Originally Posted by
David Kumm
Mike, I wasn't attempting to deflect the discussion to cigarettes. I was addressing the statement that the benefit of the regulation would be to reduce health care costs. If that argument is used there should be an explanation as to what health risks we as individuals should be allowed to take and which are decided by someone else. If flesh sensing technology is mandatory for tablesaws- and I'm not taking a position here- it should also be required on bandsaws, drill presses, shapers, routers, and lawnmowers. I'm not totally serious here but a certain amount of that logic does apply. We all draw the lines in different in different places.
A lot has been done for lawnmowers to improve the safety since a lot of people were cutting off their toes or mangling their foot or hands. If you use a modern lawn mower, you'll experience a lot of safety features that were not on lawn mowers 30 years ago. For tools like bandsaws and drill presses, I would bet the injury statistics are significantly lower than table saws. When you address accidents, you generally start with the high injury areas. The injury rate for bandsaws and drill presses may be low enough that it would not be economical to require additional safety devices. However, when we look at the cost of table saw injuries, it's clear that the benefit of certain safety devices will outweigh the cost.
But, again, I'll comment that it's not necessary to solve all the problems in order to address one. If people feel strongly that certain other tools should have additional safety devices, they should petition the CPSC for those safety devices. But that's a separate discussion than what's being discussed here, which is safety devices for table saws.
Mike
Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good.