U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Old 03-19-2015, 10:13 PM
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
4,902 posts, read 2,177,342 times
Reputation: 2382


In my parts, the cheap smoke detectors don't work simply because they are so flipping effective they get disconnected. They go off with normal cooking and sometimes they just go off. The result is zero fire detection and people die as a result. Having said that, I have never set off an alarm with my cooking but my partner and her son and my son have all set off the flipping thing. Result - we have no smoke alarm! Oops!
Quick reply to this message

Old 03-20-2015, 08:17 AM
Location: Sector 001
6,449 posts, read 5,285,589 times
Reputation: 6993
Originally Posted by Pink Jazz View Post
By your logic, we should legalize marijuana, cocaine, and other illegal drugs.

I don't see why you are being so defensive about ionization-type smoke detectors. The UL standards for testing smoke detectors is far out of date, and doesn't really represent real world fires. When these tests were made, most homes had furniture that had cotton filling. However, with the increased use of polyurethane filling, the fumes produced by furniture burning can actually be toxic. This is an important problem with ionization-type detectors, as a room can get filled with toxic smoke and the detector fails to detect it.

Trust me, I am not biased, I am just educated. You are the one who is clearly biased.

You're right, we should.
Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2015, 11:22 PM
486 posts, read 468,252 times
Reputation: 926
Originally Posted by Pink Jazz View Post
But why would you want only minimal protection from an ionization-type alarm, instead of total protection from a photoelectric alarm?

Clearly, the ideal solution would a detector that detects smoke, propane, natural gas, and CO, but at least the smoke detecting part should use a photoelectric sensor.

And by banning ionization type detectors, I don't mean that everyone shourd replace theirs instantly, I simply mean that no new ionization type detectors should be manufactured or sold. This would be a gradual phase out,

Let the public decide which ones they want. If they are too stupid then it's a matter of natural selection.
Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2015, 11:38 PM
1,373 posts, read 1,143,109 times
Reputation: 4105
I have 2 ionizing smoke detectors, if I barely burn anything on the stove they go off, really, who wants soft mushy bacon?

Besides that terrorists need a source of cheap radioactive material
Quick reply to this message
Old 03-23-2015, 03:16 AM
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
4,902 posts, read 2,177,342 times
Reputation: 2382
And the recommended place for those smoke detectors is right where any stove smoke will reach it. Like just outside the kitchen door or something. Maybe we should move them where they will give us protection but not necessarily save the kitchen (or at least gives us annoying false alarms).

So my vote actually goes to not banning them but rather placing them in more creative places. (I'm not in the USA so my vote is just an opinion).
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top