Pardon me I admire your intilect. notice the spelling, I admire your non laymen retoric, spelling, but yes you are above average .,so therefore you do not represent the majority. So I really do believe…simply put if that’s possible….that majority would rather go with common sense ideas. Reason being is that they will have a better survival rate.. in the end. Only stupid people let things happen. Some just concentrate on how smart they think they are. Knowledge and degrees but Those people can’t change a litght bulb a tire probably even their life. I’m happy with the thought that some look I this and say …hah hah hah this guy can’t spell,!!! But they can’t figure out what it says.
nWell, I nor anyone else here can speak for other departments, so it's a little bit of an exaggeration to say that "building departments perspective the laws are fluid". All I can say is that we try to apply code with an eye to the gravity of harm, likelihood of harm, and cost of repair (literally the standard established by our supreme court here). Again, allowing some use of discretion when detecting code violations. Our legal system felt that to codify everything was completely unreasonable and that a reliance on local AHJs was more suitable. I fail to see how this is a one way street. Contractors and owners benefit substantially more from this than mindless enforcement of the codes.
I'm sure there are nuances to all of this, but I am not licensed to practice law anymore than I am to practice medicine, so the nuances are largely beyond me. All I am aware of is what our supreme court has set into settled law, which I am communicating here. Are the supreme court in Canada violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Who's to say. Certainly not me, so I will rely on their rulings until I hear an argument of substance.