Steve,
Well put. However, I think that two things must be considered.
First, the public will always see the spokesman as representing the firm
they work for. An example is when we see the police department personnel
on TV. We all believe that whatever is reported is the police department's
position.
Second, as professional fire protection engineers, we should know the
difference and provide correct opinions. It is a blot on our professions
for a major firm's fire protection engineer to publically report incorrect
information.
While Schirmer, as a firm, may not agree with their employee's opinion,
they still receive the brunt of the publicity. I believe that Schirmer
should publically announce their opinion as a firm in order to clear up any
discrepancy.
Thank You
Rahe Loftin, P.E.
Region 7 - GSA
Office - 817-978-7299
Fax - 817-978-8644
Cell - 817-371-3102
"Steve Muncy"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] To
kler.org> [email protected]
Sent by: cc
sprinklerforum-bo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject
er.org Re: Schirmer Engineering
05/16/2007 01:12
PM
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
resprinkler.org
I've sent an email to the Schirmer rep that made the statement on TV
asking if he felt his comments were taken out of context, or if the
statement that the sprinklers were "not practical or feasible" and
"probably would not have an significant difference on the level of
safety" is an accurate reflection of his opinion on this issue.
However, in all fairness we need to recognize that Schirmer
Engineering is a large organization with many individuals. And as
much as we don't like it, they are sometimes paid by clients to
provide a justification for an engineering position that we may not
like. I know people who work at Schirmer (and RJA) who are huge
proponents of sprinklers. Chet Schirmer is a very big promoter of
sprinklers and has been very involved in North Carolina with Habitat
for Humanity to get sprinklers in their homes. I doubt that anyone
would try to argue that Chet Schirmer hasn't had an enormous impact
on the direction and expansion of fire sprinklers!
The problem in this case is not really Schirmer Engineering, it is
the individual who works for the organization who made what appears
to be an incredibly stupid, inaccurate statement that totally rejects
the value of human life. I can accept that it might not be "practical
or feasible" to retrofit sprinklers in some structures although I
don't think this is the case in San Diego. What I find really
offensive is that sprinklers "probably would not have an significant
difference on the level of safety." I don't know who any thinking
individual could make this case.
It doesn't matter if he was paid to give that opinion or not.....it
is downright wrong IMHO. (Disclaimer: I'm still waiting to see if
the incredibly dumb comment was his actual opinion, or if his
comments were taken out of context, although it is hard for me to see
how these words could be taken out of context.)
Steve Muncy
Dallas, TX
On May 15, 2007, at 2:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Not just sprinklering his house, If I remember correctly, during a
> wintery
> PreROP meeting in Boston, he discussed his work in getting
> Sprinklers into
> the houses built by the Local Habitat for Humanity.
>
>
> Maurice Marvi
> 800 417 4060 x78020
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
