5 ms·
He did go and call it an experiment in sustainable living, implying the intent was for it to be a dwelling. I don't think it's unreasonable for some permit requ
by maldeh 10y ago
He did go and call it an experiment in sustainable living, implying the intent was for it to be a dwelling. I don't think it's unreasonable for some permit requisites to apply to it, like being a rust hazard or a danger to neighbors during an earthquake.
- stickfigure 10y agoRust hazard?
- gravypod 10y agoI laughed when I saw this. Thanks for pointing it out.
- maldeh 10y agoI may be missing something, is this not a thing people say?
- gravypod 10y agoCouldn't anything metal be a rust hazard? Am I allowed to own a metal mail box or is that a rust hazard.
- maldeh 10y agoPerhaps this is distracting the conversation then. I just brought up rust because it is a common element of rental inspection (http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/looking.shtml http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/landlordbook/looking.shtm...), and because inhaling iron particles has been known to cause respiratory issues - probably more relevant in a human enclosure than in a mailbox (albeit not as serious as asbestos or lead). But the point stands, if the container is generally accepted as a public-access dwelling, then it is not unreasonable to subject it to inspection for livability.
- goldenkey 10y agoIt sounds like something the Ministry of Information would issue (movie Brazil..a must see)