The MN requirement for sprinklers in residences comes from the 2012 International Residential Code (IRC). Since this code is the basis for most state building codes in the US, each of those states will eventually be forced to accept the sprinkler requirement or pass legislation to amend the code if it hasn't already done so (the requirement was also in the 2009 IRC) Currently I believe only California, Maryland and DC have allowed the sprinkler requirement to become law unmodified. MN adopts the IRC after review and amendment and it has recently amended the 2012 IRC to exempt houses smaller than 4,500 s.f. Since the average size of a single family home in the US is 2,700 s.f. the rule appears to allow most single family homes in MN to be built without sprinklers. However, the building area includes all "conditioned space" so it can include conditioned lower levels and bonus rooms even if those spaces are unfinished. Even so, it seems easy enough to avoid the requirement if you really don't want sprinklers. The ICC has strongly advocated home sprinklers since 2006 when the requirement was included as an option to be adopted locally. The fight over including the requirement in the IRC has always been between home building associations (and the NHAB) and fire fighter associations (and the NFPA). A very small percentage of homeowners die in fires each year so the home buying public understandably cares more about price than sprinklers but about 45% of firefighter deaths occur in those home fires so the sprinkler code fight is basically between homebuilders and firefighters.

Tough one. However much the law may be explicit, and even if the police are called, there's no guaranteed way of MAKING BM abide at all times, unfortunately. I think all you can really do is attempt to discuss it with BM in a way that tries to minimize a judgmental/condemning tone (even if you understandably feel like judging/condemning her for putting the child at risk) and instead attempts to appeal to her good sense as a mother. This way she is more likely to actually listen instead of immaturely rebelling against the law simply because you, as SM, happen to be the one bringing it up. Tell her about your friend's daughter and say there are risks that she just may not have thought of. Tell her it doesn't mean you think she's a sh***y mother, but that something tragic happened to someone you actually know and you thought she would benefit from being told what the risks actually are. I don't blame you in this instance if you want to call the cops, but it just might not be a very long-term solution. Plus, you don't want to open a big "tit-for-tat" drama can of worms. You can only do what a person can reasonably do when they are not present to control everything that happens when the kid is outside their care. After that point, there is always a risk that something could happen because of someone else's irresponsibility. Unless you're with the kid 24/7, you'll never avoid this risk 100%.

I never could afford a "dream" car, but my best liked, all around family car was the 1964 Dodge Dart, Automatic, with the 264 cubic inch V8 engine. I drove that one to 100,000 miles and would have kept it longer except the body was rusting out due to our winter laden salted roads and I needed a replacement for our growing family. It had a good balance between power and economy, a smooth running trouble free engine, and was a good long distance driver. Visibility was good. What was unique about it? This little V8 was based on the larger 318 engine, but had thin wall castings for weight savings. Many of the internal parts were interchangeable with the 318: Crank shaft, cam shaft, cam chain, distributor, and oil pump. The spacings between cylinders were indentical so the engine could be made on the same line as its big brother 318. The pistons were smaller but the designers used a large heavy wrist pin to make the piston-wrist pin combination weight the same as the larger engine. That way, both engines could be run on the same engine balancing line. The all time most smooth engine I ever owned was a 1954 Dodge Red Ram V8 (its a hemi). It was not a particularily powerful engine, but so very smooth and quiet. One day, we were shuttled into a roadside safety check. The officer made the inspection and laid his clipboard on the hood to make the final entries, AND the he asked me to start the engine. The enigine had been running all the time. I had to jazz the throttle to convince him. He did not feel it while writing on his clipboard which was on the hood and he could not hear it over the street noise.

I read that she was annoyed by screaming children running up and down the aisle in First Class. I would be annoyed by that, too. Mostly with the parents who were allowing it, then with the FAs who are probably too scared of the ruckus it would cause with those same parents if THEY tried to stop the unruly kids. I wouldn't expect that kind of atmosphere if I was sitting in First Class. I'm not excusing Trump's behavior, though, it sounds like she over-reacted. I think it's times like those when fellow passengers need to get slightly involved and shut those kids down, because the FAs can't be everywhere at once AND the FAs have to walk a really fine line between enforcement and diplomacy/customer service. For all they know, that situation could be a set-up by the airline to test their skills and see if the FAs perform to their liking. If the adults on board had simply blocked the aisles so the kids were unable to run back and forth, maybe then the parents could have settled them down and strapped them in. This is assuming all the children had seats assigned to them. I know up to a certain age, you can (ridiculously) hold them in your lap, on some airlines.