I have also noted the sale of "Safety" extension cords. As I understand it, these cords have an inner foil wrapping that is intended to let the cord 'detect' damaged conductors.
I have to applaud the manufacturers for at least trying. Still, technology is no substitute for either care or competence.
The cynic in me fears another motive -profit by manpulating the legal/political worlds - but that's another topic, for another day. Maybe some of these guys really do care about safety.
As for the device being a 'one time only,' just think of it as another "Fixed User Safety Element," or FUSE for short. Or shorts. Whatever.
Just what is safety, after all? Would not the safest house be one with no power at all? Yet, our codes require the introduction of this hazard.
OK, that's a bit extreme .... but think for a moment ... just how many of our new code requirements address risks introduced by previous requirements? Perhaps the best example is the AFCI, which was advertised to address the pinched cord from the receptacle that was behind the bed's headboard .... and that outlet's placement was directly caused by using the '6 ft. rule' as a design principle. We started the code saying 'this is not a design manual,' then a few pages later deliver a design rule on a silver platter.
Heat at the point where the plug enters the receptacle, or an apliance using too much power. Would these concerns not be more easily, and accurately, addressed by simply putting a fuse in the plug?
