…the libertarian pro-market position regarding garage doors is not that deregulation would allow Warren to install a dangerous door… it’s that it wouldn’t. Efficient markets would drive out the unsafe pre-1993 versions because homeowners insurance companies, and the door manufacturers themselves, would seek to minimize their liability costs.

I also don’t get the physics of how the south exposure causes the door to not close.

Then, write a letter to your homeowner-policy insurer/agent explaining that you’ve replaced the opener safety circuit beam with a more reliable pressure-sensor system, and ask them to place that letter in your file.

They’ll either tell you very quickly that they’ll cancel your policy if you do that (in which case you say sorry-nevermind and put the old parts back in), or the recipient sees it, thinks “great, he wants me to open a file with the underwriting people to see if they’ll deviate from our standard policy form we’ve sold to millions and write a new one for him just because he can’t keep his transmitter and mirror aligned. . . . . Or, I could put it here in his file – just for now – until I have more time . . . ” and then you might be covered if you suffocate that annoying little brat next door.

They could, I suppose, write back and approve the exception. If they do, though, you should quickly start buying lottery tickets. It might be a streak.

Just know you’ll go uncovered. And keep in mind, “the 50 dead kids” said nothing about the prevalance of broken legs and arms and wrists, smacked heads, “near-suffocations” (a lawyer was “near”), traumatic episodes where the non-contacting garage door nevertheless does approach, almost touch, and certainly frightens, the victim . . . .

If you lose, it”ll run you $30k-$100k for defense attorney fees, costs, etc, plus however much of the verdict you eat. But, if you win, it should only cost you . . . $30k-$100k. That’s why they call it a win.

Well, that’s why WE call it a win, at least.

I just read a story about a 3 year old who shot himself with a 9mm semi-automatic pistol. The anti-gun crowd is already whining about how preventable this would have been if hand guns were banned. Nobody mentions the negilgent moron who left a cocked pistol in reach of a 3 year old child. A 3 year old child who doesn’t have the strength to pull the slide back on that pistol.

How many of those 50 children were killed by doors in disrepair? How many were killed because they were not being properly supervised by an adult? Nobody wants to ask these questions, it is easier to blame it on the garage door. We don’t take responsibility for our own actions any more. It is easier to blame something else and then get to politicians to pass another law restricting our freedom. The people pushing for laws like these are the ones who don’t care about the children. They need to be taught that there are consequences for their actions and that they are responsible for these consequences, not some inanimate object.

I met one woman, whose good friend had her 5 year old child killed by a garage door. The law requiring photocells was added starting 1/1/93, after about 50 deaths in the previous decade due to garage doors.

It is true that most garage doors can reverse if they hit something. However, the sensitivity adjustment is frequently out of adjustment, so that the motor does not reverse easily. If it reverses too easily, it will reverse for no reason. I have replaced many garage doors after the motor broke the door in the middle, from pushing while the door was stuck.

You can mount the photo sensors so they face each other just inches apart, and avoid the problems you mentioned. I’ve seen it done a number of times. However, I think that this a case where an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. I think it’s better to put up with a little extra effort to make sure the door operates safety, then to regret an accident.

Or I could … you know … be proactive/responsible for my own kids (as you suggest) and teach them to swim rather than requiring my neighbor to shell out a few thousand dollars (if they’re old enough to wander, they’re old enough to swim). You speak of personal responsibility, but your examples are of how to absolve oneself of responsibility.

But the technologist in me wonders if this particular problem might not be solvable without the risk of expensive lawyer interactions.

Can the two units (light source and sensor) be installed in pieces of ABS (black) pipe so the sun can’t be “seen”?

Or can both be installed behind the door frame such that the sun never falls on them? (Both on one side of the door with a mirror on the opposite side?)

Are there any legitimate ideas about how to end the slow creep of government regulations into our daily life? Does anyone else think we’ll eventually getting to a breaking point where people will say, “enough is enough?”