Cash wrote
John Rumm wrote

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18266064

As one who over the years has been involved in repairing several fire
damaged dwellings (two with fatalities) [1], I think that sprinklers in
dwellings are a bloody good idea, and is one of those where the value of
fitting them could well far outweigh the costs in lives saved and reduced
injuries.

The real problem with the cost is that only a tiny subset
of houses ever have a fire that sprinklers would help with.

We don’t mandate full fire hose hydrants in all houses either,
for the same reason.

As for the builders shouting about the costs, they will recoupe these
simply by increasing the cost of their houses from eye-watering to
larcency with the extortionate profits they make on them.

The problem is that home buyers will have to pay that cost.

Now if they could legislate for householders to have some training in how
a dwelling fire develops when doors are left open at night, along with the
very high temperatures created, and how to escape from a burning building,
that would be a bonus - but then the shoutsof a "nanny state" would be
very loud!

Because, again, its just not cost effective.

We don’t even do it with car drivers and they have a lot more life
threatening accidents than we see with life threatening fires in houses.

[1] Some of the sights I've seen have been horrendous, and I have a
great respect for those professionals that fight the things (and a great
awareness instilled in myself and family).