On Jan 15, 11:54*am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article
,

*Evan wrote:
... airbags became
a requirement in cars because people were failing to use the
seatbelts...

I'm not looking around intentionally for things to disagree with you on,
but you make some irrational assumptions about things.

Airbags are known by the acronym SRS for a reason. They were *never*
intended to replace seatbelts. The issue of people not wearing seatbelts
was addressed with seatbelt laws, not airbags.

here want to see some code double talk here is a comment on new arc
fault protection they ant put into old wiring which actually provides
no protection

From Electrical contracting magazine
Analysis: As aging wiring systems become more of a concern in the
electrical industry, the Code is taking a proactive approach to
providing protection of these systems. Many areas of a dwelling
require the use of AFCI protection in an effort to help avoid
electrical fires. When AFCIs were first introduced into the NEC, the
substantiation for their inclusion was based largely on electrical
fires in older homes. With the inception of these devices, the Code
began protecting new and future wiring systems but didn’t address the
older ones that contained many of the fires discussed in the AFCI
arguments. This change expands the AFCI requirements to older homes.
Because these older homes often don’t contain an equipment grounding
conductor, installation of an AFCI circuit breaker does very little in
the way of protecting the branch circuits. The receptacle-type AFCIs
also provide a significantly lower level of protection, but they will
be required, nonetheless.