The initial cost is often a cited point against the installation or requirement of these systems, having a wide range of design and system choices. This typically is batted down by citing the cost savings from insurance reductions for the building owner. My argument against this was simple; first, there is no blanket requirement to reduce insurance burdens and not all insurance companies offer discounts based on this. Second; on average, it takes roughly 30 years (typical length of a standard mortgage in the US) to recover those costs through the average insurance reductions. Lastly on this point; insurance reductions have a great chance of being negated - or worse, insurance rates can be increased if/when a system malfunctions and accidentally discharges. This situation can occur from human error such as damaging/opening a head, improperly maintaining the system, or allowing pipes to freeze.

I then extended this point with a focus on my specific community. My state is a high cost of living state, and further, the specific city is well below average income in the state. In short, the area is significantly economically depressed in most areas. An increased financial burden where families often struggle to make ends meet was a significant arguing point.

With again, focus on the specific city, I highlighted the staffing shortages within the fire marshals office. With current inspection burden unfulfilled, with a substantial backlog of inspections already, the additional responsibility placed on them would be simply unfeasible. My state's building code requires all residential sprinkler systems to have designs approved and inspected by the municipality.

Finally - utilizing NFPA 13D, specifically the requirements for water supply to a sprinkler system in residences - I highlighted the need for water sources in the outlying sections of the city, located at much higher elevation than the city center. Some areas do not have the required 4-inch mains required by 13D (when connected to a municipal supply) and water pressure will also not meet requirements. This would mean these residents would have a a further burden of planning, installing, and maintaining a static water source. Also on this note, was a mention of climate - the N.E. US - being cold, where pipe freezing is a serious concern, necessitating a more complex and expensive dry system in most circumstances. 
Analyze the text and say why you are for or against Residential Sprinklers. Do you share the opinion of the author of the text? provide references to support your positions.