# Is this hack?



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> The practice of taping up abandoned NM cable or K&T, removing them from the box and shoving them into the wall after rewiring.
> 
> I only do this with cable or K&T that is still live but deadended so there are no buried splices. I don't see anything in the code that forbids this.


I do it all the time.. taping shows someone at least was working on the wire and made it safe (without a box)


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> The practice of taping up abandoned NM cable or K&T, removing them from the box and shoving them into the wall after rewiring.
> 
> I only do this with cable or K&T that is still live but deadended so there are no buried splices. I don't see anything in the code that forbids this.


Peter, I do the same thing. I'd be hard pressed to say why it would ever be a hazard, and it's certainly not an NEC prohibited practice.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

why not finding the other end of the cable and de-energizing it? i dont think sticking a live wire in the wall is a good idea tape or not?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

electricalperson said:


> why not finding the other end of the cable and de-energizing it? i dont think sticking a live wire in the wall is a good idea tape or not?


Yes, I don't think they should allow live wires in buildings. The electricity could jump out at any minute. :jester:


----------



## Mike Guile (Jan 14, 2010)

*finding*

We would all love to find the other end. If the owner has a money tree in backyard and wants to pay us we all would be glad to find it. Lately, the owners money trees must be dying I've noticed.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

electricalperson said:


> why not finding the other end of the cable and de-energizing it?


That can sometimes be cost prohibitive and time prohibitive. It can often be impossible, with K&T, since the splices are not necessarily accessible.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

electricalperson said:


> why not finding the other end of the cable and de-energizing it? i dont think sticking a live wire in the wall is a good idea tape or not?


Because today that would have involved going into an attic. Why do unnecessary work? That cable will be there until the world ends. I'm not concerned about it.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

I do the same thing....I wouldn't have openly admitted it first though....:jester:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I will say, however, that if there's plenty of room in the box (like running a dedicated circuit to a certain receptacle that was formerly on with the rest of the room), I'll just nut it off and stuff in in the back of the box.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> I will say, however, that if there's plenty of room in the box (like running a dedicated circuit to a certain receptacle that was formerly on with the rest of the room), I'll just nut it off and stuff in in the back of the box.


Sometimes I do that too. However, today I was dealing with those shallow beveled corner Gem boxes. I had to get GFCI's in them. I needed all the space I could get. :jester:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Sometimes I do that too. However, today I was dealing with those shallow beveled corner Gem boxes. I had to get GFCI's in them. I needed all the space I could get. :jester:


Yup. Your install and my install would have looked the same then. Except I'd have used a P&S GFCI, and you probably used a gay Leviton. :laughing:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Peter D said:


> Sometimes I do that too. However, today I was dealing with those shallow beveled corner Gem boxes. I had to get GFCI's in them. I needed all the space I could get. :jester:


I call those "cut-corner" boxes....Getting a gfi in there must have been fun...


----------



## Mike Guile (Jan 14, 2010)

*wall*

speaking of hacks. on the big 400 amp service job we are also relocating all the dangling circuits below a ceiling back above studs. I'm talking 35 circuits, 23 j-boxes and 200 man hours at least. 

When wall were excavated we found a bunch of metal boxes behind drywall. The only thing is they all had covers on them good on the bright side. Would that be a hack or a wanna be hack???


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Yup. Your install and my install would have looked the same then. Except I'd have used a P&S GFCI, and you probably used a gay Leviton. :laughing:


Yeah, how'd you know? :laughing: I'm trying to run down my inventory of Leviton stuff and start stocking P&S. However...since the P&S doesn't match any of the Leviton stuff I encounter, I'm questioning the wisdom of that. 



NolaTigaBait said:


> I call those "cut-corner" boxes....Getting a gfi in there must have been fun...


I was pretty impressed with myself. GFCI in one with a 12/2, GFCI/switch combo in the other with a 12/2 and 14/2 feeding it. :thumbup: You have to do what those old timers did...cut the wires VERY short and fold them in carefully.


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

I would have to say that is hack for sure. I don't feel like digging through my codebook for the article but seems like even a bright green apprentice would know not to stuff an energized wire in a wall.

I wouldn't use the owner not wanting to pay as an excuse either considering you should give them the ultimatum of having to spend the money to kill the wire or having a blank plate on the wall...


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

eh1159 said:


> I would have to say that is hack for sure. I don't feel like digging through my codebook for the article but seems like even a bright green apprentice would know not to stuff an energized wire in a wall.
> 
> I wouldn't use the owner not wanting to pay as an excuse either considering you should give them the ultimatum of having to spend the money to kill the wire or having a blank plate on the wall...


:sleep1:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

eh1159 said:


> I would have to say that is hack for sure. I don't feel like digging through my codebook for the article but seems like even a bright green apprentice would know not to stuff an energized wire in a wall.
> 
> I wouldn't use the owner not wanting to pay as an excuse either considering you should give them the ultimatum of having to spend the money to kill the wire or having a blank plate on the wall...


Child Please......


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

I was pretty impressed with myself. GFCI in one with a 12/2, GFCI/switch combo in the other with a 12/2 and 14/2 feeding it. :thumbup: You have to do what those old timers did...cut the wires VERY short and fold them in carefully.[/quote]


Your gonna have to learn box-fill calcs to pass your journeymans test, at least here in texas.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

eh1159 said:


> I would have to say that is hack for sure. I don't feel like digging through my codebook for the article but seems like even a bright green apprentice would know not to stuff an energized wire in a wall.


I feel compelled to ask you do look it up, because I know you'll give up in frustration. Those of us with a great many years in this trade already know that this is not prohibited by the NEC. 

You're certainly entitled to your opinion of this practice as being "hack", but you can't pretend for even a second that it's a violation.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

eh1159 said:


> Your gonna have to learn box-fill calcs to pass your journeymans test, at least here in texas.


Thanks, I already passed it and the electrical contractor exam in my state as well. 

Now in the real world we don't always have the luxury of ripping out the box and installing a new one like the situation I was in today. Sometimes you make due with what you have.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

I've seen union guys do worse..


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

> Your gonna have to learn box-fill calcs to pass your journeymans test, at least here in texas


I swear....Trolls grow on trees around here.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

eh1159 said:


> Your gonna have to learn box-fill calcs to pass your journeymans test, at least here in texas.


Actually, you're going to have to learn about local amendments. Many north-eastern states have an amendment that lets you work on an existing violation as long as you don't enhance the severity of the existing violation. 

Thanks for stopping by. Any other wisdom to pass along?


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

MDShunk said:


> I feel compelled to ask you do look it up, because I know you'll give up in frustration. Those of us with a great many years in this trade already know that this is not prohibited by the NEC.
> 
> You're certainly entitled to your opinion of this practice as being "hack", but you can't pretend for even a second that it's a violation.




This may be true and i probably will look later just for kicks, but i think there is a difference between someone who uses the code as a bare minimum to get by and those of us that consider ourselves craftsmen.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

eh1159 said:


> This may be true and i probably will look later just for kicks, but i think there is a difference between someone who uses the code as a bare minimum to get by and those of us that consider ourselves craftsmen.


Yes, I agree with that. I will also state the necessarily corrolary, which is that those that hold the artwork in higher regard than the bottom line are stealing from their employer.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Yes, I agree with that. I will also state the necessarily corrolary, which is that those that hold the artwork in higher regard than the bottom line are stealing from their employer.


Since I'm employing myself doing unnecessary work to replace the boxes would be stealing from the customer, IMO.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Hey MD good luck on that JW test buddy you're gonna need it..


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

eh1159 said:


> I would have to say that is hack for sure. I don't feel like digging through my codebook for the article but seems like even a bright green apprentice would know not to stuff an *energized wire* in a wall.
> 
> I wouldn't use the owner not wanting to pay as an excuse either considering you should give them the ultimatum of having to spend the money to kill the wire or having a blank plate on the wall...


Who said anything about an energized wire being buried in a wall? :blink:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> Hey MD good luck on that JW test buddy you're gonna need it..


Gee, thanks Mag. You know I haven't been doing this very long. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> Who said anything about an energized wire being buried in a wall? :blink:


I did. Read the OP.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> Who said anything about an energized wire being buried in a wall? :blink:


Actually, I'm not sure what it would matter if it was energized or not. If you nut off the end of two pieces of K&T and stuff them back out of the box, and into the wall, it sorta seems like that should be a violation, but it's not. Splices you can't bury, but there's no mention about dead ends.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

In case anyone is wondering, I used Super 33 and not "jap wrap" to tape the dead ends up. :thumbup:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> In case anyone is wondering, I used Super 33 and not "jap wrap" to tape the dead ends up. :thumbup:


Ohhhhh... you see, right there is where you screwed up. A professional would have provided a secondary electron barrier with a coating of Scotchkote. :whistling2:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

MDShunk said:


> Gee, thanks Mag. You know I haven't been doing this very long. :laughing:


I've got a few Tom Henry books if you need to borrow them. :thumbsup:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> I did. Read the OP.


OK.. my mistake. 

If it is live, I put in in a box to dead end it.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Peter D said:


> In case anyone is wondering, I used Super 33 and not "jap wrap" to tape the dead ends up. :thumbup:


:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Ohhhhh... you see, right there is where you screwed up. A professional would have provided a secondary electron barrier with a coating of Scotchkote. :whistling2:


:laughing: You know, that never even occurred to me. I was so impressed that I got those GFCI's to fit that I didn't think of much else after that.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Ohhhhh... you see, right there is where you screwed up. A professional would have provided a secondary electron barrier with a coating of Scotchkote. :whistling2:


:laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> OK.. my mistake.
> 
> If it is live, I put in in a box to dead end it.


Oh come on now....You are gonna put it in a box? Really?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Oh come on now....You are gonna put it in a box? Really?


:sleep1:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

I'm still laughing over the "jap wrap" line. 

I try to find a box so the neutrons don't spring a leak and form mold all over the sheathing.


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

What about Article 110.27 (A)??

People are getting quite defensive for a thread titles "IS THIS HACK?"... expect some opinions if you end a thread with a question mark.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Oh come on now....You are gonna put it in a box? Really?


Yes.. because I have come across wires in a wall that were live and not even taped and I cursed the guy who used the blue Carlon boxes in the rest of the job.. :whistling2:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

eh1159 said:


> What about Article 110.27 (A)??
> 
> People are getting quite defensive for a thread titles "IS THIS HACK?"... expect some opinions if you end a thread with a question mark.


The question was a rhetorical one. Besides, even if someone actually thinks it's hack doesn't mean I'm going to stop the practice. :laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

And lets not forget your working with that dreaded NM that should NEVER be exposed to the light of day..


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

eh1159 said:


> What about Article 110.27 (A)??


That's an interesting citation, but it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. If you want to start a thread about the proper way to guard live parts of equipment, you can do that, but right now we're talking about something different.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

eh1159 said:


> What about Article 110.27 (A)??
> 
> People are getting quite defensive for a thread titles "IS THIS HACK?"... expect some opinions if you end a thread with a question mark.


I agree with MD. That's good that you're putting up a fight though. 

You might want to look at Chapter 3 and in article 314. 

Btw, welcome to the forum. :thumbsup:


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

I would never do that. 

But if I did, I would cut the sheath about 4", snip off the ground first, then stagger the neutral and hot leaving an inch of sheath at the end. I'd tape it up then fold over the end of the sheath and tape it tightly in place.




> i dont think sticking a live wire in the wall is a good idea tape or not?


The whole house is full of energized cables........right? We're not talking about splices here, just deadended cables.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

eh1159 said:


> People are getting quite defensive for a thread titles "IS THIS HACK?"... expect some opinions if you end a thread with a question mark.


I tried that line a few weeks ago about installing PVC boxes underground

For the record, I still think dirt is final grade and grass is a add on 

But lets not talk about me.. :laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> I tried that line a few weeks ago about installing PVC boxes underground
> 
> For the record, I still think dirt is final grade and grass is a add on
> 
> But lets not talk about me.. :laughing:


And you're still wrong, and still a hack. :thumbsup:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> And you're still wrong, and still a hack. :thumbsup:


Thanks for your concern 








:sleep1:


----------



## Carbon (Mar 14, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> But lets not talk about me.. :laughing:


You're pretty much the only one doing it...


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Carbon said:


> You're pretty much the only one doing it...


Welcome to the forum :thumbsup:


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

MDShunk said:


> That's an interesting citation, but it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. If you want to start a thread about the proper way to guard live parts of equipment, you can do that, but right now we're talking about something different.



Yeah I didn't look very hard, I guess my reasoning is that it can later be easily cut into since it is probably not hanging in the dead center of the cavity (as would a properly strapped NM cable). O well I'm done arguing for it, yall know where I stand on the subject :laughing:.


----------



## user438 (Jun 6, 2007)

How is this not prohibited by the NEC ? Just because you found a loop hole in the wording of "all splices must be in aproved boxes" don't make it right. You think just because it is not a splice it is ok ?

The intent of the code was not only for splices but to prevent bare conductors without outer jacket from being in a wall.

If I use your logic I guess flying splices are ok too ? oh but then that would prevent the loophole in wording since it is a splice.

In my opinion it is lazy and extremely hackish and in violation of

300.15 2008 NEC it would be considered a termination point aka end of run

Hows them Apples ?


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

Green or red apples?

~Matt


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Peter D said:


> And you're still wrong, and still a hack. :thumbsup:


Wow Peter D (not Peter D) Is calling someone a Hack!:jester:
Now that is funny!:laughing:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> For the record, I still think dirt is final grade and grass is a add on



Let the record show Black4Truck still has his head up his a.....:jester:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Rich R said:


> The intent of the code was not only for splices but to prevent bare conductors without outer jacket from being in a wall.


If that was the intent, that's what they would have said. After all, K&T remains legal.



Rich R said:


> I use your logic I guess flying splices are ok too ? oh but then that would prevent the loophole in wording since it is a splice.


No, that is clearly a violation.



Rich R said:


> my opinion it is lazy and extremely hackish and in violation of
> 
> 300.15 2008 NEC it would be considered a termination point aka end of run
> 
> Hows them Apples ?


You're entitled to your opinion that it's hack, but there is no violation. A termination point would necessitate that it ends at a terminal of some sort. The conductors we're talking about are unterminated.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

eh1159 said:


> Yeah I didn't look very hard, I guess my reasoning is that it can later be easily cut into since it is probably not hanging in the dead center of the cavity (as would a properly strapped NM cable). O well I'm done arguing for it, yall know where I stand on the subject :laughing:.


So where is this "dead center of the cavity rule". And don't say 110.27 (A) again. That one still doesn't apply. :laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Let the record show Black4Truck still has his head up his a.....:jester:


:laughing::laughing:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> :laughing::laughing:



:thumbup:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

So nobody thinks article 300.15 applies in the OP's question



> 300.15 Boxes, Conduit Bodies, or Fittings — Where Required.
> A box shall be installed at each outlet and switch point for concealed knob-and-tube wiring.
> Fittings and connectors shall be used only with the specific wiring methods for which they are designed and listed.
> Where the wiring method is conduit, tubing, Type AC cable, Type MC cable, Type MI cable, nonmetallic-sheathed cable, or other cables, a box or conduit body shall be installed at each conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, *termination point*, or pull point, unless otherwise permitted in 300.15(A) through (M).


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

I've been waiting for Dennis to show up with that one. :thumbsup:

I'll still tape and dead end anyway.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> So nobody thinks article 300.15 applies in the OP's question


I think it applies to NM but not K&T.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> I think it applies to NM but not K&T.


 I agree. There is an allowance for K & T

Scott you better watch it. I will send the wire police after you if you don't shape up.


----------



## eh1159 (Feb 1, 2010)

electricmanscott said:


> So where is this "dead center of the cavity rule". And don't say 110.27 (A) again. That one still doesn't apply. :laughing:




Where did i say there was "dead center of cavity rule?" I said a properly strapped wire would be in the center of a cavity or at least 1-1/4" away from your sheathing or gyp board.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> Yes.. because I have come across wires in a wall that were live and not even taped and I cursed the guy who used the blue Carlon boxes in the rest of the job.. :whistling2:


:thumbsup:


----------



## CAN_SPARKY (Mar 17, 2010)

*Here it is (Canadian Version)*



MDShunk said:


> I feel compelled to ask you do look it up, because I know you'll give up in frustration. Those of us with a great many years in this trade already know that this is not prohibited by the NEC.
> 
> You're certainly entitled to your opinion of this practice as being "hack", but you can't pretend for even a second that it's a violation.


Although we have different Codes, OUR CEC is VERY similar to your NEC. This is our rule number in Canada

All unused wiring and electrical equipment shall be removed or enclosed in approved enclosures. - Rule 02-108

Hope this helps​


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

CAN_SPARKY said:


> Although we have different Codes, OUR CEC is VERY similar to your NEC. This is our rule number in Canada
> 
> All unused wiring and electrical equipment shall be removed or enclosed in approved enclosures. - Rule 02-108
> 
> Hope this helps​


In the US we don't have to remove standard NM cables etc. There is a rule for abandoned communication cables as well as some other situations also.


----------



## jbfan (Jan 22, 2007)

220/221 said:


> I would never do that.
> 
> But if I did, I would cut the sheath about 4", snip off the ground first, then stagger the neutral and hot leaving an inch of sheath at the end. I'd tape it up then fold over the end of the sheath and tape it tightly in place.
> 
> ...


That seems like a lot of work for something you would never do any way!:jester:


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> So nobody thinks article 300.15 applies in the OP's question


 
I'm not disagreeing with you as I was taught to put any hot wire in a box with a blank...but I can see MD Shunk's opinion being true also. There is no termination made so does that mean there is no termination point? I dont know but I do tend to put them in a box if at all possible or remove them.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> but I can see MD Shunk's opinion being true also. There is no termination made so does that mean there is no termination point? I dont know but I do tend to put them in a box if at all possible or remove them.


I would be on board with that way of looking at it except that section mentions splices, so termination must mean a dead end.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

jwjrw said:


> There is no termination made so does that mean there is no termination point?


To further what Bob said, take the term termination point and substitute the word end for termination. They do mean the same.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

Dennis Alwon said:


> To further what Bob said, take the term termination point and substitute the word end for termination. They do mean the same.


i am thinking its up to whatever everyones definition of termination is. to me termination means the end of a cable whether its connected to a switch or just sitting in the box with nothing on it. i dont like the idea of taping up a live wire and sticking it in the wall. even if some say its safe it might just be a reason to get blamed if there is a fire in the house.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Dennis Alwon said:


> To further what Bob said, take the term termination point and substitute the word end for termination. They do mean the same.


But it does not have to mean end, therein lies the confusion. 

When you connect a conductor to a terminal you have terminated it.


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> To further what Bob said, take the term termination point and substitute the word end for termination. They do mean the same.


 

It's another one of them situations where I wished the Nec said...
Thou shault not leave a conductor hot in a wall that is not in an accessible box. Those that do shall be struck down or something similar..:laughing:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> But it does not have to mean end, therein lies the confusion.
> 
> When you connect a conductor to a terminal you have terminated it.


So it encompasses all the meanings.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> I would be on board with that way of looking at it except that section mentions splices, so termination must mean a dead end.


Termination is the connection to equipment and devices. They don't want you to, for instance, terminate a receptacle without a box. To terminate a wire necessarily involves a terminal of some sort.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

eh1159 said:


> Where did i say there was "dead center of cavity rule?" I said a properly strapped wire would be in the center of a cavity or at least 1-1/4" away from your sheathing or gyp board.


Suppose you have never done old work? :jester:

I'll take an NM cable loose in a cavity over one stapled to a stud vs a saw.


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

> The intent of the code was not only for splices but to prevent bare conductors without outer jacket from being in a wall.


My hypothetical method keeps the jacket in place.:whistling2:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Termination is the connection to equipment and devices. They don't want you to, for instance, terminate a receptacle without a box. To terminate a wire necessarily involves a terminal of some sort.


I have to disagree.

Why would the code include


> conductor splice point, outlet point, switch point, junction point, termination point, or pull point?


So are you saying that if I run a wire into a switch box and cap it off I don't have to count that for fill??? Red section below using the word terminate



> 314.16(B)(1) Conductor Fill. *Each conductor that originates outside the box and terminates or is spliced within the box shall be counted once,* and each conductor that passes through the box without splice or termination shall be counted once. Each loop or coil of unbroken conductor not less than twice the minimum length required for free conductors in 300.14 shall be counted twice. The conductor fill shall be calculated using Table 314.16(B). A conductor, no part of which leaves the box, shall not be counted.
> *Exception: An equipment grounding conductor or conductors or not over four fixture wires smaller than 14 AWG, or both, shall be permitted to be omitted from the calculations where they enter a box from a domed luminaire or similar canopy and terminate within that box.*




Why would this exception be necessary if the above section would allow a capped wire not to be counted???


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> I have to disagree.
> 
> Why would the code include
> 
> ...


The wires in the exception still terminate someplace. They're not simply dead-ended and capped. 

Every instance where the word "terminate" is used in the NEC, the wire is actually connected to something.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> The wires in the exception still terminate someplace. They're not simply dead-ended and capped.
> 
> Every instance where the word "terminate" is used in the NEC, the wire is actually connected to something.


What about the first part of the article. A wire is capped at a switch box -- do I need to count it?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> What about the first part of the article. A wire is capped at a switch box -- do I need to count it?


It still says that if the conductor does not have a splice or termination, it needs to be counted. So, yes. Push it back out of the box and into the wall, and don't count it. That's another option.


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Leaving the wire flapping in the breeze inside a wall is to me bootleg. Code or no code.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> Leaving the wire flapping in the breeze inside a wall is to me bootleg. Code or no code.


Where do you wear your boots?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> It still says that if the conductor does not have a splice or termination, it needs to be counted. So, yes. Push it back out of the box and into the wall, and don't count it. That's another option.


You are grasping, IMO.  The only place it states what you say above, and it does not use those words, is if the wires pass thru the box without termination. I did not ask that. IMO, if you agree that the word that is capped in the box shall be counted then you have to accept that your statement earlier


> Every instance where the word "terminate" is used in the NEC, the wire is actually connected to something.


 cannot be correct. I know you won't agree.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Dennis Alwon said:


> You are grasping, IMO.  The only place it states what you say above, and it does not use those words, is if the wires pass thru the box without termination. I did not ask that. IMO, if you agree that the word that is capped in the box shall be counted then you have to accept that your statement earlier cannot be correct. I know you won't agree.


I don't agree. :laughing:

I think we can both agree that the word "terminate" has two meanings, and it's not at all clear what meaning they're using in the NEC when they talk about cables that "terminate" needing to be in a box. That gives me the latitude to select the meaning that suits me best.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

A 4" round box with connector and blank cover will cost you $1.25

A 16 oz. 7-11 coffee will cost you $1.75

Use the box and move on :thumbsup:


----------



## wildleg (Apr 12, 2009)

termination is an end, terminals or not. its hack. its a violation. and it should be avoided. find out where it's fed from and abandon the wire.

(you asked)


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Jan 27, 2009)

220/221 said:


> I would never do that.
> 
> But if I did, I would cut the sheath about 4", snip off the ground first, then stagger the neutral and hot leaving an inch of sheath at the end. I'd tape it up then fold over the end of the sheath and tape it tightly in place.


Pretty much what I do when need be, but 9 out of ten times I will dead end it in a blanked box.


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> A 4" round box with connector and blank cover will cost you $1.25
> 
> A 16 oz. 7-11 coffee will cost you $1.75
> 
> Use the box and move on :thumbsup:


I seriously don't think the issue here is cost. For me it is a discussion but it could be really inconvenient and unsightly in some situations. If everyone thought it was legal to just bury it I think most would unless a suitable alternative arouse.


----------



## megajolt (Mar 18, 2010)

If it's live, no way would I tape it up and leave it in the wall. When you come across something like that, do you just go "oh, right, someone must not have had the time to trace this wire out.... oh well..." If nothing else, find out where it's fed from, clip it and then abandon the wire in the wall - dead, not connected on either end. 

I wouldn't let a homeowner decide what's safe and what's not safe, just because they don't want to spend the extra little bit of money so you can make the job right.


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

> A 16 oz. 7-11 coffee will cost you $1.75


*24* OZ coffee at Circle K is 96 cents on Monday. Refill it all week for the same price.




It's not a money thing, it's a waste of resources.

If someone can explain why it is any more unsafe than any other romex running thru the building, I will listen.


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> The practice of taping up abandoned NM cable or K&T, removing them from the box and shoving them into the wall after rewiring.
> 
> I only do this with cable or K&T that is still live but deadended so there are no buried splices. I don't see anything in the code that forbids this.


 
 THATS BRUTAL WORKMANSHIP, YOU CALL YOURSELF AN ELECTRICIAN.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> THATS BRUTAL WORKMANSHIP, YOU CALL YOURSELF AN ELECTRICIAN.


Look who is talking :laughing:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> Look who is talking :laughing:


:sleep1:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Dumb Canadians..IF it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking German...courtesy of BuzzKill...:laughing:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Dumb Canadians..IF it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking German...courtesy of BuzzKill...:laughing:


 
YOU ******* :laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Dumb Canadians..IF it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking German...courtesy of BuzzKill...:laughing:


:laughing::laughing:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Honda Racer said:


> YOU ******* :laughing:


Theres no such thing as a ******* in New Orleans...we are like New Yorkers....


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Here, read this .... I'm a "yat":laughing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yat_dialect


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

so whats the verdict here. is it hack or not:thumbup: i still think its illegal. depending on what the definition of terminate mean. to me terminate means the end. no matter if its terminated on a switch or just the wire nutted wires are terminated in the box. a live wire needs a box IMO


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

The verdict is that everyone will do it their own way unless convinced otherwise.

I am still open if someone can explain a realistic danger involved.

Tell me *why* a "live wire" ( live cable actually) needs a box. 

Give me something to think about.:thumbup:


----------



## waco (Dec 10, 2007)

Interesting discussion. My vote is that it is illegal to leave energized, unused conductors in a wall, taped or not. For one thing, I see no reason why the situation would exist since K&T can be accessed and disconnected at the source. If there is simply no way to render the conductors dead, then I cut-in a box and terminate them there.

That said, I have no issue with leaving unused, dead conductors in place.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Dennis pointed out where a box is necessary for NM, so IMO it looks like HACK not to use one.


----------



## wildleg (Apr 12, 2009)

I'd like you to find one inspector (anywhere) that would approve that.

If nothing else, the guys that do this kind of work should at least mark a wall or the fence, like the hoboes did back in the 30's, so that a guy who doesn't do this can just drive away without having to trouble shoot all the dead ends and in wall splices and who knows what else.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

220/221 said:


> The verdict is that everyone will do it their own way unless convinced otherwise.
> 
> I am still open if someone can explain a realistic danger involved.
> 
> ...


because 300.15 like what dennis pointed out says termination point. the definition of terminate is the end.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

electricalperson said:


> because 300.15 like what dennis pointed out says termination point. the definition of terminate is the end.


Thats pretty vague...I think termination means different things to everyone...


----------



## megajolt (Mar 18, 2010)

certainly if you marret up the wires, tape them, cut them staggered, whatever, no, it probably isn't going to burn the house down.

I think the idea behind this being a hack job is that it's just not the proper way to deal with the situation. IMO, say someone down the road needs to find that wire, for whatever reason. How would they ever be able to find it hidden in some wall? Or what if down the road, for whatever reason, you could use that live feed for something else, it has the potential to be an easier job for someone else to simply come out of that JB.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Thats pretty vague...I think termination means different things to everyone...


I agree.. same as final grade to me :jester:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> I agree.. same as final grade to me :jester:


Yeah, to me, termination point means it is connected to something...


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

go look up the definition of terminate in the dictionary 

ter·mi·nate (tûr'mə-nāt') 
v. ter·mi·nat·ed, ter·mi·nat·ing, ter·mi·nates

v. tr.
To bring to an end or halt: "His action terminated the most hopeful period of reform in Prussian history" (Gordon A. Craig).

To occur at or form the end of; conclude or finish: a display of fireworks that terminated the festivities.

To discontinue the employment of; dismiss: a company that terminated 300 workers.

v. intr.
To come to an end: The oil pipeline terminates at a shipping port. Negotiations terminated yesterday. See Synonyms at complete.

To have as an end or result: "The Peloponnesian war ... terminated in the ruin of the Athenian commonwealth" (Alexander Hamilton).

*i believe the people who wrote the code used the word terminate to mean the end of the wire. 
*
ter·mi·nal   [tur-muh-nl] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
situated at or forming the end or extremity of something: a terminal feature of a vista.
2.
occurring at or forming the end of a series, succession, or the like; closing; concluding.
3.
pertaining to or lasting for a term or definite period; occurring at fixed terms or in every term: terminal payments.
4.
pertaining to, situated at, or forming the terminus of a railroad.
5.
Botany. growing at the end of a branch or stem, as a bud or inflorescence.
6.
Architecture. noting a figure, as a herm or term, in the form of a bust upon a gaine.
7.
pertaining to or placed at a boundary, as a landmark.
8.
occurring at or causing the end of life: a terminal disease.
9.
Informal. utterly beyond hope, rescue, or saving: The undercapitalized project is a terminal problem.
–noun
10.
a terminal part of a structure; end or extremity.
11.
Railroads. a major assemblage of station, yard, maintenance, and repair facilities, as at a terminus, at which trains originate or terminate, or at which they are distributed or combined.
12.
Computers. any device for entering information into a computer or receiving information from it, as a keyboard with video display unit, either adjoining the computer or at some distance from it.
13.
a station on the line of a public carrier, as in a city center or at an airport, where passengers embark or disembark and where freight is received or discharged.
14.
Electricity.
a.
the mechanical device by means of which an electric connection to an apparatus is established.
b.
the point of current entry to, or point of current departure from, any conducting component in an electric circuit.
15.
Architecture.
a.
a herm or term.
b.
a carving or the like at the end of something, as a finial.

*a terminal is a noun meaning the end of the wire thats attached to a device. the termination point is the end of the wire doesnt matter if its attached to anything or not its still a termination point*


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

> say someone down the road needs to find that wire, for whatever reason. How would they ever be able to find it hidden in some wall?


Would it be somehow easier to find if it was terminated in a JB?



> Or what if down the road, for whatever reason, you could use that live feed for something else, it has the potential to be an easier job for someone else to simply come out of that JB.


Well, it's still there for them. They just have to install their own JB.:laughing:


I just did this yesterday BTW. Working off a 12' ladder in a residence. There were two 4" cans about 15' apart in the living room. They wanted one can removed. Switch leg ended at that can. I wasn't about to take apart the JB on the first can, they didn't want (or need) an exposed jb/blank cover and I didn't see a point in terminating the cable in a buried JB.



Also, I agree that the cable is terminated in the box and the NEC requires a box. I'm just sayin that _sometimes_ it's uneccesary. I can make the cable just as safe without a JB.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

the article says switch point, splice point, outlet point, junction point, termination point or pull point. 

a switch is not an outlet, a receptacle is an outlet, a termination point is the end of the wire. a junction is the same as a splice 

i believe the article requires a box on all live wires. used or not. a terminated wire is the wire at the end of its run. it can have terminals on it or it can be capped off in the box. its illegal to put live wires in the wall with no box


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

electricalperson said:


> the article says switch point, splice point, outlet point, junction point, termination point or pull point.
> 
> a switch is not an outlet, a receptacle is an outlet, a termination point is the end of the wire. a junction is the same as a splice
> 
> i believe the article requires a box on all live wires. used or not. a terminated wire is the wire at the end of its run. it can have terminals on it or it can be capped off in the box. its illegal to put live wires in the wall with no box


Whatever you say:laughing:...I try to avoid it, but with k&t it is almost impossible...


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

Proofreading my last post, is it even legal to bury (conceal) a jbox with a cable in it?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

220/221 said:


> Proofreading my last post, is it even legal to bury (conceal) a jbox with a cable in it?


No.. it must be accessible without removing structure (drywall) 

A dead ended wire is not a junction box


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Whatever you say:laughing:...I try to avoid it, but with k&t it is almost impossible...


300.15 only applies to AC, MC, MI, conduit, tubing and romex. it also says other cables. knob and tube is not a cable but individual conductors ran on insulators. with knob and tube your clear.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> THATS BRUTAL WORKMANSHIP, YOU CALL YOURSELF AN ELECTRICIAN.


:sleep1:


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

220/221 said:


> Proofreading my last post, is it even legal to bury (conceal) a jbox with a cable in it?


its legal to put a junction box behind a remodel can. its not part of the buildings structure or finish. they are made to be removed


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Dumb Canadians..IF it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking German...courtesy of BuzzKill...:laughing:





:icon_rolleyes:


do either of you actually own an atlas?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

I must be on a roll (of tape, literally :laughing Today I had to refeed an outside light. Originally it had a ungrounded feed in and a switch loop to the inside. The original light had no box. I added an Arlington siding block and fed it with brand spankin' new deadly 14/2 NM cable. 

I then taped up the old feed and stuffed it behind the vinyl siding. :thumbup:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Thomps said:


> :icon_rolleyes:
> 
> 
> do either of you actually own an atlas?


Here we go....Yeah, argue how your sorry neutral country would be around if it wasn't for the United States...


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Peter D said:


> I must be on a roll (of tape, literally :laughing Today I had to refeed an outside light. Originally it had a ungrounded feed in and a switch loop to the inside. The original light had no box. I added an Arlington siding block and fed it with brand spankin' new deadly 14/2 NM cable.
> 
> I then taped up the old feed and stuffed it behind the vinyl siding. :thumbup:


These must be some craigslist customers...who else would hire this hack?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Stop messing up my thread with talk about Canada.


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

OK

Sometimes a live cable must be abandoned in a concealed location.

You can't legally use a JB and you can't legally _safe it off._

You now have two choices.

Take the time to find the other end or you choose which section of code to violate.




> I then taped up the old feed and stuffed it behind the vinyl siding


I hope you at least stripped the ends and left them close enough together to cause an arc someday.

That reminded me of a post from a couple years back where someone suggested it was a good idea to wirenut the black/white together in case someone tried to reenergize it someday.


----------



## Ohmbre (Oct 8, 2009)

IMO You leave an installation how you'd like to find. Thats how I was taught. If you came across buried boxes or live cable behind a wall you'd be posting how "Hack" it was.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Ohmbre said:


> IMO You leave an installation how you'd like to find. Thats how I was taught. If you came across buried boxes or live cable behind a wall you'd be posting how "Hack" it was.


:laughing:...Uh, Yeah!


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Here we go....Yeah, argue how your sorry neutral country would be around if it wasn't for the United States...




Neutral?


:001_huh:

what are you babbling about? Are you still drunk from super bowl?


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

220/221 said:


> That reminded me of a post from a couple years back where someone suggested it was a good idea to wirenut the black/white together in case someone tried to reenergize it someday.



i splice all the wires together and put a wirenut. i do the same to the other end of an abandoned cable. i dont think anybody thats smart will unsplice a wire and energize it without first finding the other end. at lease use an ohm meter on it.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Thomps said:


> Neutral?
> 
> 
> :001_huh:
> ...


Child please....


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

Peter D said:


> Stop messing up my thread with talk about Canada.




Sorry. 

But you op was hack.

Better?


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Stop messing up my thread with talk about Canada.


:sleep1:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

220/221 said:


> I hope you at least stripped the ends and left them close enough together to cause an arc someday.


:sleep1:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Here we go....Yeah, argue how your sorry neutral country would be around if it wasn't for the United States...


YOU PROBLABLY MARRIED YOUR COUSIN, YOU ******* :laughing:


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Child please....




That's outstanding? Anymore sad puns you'd like to throw around? Or do you want to explain your neutral comment?

Sorry, I can't see your YouTube clip.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> YOU PROBLABLY MARRIED YOUR COUSIN, YOU ******* :laughing:


:sleep1:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Child please.......


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

220/221 said:


> OK
> 
> Sometimes a live cable must be abandoned in a concealed location.
> 
> ...


One wire is not a junction box


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Thomps said:


> That's outstanding? Anymore sad puns you'd like to throw around? Or do you want to explain your neutral comment?
> 
> Sorry, I can't see your YouTube clip.


I thought Canada was like Switzerland...Neutral?????...If not, you are a pathetic excuse for a country...


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Honda Racer said:


> YOU PROBLABLY MARRIED YOUR COUSIN, YOU ******* :laughing:


Get outta town...3rd cousin doesn't count


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> One wire is not a junction box


its a termination point


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

> One wire is not a junction box


Good point. No splice, no junction.

Can you conceal a termination box?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

220/221 said:


> Good point. No splice, no junction.
> 
> Can you conceal a termination box?


Yes.. there is nothing in there to become loose and need servicing


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> I thought Canada was like Switzerland...Neutral?????...If not, you are a pathetic excuse for a country...


Um, no. You would be wrong. 

Canada doesn't share many traits with Switzerland. For example, Switzerland is in Europe, Canada is not. Switzerland is landlocked, again, Canada is not. 

Neutral to what exactly? Have you really put much thought into this?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> I thought Canada was like Switzerland...Neutral?????...If not, you are a pathetic excuse for a country...


:sleep1:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I heard Canada is being over run by towel heads.. true??


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> I heard Canada is being over run by towel heads.. true??


:sleep1:


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 25, 2007)

> Yes.. there is nothing in there to become loose and need servicing


 
Well I know that and you know that but does the NEC share our views?



> i splice all the wires together and put a wirenut. i do the same to the other end of an abandoned cable


See, to me that seems like a wasted effort with no return. I fail to see how it is any more safe than simply making the end of the cable safe. I can see someone troubleshooting, finding unconnected wiring and trying to fire them up. I have seen wires abandoned simply because some HO or handyman didn't know what to do with them.

I'm not saying your method is wrong BTW. I'm just sayin I don't get it.


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> I heard Canada is being over run by towel heads.. true??


Overrun???

No. Most major cities do have strong middleastern communities, but that's no diiferent than any western country. 

There was a study released recently that said in the next 5 years, the population of Canada will see a huge increase in the percentage of viaiable minorities across the country, fueled mainly throu immigration. Something like 15%. 

I will try and find a link.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Thomps said:


> Overrun???
> 
> No. Most major cities do have strong middleastern communities, but that's no diiferent than any western country.
> 
> ...


Thats great:blink:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

CANADA RULES, USA SUCKS :thumbup:


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Thats great:blink:


Glad you like it. 

Here is the link. 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/03/09/statscan-minority.html


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Honda Racer said:


> CANADA RULES, USA SUCKS :thumbup:


Actually, I've been to Toronto, and you could eat dinner off the street, it was really clean...no trash in sight...other than that..CHIT on Canada:thumbsup:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Actually, I've been to Toronto, and you could eat dinner off the street, it was really clean...no trash in sight...other than that..CHIT on Canada:thumbsup:


 
AT LEAST WE DON'T MARRY OUR COUSINS IN CANADA. :no:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

I'm snooooooring right now....pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

NolaTigaBait said:


> I'm snooooooring right now....pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff


:sleep1:


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Actually, I've been to Toronto, and you could eat dinner off the street, it was really clean...no trash in sight...other than that..CHIT on Canada:thumbsup:




Are you sure you were in the right toronto?

Why you bitterness for Canada anyway?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I was in Toronto (25) years ago and to cross the street you just stuck your finger out.

NO.. not THAT finger :no:

Is that still the accepted way of crossing the street??


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> I was in Toronto (25) years ago and to cross the street you just stuck your finger out.
> 
> NO.. not THAT finger :no:
> 
> Is that still the accepted way of crossing the street??


:sleep1:


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Thomps said:


> Are you sure you were in the right toronto?
> 
> Why you bitterness for Canada anyway?


No biiterness...just breakin balls


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> CANADA RULES, USA SUCKS :thumbup:


:yawn:


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

Black4Truck said:


> I was in Toronto (25) years ago and to cross the street you just stuck your finger out.
> 
> NO.. not THAT finger :no:
> 
> Is that still the accepted way of crossing the street??


:laughing:

sadly, no. There have been a series of accidents recently involving people crossing the streets downtown. 

It's a nice enough city I guess, as far as citys go, but not my cup of tea.


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

NolaTigaBait said:


> No biiterness...just breakin balls


Fair enough. 

I thought maybe you'd been shotdown by some cadain girl while online dating or something and just took it to heart. 
:jester:


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

Peter D said:


> :yawn:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> AT LEAST WE DON'T MARRY OUR COUSINS IN CANADA. :no:


Yeah, you just say "aboot" and "eh?"


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

Peter D said:


> :yawn:


Want your thread back now Peter?


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, you just say "aboot" and "eh?"


:sleep1:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Thomps said:


> Want your thread back now Peter?


Yeah, the Canada vs. USA argument is pretty stupid. Both countries are very good friends and allies. And besides, everyone knows the USA is way better. :laughing:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, the Canada vs. USA argument is pretty stupid. Both countries are very good friends and allies. And besides, everyone knows the USA is way better. :laughing:


:sleep1:


----------



## Thomps (Nov 27, 2008)

Peter D said:


> Yeah, the Canada vs. USA argument is pretty stupid. Both countries are very good friends and allies. And besides, everyone knows the USA is way better. :laughing:


:001_huh:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> :sleep1:



Stop using my comeback, you stupid troll!


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Stop using my comeback, you stupid troll!


:sleep1:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> :sleep1:



You do realize every time you do that you're copying me, right?


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

It figures this thread would last this long. Yall need to get out of the house more.:laughing:

~Matt


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> You do realize every time you do that you're copying me, right?


:sleep1:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Mr. 50% off.. fix your profile page so I can leave you derogatory messages.. again


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> Mr. 50% off.. fix your profile page so I can leave you derogatory messages.. again


:sleep1:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> Stop using my comeback, you stupid troll!


 QUIT STEALING MY COMEBACK TROLL, MYSELF AND THE OTHER REAL ELECTRICIANS, DON'T WANT YOU HERE.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Honda Racer said:


> QUIT STEALING MY COMEBACK TROLL, MYSELF AND THE OTHER REAL ELECTRICIANS, DON'T WANT YOU HERE.


:sleep1:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter.. seems Honda, JackBoot, Forgery are all you.. say it ain't so


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> Peter.. seems Honda, JackBoot, Forgery are all you.. say it ain't so


:sleep1:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Peter D said:


> :sleep1:


I will take that as a YES :no:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> I will take that as a YES :no:



We've already been through this. I'm not going to repeat myself.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

i dont think peter d makes other names just to start fights with himself on electriciantalk.com


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

electricalperson said:


> i dont think peter d makes other names just to start fights with himself on electriciantalk.com


And so far you're the only one who has figured that out. :thumbsup:


----------



## Honda Racer (Feb 15, 2010)

Peter D said:


> And so far you're the only one who has figured that out. :thumbsup:


 
:sleep1:


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

Peter D said:


> And so far you're the only one who has figured that out. :thumbsup:


i think youre smarter than that. plus i dont really see how thats entertaining :thumbsup: i trust you


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

electricalperson said:


> 300.15 only applies to AC, MC, MI, conduit, tubing and romex. it also says other cables. knob and tube is not a cable but individual conductors ran on insulators. with knob and tube your clear.


So can you explain why the dead end of K&T is safe but a dead ended NM is not?


----------



## user438 (Jun 6, 2007)

MDShunk said:


> If that was the intent, that's what they would have said. After all, K&T remains legal.
> 
> No, that is clearly a violation.
> 
> You're entitled to your opinion that it's hack, but there is no violation. A termination point would necessitate that it ends at a terminal of some sort. The conductors we're talking about are unterminated.


 
Well it is not really my opinion that is hack, it is a fact that is hack. 300.15 says it is a violation. You can play word games with it all you want. The only reason anybody has posted had for doing this is to save time which just reiterates my laziness statement.

The reason the code leaves out KT is because they realize that there is no point when the entire run is exposed anyway. in fact I can't believe they have not made a code to eliminate that 100 year old crap on sight

As far as the definition of termination goes, that is easy, look it up in dictionary. Termination is and end point. The reason the screws on an outlet or device are called Terminals is because that is where you end the wire run, it is not because the screws themselves have magically become "terminals"

it has never taken me more than 20 minutes to find out where a wire that was end of run was coming from and disconnect it. All I do is old work, I have on occasion found the wire was coming from a buried box in wall (Peter D) and told the customer or pimpled faced manager that we will have to open the wall up.


Now on the other hand as 220/221 was saying " tell me how it is any unsafer than the rest of the NM or MC etc that is energized in walls " In reality it probably isn't but I think IMO that the code has to start somewhere and is in there because they want the jackets on cables and is probably why KT was excluded from it. This brings me back to what I said before, If they want to enforce this with no confusion they need make it mandatory to remove KT where you encounter it or just say "yeah no probs deadending in a wall cavity with any wiring"


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Rich R said:


> The reason the code leaves out KT is because they realize that there is no point when the entire run is exposed anyway. in fact


So can you explain why the dead end of K&T is safe but a dead ended NM is not? 



BTW, there were few facts in you're post, mostly just opinion.


----------



## user438 (Jun 6, 2007)

I don't think it is any safer, but for some reason the code excludes it from 300.15. I never said it was fact but my guess is they excluded it because there is no point in it.

My opinion is they should make it code to have you remove it once you touch it.

The only fact is 300.15 says you can't do this with NM,MC etc..

BTW that upside down outlet avatar drives me crazy


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> So can you explain why the dead end of K&T is safe but a dead ended NM is not?


ask the people who write the code


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> I heard Canada is being over run by towel heads.. true??


What's a towel head?


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> What's a towel head?


It is a racist term to denote Arabs or people of Middle Eastern decent.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Dennis Alwon said:


> It is a racist term to denote Arabs or people of Middle Eastern decent.


I know this, I just wanted to hear the a-hole explain it. 

The fact that a person in 2010 would say something like this in public in front of people he doesn't know shows just what kind of person he is.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

electricmanscott said:


> I know this, I just wanted to hear the a-hole explain it.
> 
> The fact that a person in 2010 would say something like this in public in front of people he doesn't know shows just what kind of person he is.


 
Yea figuring that the "Towel heads" blew up the world trade center less then 10 years ago we should still be using much harsher words then just towel head !!!

We were and still are at war with them,they call us much worse things,if they had their way we would all be dead.

You call him an a-hole for calling the enemies of our country "towel heads" ?

Take the panties off you over sensitive bleeding heart Pansy a$$ !!!


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

robnj772 said:


> Yea figuring that the "Towel heads" blew up the world trade center less then 10 years ago we should still be using much harsher words then just towel head !!!
> 
> We were and still are at war with them,they call us much worse things,if they had their way we would all be dead.
> 
> ...



What is your ethnic back ground. How about your wife or husband?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> I know this, I just wanted to hear the a-hole explain it.
> 
> The fact that a person in 2010 would say something like this in public in front of people he doesn't know shows just what kind of person he is.


Scott.. I am not an A hole and you have no idea what kind of person I am.

Sorry the term "towel head" makes you why not move there..


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> Scott.. I am not an A hole and you have no idea what kind of person I am.
> 
> Sorry the term "towel head" makes you why not move there..


What is your ethnic background? Your wife?


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> What is your ethnic background? Your wife?


 
Italian and my X wife was Polish.

Make all the jokes you like and I will not call you a A hole..


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

electricmanscott said:


> What is your ethnic background? Your wife?


Not *********....


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

NolaTigaBait said:


> Not *********....


 
Nola.. yesterday Honda was saying your a "*******" and married your cousin. 

Why is it YOU didn't get upset over this "racist" name being directed at where you live.

Some people are soooo touchy feely with Arabs and we must not offed them 

Fort Hood is old news already :no:


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

electricmanscott said:


> What is your ethnic back ground. How about your wife or husband?


 
I am an American who has lost Friends and relatives to "towel head"s during both WTC bombings and during the wars that have followed.

I am an American who has served,defended and protected MY country from these " towel heads"

I am an American and proud of it!!!!!!!!!!

If your offended because someone called the enemies of MY country a "towel head" maybe you should move to Canada with the rest of the ***** draft dodging bleeding liberal hearted hippie D-bags.


----------



## MarkyMark (Jan 31, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> So can you explain why the dead end of K&T is safe but a dead ended NM is not?


From a code standpoint, without this option, it is often possible with K&T to run into a situation to which where there is no legal fix.

Stuffing K&T wires into a plastic box and capping them off is not legal, is more work, and probably no safer.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Black4Truck said:


> Some people are soooo touchy feely with Arabs and we must not offed them


I see....so it's ok to make fun of Arabs and they are the scum of the earth. And every single one of them is a terrorist right?  

This country is screwed.


----------



## NolaTigaBait (Oct 19, 2008)

Peter D said:


> I see....so it's ok to make fun of Arabs and they are the scum of the earth. And every single one of them is a terrorist right?
> 
> This country is screwed.


No, but it seems like terrorism is more prevalent amonst arab nations....


----------



## ElectroMotive (Mar 10, 2010)

Peter D said:


> I see....so it's ok to make fun of Arabs and they are the scum of the earth. And every single one of them is a terrorist right?
> 
> This country is screwed.


Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.


----------



## ElectroMotive (Mar 10, 2010)

Oh, just to clarify, Arabs do not wrap their head's with towels, Sikhs do. Sikhs, while they may look and act odd from an American perspective, are pretty nice people. On the other hand, I'm not too impressed with Arabic culture....


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

I hope this thread has worn out it's welcome. I for one would like to see it gone.

Why do decent thread that have some good thinking going on in it have to turn into this crap.


----------



## electricalperson (Jan 11, 2008)

ElectroMotive said:


> Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.


there is terrorists in all religions


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

nmzdgfnhdmfjh,tfgdjfgsdfagbgxhmcfnfshj,gfgmfn


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

I really have no problem with what any of you think about any race religion color etc. you are free to feel however you wish but, In my view coming out as a racist in a group of people you know nothing about shows a distinct lack of decent character.

Of course the responses were completely predictable and not surprising at all, not to mention who they came from.

We wonder why society has such a negative view of people in the trades. Take a look in the mirror.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> I really have no problem with what any of you think about any race religion color etc. you are free to feel however you wish but, In my view coming out as a racist in a group of people you know nothing about shows a distinct lack of decent character.
> 
> Of course the responses were completely predictable and not surprising at all, not to mention who they came from.
> 
> We wonder why society has such a negative view of people in the trades. Take a look in the mirror.


You are a fine example of a "girly man" put a bow in your hair 

Only response I find offensive here is yours and saying we are a racist group just shows you don't have a clue :no:

People like you are the reason the police can't use racial profiling to find the people trying to kill us.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

electricmanscott said:


> I really have no problem with what any of you think about any race religion color etc. you are free to feel however you wish but, In my view coming out as a racist in a group of people you know nothing about shows a distinct lack of decent character.
> 
> Of course the responses were completely predictable and not surprising at all, not to mention who they came from.
> 
> We wonder why society has such a negative view of people in the trades. Take a look in the mirror.


 
If you had no problem with it why did you call B4T an Asshole?

If you had no problem with it you wouldn't have even responded to his use of the word "Towel Head".

Same goes for you Dennis,if his comment was just ignored this thread wouldn't have gone off track.

So what exactly do you know of these people anyway Mr Know it all from the blue state of Mass?

Have you lived and served among these people? Are you familiar with their religion and their culture?


I have and my feelings toward them have derived from my personal experiences and their actions towards the Western world and the country I live in.

This isn't about race like you two seem to think it is.

It is about religion.The teachings of the Koran and Mohamed. It is the islamic religion that teaches them we are the enemy.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Keep proving my point. :laughing:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> Keep proving my point. :laughing:


Some people just don't "get it".. you are one of them :no:

The people who wanted to kill soldiers at Fort Dix

The guy trying to blow up a plane Christmas day

The shoe bomber

The soldier who killed (12) fellow soldiers

The groups of guys plotting to release nerve gas in NYC subways

The guy who was going to take a blow torch to the Brooklyn Bridge.

*All Arab men on a mission to KILL Americans*


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I am not saying all Arabs are bad people, but seeing them dance in the streets after 9/11 does not sit well with me.

I also don't see the Arab leaders out there marching in protest to end the JIHAD they keep ranting about.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> *All Arab men on a mission to KILL Americans*


yes....finish the sentence

I'll do it for you.

*which means all Arab men want to kill Americans*


----------



## ElectroMotive (Mar 10, 2010)

I'd like to quickly interject that all religion is make believe. Now back to your scheduled thread.


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

ElectroMotive said:


> I'd like to quickly interject that all religion is make believe. Now back to your scheduled thread.


Ok, now we agree.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> yes....finish the sentence
> 
> I'll do it for you.
> 
> *which means all Arab men want to kill Americans*


 
Nice try.. but that is not what I am saying :no:


----------



## electricmanscott (Feb 11, 2010)

Black4Truck said:


> Nice try.. but that is not what I am saying :no:


It's exactly what your saying. Nice backpedaling though.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

electricmanscott said:


> It's exactly what your saying. Nice backpedaling though.


I am not backpedaling and for sure not afraid to speak my mind on this subject.

Again.. nice try, but it fell short

See post #221 if you are still confused


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Towelheads can kiss my ass and I ain't ever working for them ever again.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Magnettica said:


> Towelheads can kiss my ass and I ain't ever working for them ever again.


:laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Black4Truck said:


> :laughing::laughing::laughing:


:thumbsup:


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

Magnettica said:


> :thumbsup:


:laughing::thumbup::laughing:


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Ever see this movie?


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

Well, I was going to edit out the junk here, which turns out to be the last four pages. It's just not worth it.

I know we let things get a bit off topic at times, but this is out of hand. Also, let's try and keep it a bit more civil and less insulting, shall we.


----------

