases wind up injured or killed and that's tragic
on so many levels. Heck, stupid parents might have a child who might
grow up to be a great scientist, a hero or President.... OH HELL. ^_^

TDD

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 18:42:22 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Feb 18, 5:15*pm, "
wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:41:13 -0500, diy savant wrote:
On 2/18/2012 2:47 PM, wrote:

What power does the NEC have in this area, though? *It's *not* federal law.

No ****, Captain Obvious! *DUH!

From wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Electrical_Code

The National Electrical Code (NEC), or NFPA 70, is a regionally
adoptable standard for the safe installation of electrical wiring and
equipment in the United States. The NEC, while having no legally binding
regulation as written, can be and often is adopted by states,
municipalities and cities in an effort to standardize their enforcement
of safe electrical practices within their respective jurisdiction. In
some cases, the NEC is amended, altered and may even be rejected in lieu
of regional regulations as voted on by the governing bodies of any given
locale.

The NEC codifies the requirements for safe electrical installations into
a single, standardized source. It is part of the National Fire Codes
series published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and
while not itself a U.S. law, NEC use is commonly mandated by state or
local law.[1]

The "authority having jurisdiction" inspects for compliance with these
minimum standards.

Oh, Pvt. Dullard, on what basis were these things confiscated? *It certainly
wasn't the NEC. *What is the NEC doing with plug-in appliances, anyway. *It's
not their bailiwick.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I didn't think the NEC was involved with hair dryers either, but
per Mr. Burns citation, they are. You on the other hand have
another good point, which is that whatever the NEC says, it's
not federal law and you would not think it had anything to do
with shipments of products coming into the country.
I guess state XYZ or city ABC could adopt
the NEC without that part, in which case those dryers would
be OK there. My guess would be that there is some other
law involved that lead to the confiscation, but I don't know.

Even in the jurisdictions where the NEC is codified, it's as a building code,
which wouldn't cover plug-ins either. If anyone has an article that actually
makes any sense out of this, I'd like to see it. OTOH, if they had UL (or
such) tables on them, they could have been confiscated as counterfeits.

[Robert Neville]

" wrote:


Even in the jurisdictions where the NEC is codified, it's as a building code,
which wouldn't cover plug-ins either. If anyone has an article that actually
makes any sense out of this, I'd like to see it.

They appear to be using authority granted under the Consumer Products Safety
Act. This is the same agency that banned lawn darts a few years ago. The
relevent text comes from Section 17 - Imported Goods:

http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/cpsa.pdf

(a) Any consumer product offered for importation into the customs territory of
the United States (as defined in general note 2 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States) shall be refused admission into such customs
territory if such product—

(1) fails to comply with an applicable consumer product safety rule;

Link to a copy of a letter from the CPSC follows:

http://www.cpsc.gov/BUSINFO/Hairdryer.pdf