Safety lites on gar. door opener

Do you really want to explain why you chose delibertly to not use a required safety device if the rare, but possible accident occures?

Yea, it has not happend to you in the last 20 years so it won't happen next year......

Reply to
sligoNoSPAMjoe
Loading thread data ...

you chose delibertly to not

the last 20 years so it

actually statitics prove the longer something hasnt happened the greater bthe risk it will

Reply to
hallerb

That is _not_ so. Past history is immaterial for future in any process w/ a fixed probability of occurrence. For example, for a fair coin the probability of H is still 1/2 even if there hasn't been a head for the last N tosses (immaterial of N).

--

Reply to
dpb

install a regular doorbell button just inside garage door area.

walk out, reach in push button.

its not rocket science. although a utdoor touch pad is very convenient

Reply to
hallerb

... as I say, you suit yourself, I'll suit myself...

--

Reply to
dpb

This is a good reason to just repair / maintain your old opener to avoid the hassle of the new nany-devices.

Reply to
Pete C.

the same could be said of keeping your ancient 57 chevy on the road.

did you see the crash test between the 57 bel air and the 20008 mailbu.

the crash test dummy in the bel air died many times over, the 2008 driver would of walked away.

With a doorbell button just a few bucks why mess around defeating the safety systems???

and put yourself at fiancial risk if someone dies?????

Reply to
hallerb

No. Past events have no effect on the chance of a future event.

Reply to
sligoNoSPAMjoe

???? go out that way? I go out through the door and hit the close button as I go. I don't have to even think about 'avoiding the beam'. I can't recall even once that the door started to close and then opened as I went through it.

You _do_ have a close button on the door jamb?

Something does not compute.

Harry K

Reply to
Harry K

Yes, we can tell you are convinced it is a nuisance an no facts will change your mind.

Harry K

Reply to
Harry K

So because one item doesn't have them, no items should? Seems a flaw of logic in there somewhere.

Harry K

Reply to
Harry K

D-

I agree with you that they are a PITA.

I've had GDO installations with & without the safety sensors.

A feature I always add to GDO installations is a "Dad switch", a switch I mount about 6' off the ground on the garage door opening framing just inside. This way I can close the door while standing outside the view of the sensors and not have to jump over them or key into a touch pad. Touch pads are handy entrance devices but the "Dad switch" is way faster for closing.

cheers Bob

Reply to
DD_BobK

And from seeing it happen a few times the rough and tough I am so smart and everyone needs to be responsible for their own actions no one can tell me what to do types immediately want everyone to help (free stuff from government, sue everyone etc) them when they have an accident or problem.

Reply to
George

You have to wonder why stubborn people even announce what they are going to do. Clearly he was already convinced that the 30 minute job of running some low voltage wire and mounting a sensor was an undesirable, overwhelming task when he made the post.

Reply to
George

Remember the axiom of systems: "Fail-safe systems often fail by failing to fail safe."

In this case, imagine the scenario where you punch the button for door-down and go inside (or drive away). Meanwhile, the safety sensors cannot see each other (power failure, dirt, leaf, whatever) and raise the door. Shortly thereafter, a passing band of thieves go "Bless you lord!," sacrifice a chicken, and remove everything from your garage, including your pin-up calendar, and the length of rubber hose you use to siphon lawnmower gas.

You return to the garage to face a yawing abyss, a vast emptiness, and a garage door opener about to bust its buttons because it saved a life!

You relied on a fail-safe system to keep things safe. Now you weep.

Of course the purist would say "It's your own damn fault for not making sure the door stayed down!" But the obvious flaw in THAT argument is: "If I were in the habit of watching the door go down, why would I need an electric-eye monitor?"

Reply to
HeyBub

Harry K wrote: ...

Yes, it is a fact that when I push the button and walk out and it reverses that is a nuisance indeed... :)

That's only the most frequent of the other nuisances as well that had w/ the one location that did have them installed...but at that time the kids were still at home and were living in a residential neighborhood so I put up w/ it despite the nuisance.

Now that there are no kids and am back on the farm and it's isolated enough so there's no chance somebody else's kids will wander around unbeknownst, there's really no point in retaining this nuisance factor in my life at the moment.

Other situations are, certainly, different and I'd consider them on their individual merits/concerns.

--

Reply to
dpb

George wrote: ...

I won't speak for OP; I only agreed w/ him that there are times/places where the practical utility of the beams is minimal at best and risks of not using them are (imo acceptably) low.

It really wouldn't make much difference from a risk-aversion standpoint here if I were to have installed them on the one I mentioned I had just done as it's a double garage and the other half has an opener that isn't equipped with them at all. That garage is the one that gets by far the most use as it is the primary automobile while the other had been being used as storage for the time since we returned to the farm and I finally managed to clean up enough to get the other car in there and out of the barn where it's been parked and (mostly) unused and in the way...and, no, I'm not about to either replace a working one in the other garage until/before it fails nor go to the effort to move them. :)

It's all about circumstances...

--

Reply to
dpb

Ummm...for kids? Your argument stretches logic beyond all bounds.

Harry K

Reply to
Harry K

That _seems_ to be English but...

Harry K

Reply to
Harry K

you know theres probably a insurance exclusion for intentially defeating safety systems..........

Reply to
hallerb

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.