Trump bragged that his tower withstood a fire — silent about lack of sprinklers

[theDoctorisIn]

Trump is a cheap bastard that cares nothing for others...I'm not outraged...because this is exactly what I expect from him.That does not make me a leftist..that makes me a realist.

How many high rise buildings in New York City have no sprinkler system?

Any that were built before 1999, and have not had significant renovations, are not legally required to have sprinklers (because Trump and other developers paid the City Council to grandfather those buildings in).

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why is this even relevant?

Because you're a raging fuckwit that thinks the dead guy was "renting" in Trump Tower, and could have just moved - thereby attempting to put the blame for this man's death on his own head.

Is that any more stupid than blaming Trump?

If it was his condo, he would be responsible for the entire cost of installing the sprinklers. Therefore it is not Trump's problem.

No, that's not how it works. Owning a condo isn't like owning a freestanding home.

The City of New York tried to pass a law in 1999 (after a number of deaths from fires in apartment buildings) that would have required building owners to install sprinklers in them.

Trump spent millions of dollars legally bribing City Councilmen to get them to vote against it - and after that proved to be impossible, he got them to write a grandfather clause into it that exempted buildings like his.

Requiring pre-existing buildings to install massively expensive and disruptive sprinkler systems is waste. Requiring them in newer structures makes sense. Trump and other businesses would be doing nothing wrong is requesting to be grandfathered under that law.

I'm glad to see that you're on the side of the little guy.

If the little guy is dumb enough to live in a condo, not a chance!

Too bad, so sad!

Caveat emptor!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Sprinkler systems aren't "plumbing". They're universally considered part of the "common areas" of the building, and the responsibility of either the condo association, or the owner of the building.

Of course they're plumbing, what are they, electrical? LOL

It's ONLY the responsibility of the building owner if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, exactly. That's why Trump fought that law in New York so desperately.

No one is claiming that Trump is legally responsible - he paid off the city council to make sure that he wasn't.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Because you're a raging fuckwit that thinks the dead guy was "renting" in Trump Tower, and could have just moved - thereby attempting to put the blame for this man's death on his own head.

Is that any more stupid than blaming Trump?

If it was his condo, he would be responsible for the entire cost of installing the sprinklers. Therefore it is not Trump's problem.

No, that's not how it works. Owning a condo isn't like owning a freestanding home.

The City of New York tried to pass a law in 1999 (after a number of deaths from fires in apartment buildings) that would have required building owners to install sprinklers in them.

Trump spent millions of dollars legally bribing City Councilmen to get them to vote against it - and after that proved to be impossible, he got them to write a grandfather clause into it that exempted buildings like his.

Requiring pre-existing buildings to install massively expensive and disruptive sprinkler systems is waste. Requiring them in newer structures makes sense. Trump and other businesses would be doing nothing wrong is requesting to be grandfathered under that law.

I'm glad to see that you're on the side of the little guy.

If the little guy is dumb enough to live in a condo, not a chance!

Too bad, so sad!

Caveat emptor!

You're quite the example of a Trump supporter, aren't you?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The cost of installing sprinklers in Trump Tower would be in the tens of millions.

The Cost of Installing Sprinkler Systems In Older Buildings

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Is that any more stupid than blaming Trump?

If it was his condo, he would be responsible for the entire cost of installing the sprinklers. Therefore it is not Trump's problem.

No, that's not how it works. Owning a condo isn't like owning a freestanding home.

The City of New York tried to pass a law in 1999 (after a number of deaths from fires in apartment buildings) that would have required building owners to install sprinklers in them.

Trump spent millions of dollars legally bribing City Councilmen to get them to vote against it - and after that proved to be impossible, he got them to write a grandfather clause into it that exempted buildings like his.

Requiring pre-existing buildings to install massively expensive and disruptive sprinkler systems is waste. Requiring them in newer structures makes sense. Trump and other businesses would be doing nothing wrong is requesting to be grandfathered under that law.

I'm glad to see that you're on the side of the little guy.

If the little guy is dumb enough to live in a condo, not a chance!

Too bad, so sad!

Caveat emptor!

You're quite the example of a Trump supporter, aren't you?

I support people in the right, and in this case Trump is in the right.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.

I don't think you understand what ex post facto laws are.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No, that's not how it works. Owning a condo isn't like owning a freestanding home.

The City of New York tried to pass a law in 1999 (after a number of deaths from fires in apartment buildings) that would have required building owners to install sprinklers in them.

Trump spent millions of dollars legally bribing City Councilmen to get them to vote against it - and after that proved to be impossible, he got them to write a grandfather clause into it that exempted buildings like his.

Requiring pre-existing buildings to install massively expensive and disruptive sprinkler systems is waste. Requiring them in newer structures makes sense. Trump and other businesses would be doing nothing wrong is requesting to be grandfathered under that law.

I'm glad to see that you're on the side of the little guy.

If the little guy is dumb enough to live in a condo, not a chance!

Too bad, so sad!

Caveat emptor!

You're quite the example of a Trump supporter, aren't you?

I support people in the right, nd in this case Trump is in the right.

You dance of the grave of a dead man, not because Trump is right - but because you're a disgusting human being.

You should shout that from the rooftops.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The cost of installing sprinklers in Trump Tower would be in the tens of millions.

The Cost of Installing Sprinkler Systems In Older Buildings

How much money does Trump Tower make per year?

 

[BULLDOG]

There are no "rentals" in Trump Tower. They're all condos.

Apparently Brassner was desperately trying to sell his condo since the election, but no one wanted to buy it.

Why is this even relevant?

Because you're a raging fuckwit that thinks the dead guy was "renting" in Trump Tower, and could have just moved - thereby attempting to put the blame for this man's death on his own head.

Is that any more stupid than blaming Trump?

If it was his condo, he would be responsible for the entire cost of installing the sprinklers. Therefore it is not Trump's problem.

No, that's not how it works. Owning a condo isn't like owning a freestanding home.

The City of New York tried to pass a law in 1999 (after a number of deaths from fires in apartment buildings) that would have required building owners to install sprinklers in them.

Trump spent millions of dollars legally bribing City Councilmen to get them to vote against it - and after that proved to be impossible, he got them to write a grandfather clause into it that exempted buildings like his.

Requiring pre-existing buildings to install massively expensive and disruptive sprinkler systems is waste. Requiring them in newer structures makes sense. Trump and other businesses would be doing nothing wrong is requesting to be grandfathered under that law.

Only an idiot would live in a condo in the first place.

A waste? I'm sure the family of the dead guy would disagree with you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.

I don't think you understand what ex post facto laws are.

There are literally hundreds of examples of shit that you make comments on that you have no clue as to what you are talking about, simply because you have been proven wrong about the same number of times.

You may have "doctor" in your username, but that is definitely in proctology because all you seem to know anything about is things any dumbass should know when you are wrong.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The cost of installing sprinklers in Trump Tower would be in the tens of millions.

The Cost of Installing Sprinkler Systems In Older Buildings

How much money does Trump Tower make per year?

None of your damn business. That's how much!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.

I don't think you understand what ex post facto laws are.

There are literally hundreds of examples of shit that you make comments on that you have no clue as to what you are talking about, simply because you have been proven wrong about the same number of times.

You may have "doctor" in your username, but that is definitely in proctology because all you seem to know anything about is things any dumbass should know when you are wrong.

Blah blah blah.

A law requiring building owners to install sprinkler systems isn't a "retroactive" law.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The cost of installing sprinklers in Trump Tower would be in the tens of millions.

The Cost of Installing Sprinkler Systems In Older Buildings

How much money does Trump Tower make per year?

None of your damn business. That's how much!

You should suggest some of your posts in this thread to Trump for campaign slogans.

"He deserved to die!"

"None of your damn business!"

 

[airplanemechanic]

You liberals didn't give a shit about Trump Tower not having sprinklers until someone died.

Why didn't you care last Sunday?

Just like with guns, you were silent before Sandy Hook, now you pretend to care.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You liberals didn't give a shit about Trump Tower not having sprinklers until someone died.

Why didn't you care last Sunday?

I would guess that most people didn't know that Trump Tower didn't have sprinklers prior to this weekend.

Is it really that hard for you to understand why someone dying in a fire in Trump Tower might bring this issue to the forefront?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Only if the law requires them.

If not, the condo owner is responsible for all costs.

Yes, that's why Trump fought so hard against that law.

Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.

I don't think you understand what ex post facto laws are.

There are literally hundreds of examples of shit that you make comments on that you have no clue as to what you are talking about, simply because you have been proven wrong about the same number of times.

You may have "doctor" in your username, but that is definitely in proctology because all you seem to know anything about is things any dumbass should know when you are wrong.

Blah blah blah.

A law requiring building owners to install sprinkler systems isn't a "retroactive" law.

Yes it is! Dumbass! If the law did not exist at the time of construction, it is therefore retroactive. Fr someone who claims to know so much, you sure don't do definitions of words very well!

 

[Markle]

When I owned rental properties, mostly single houses but a few duplexes, I offered to install sprinklers if the tenants would agree to a $2/month rent increase. A figure that would cover the installation costs in about 2,500 months. For you mathematically challenged liberals, that's 208 years, 4 months. Not really expecting any tenant to stay that long nor even to own any of the properties that long. Point was, did they want sprinklers enough to put a tiny bit of skin in the game.

One tenant did. She was 83 years old at the time and valued every minute she had left. Her unit got a very high grade sprinkler system installed very quickly. The others? A few didn't want the mess of the installation; most objected to paying $24 more per years (libs: $2 per month times 12 months in a year = $24).

The others failed to see ANY value in sprinklers so I simply honored their wishes. Over the years one of the houses had a fire. A grease fire on the stove which would have been made worse by sprinklers. But the dumb shit living there tried to throw the flaming pan out a closed window so there was more damage than there should have been. Most of it to his clothing but enough skin damage to make him smart. Smart as in suffer a little pain - not to increase intelligence. Could have saved his skin had he put a tiny bit in the game.

I've been a Realtor in Tallahassee, FL and have traveled all over the state giving seminars and lectures. That has been over 40 years. I've never seen a single-family residence, duplex, quadruplex or anything of the sort with a sprinkler system. Complete waste of money. Quality smoke and CO2 alarms are more than sufficient.