Todays USA today TS article

[John Coloccia]

Stop the demonizing of those who prefer to have a choice. I could just as easily demonize those who believe it should be mandatory.

Admittedly I haven't re-read the entire thread, but I re-read a lot of it, and I can't find even a hint of this going on. Most SS owners as far as I can tell prefer choice as well. The personal attacks are historically, and consistently anti-sawstop, usually in the form of accusing owners of somehow being lesser woodworkers.

It seems like there's so much pent up and misdirected anger that many don't even bother to read or attempt to understand what anyone is saying anymore. People just glance at a post, read a couple of words, and then just go with what they think it should have said.

I find Gass and his tactics to be repugnant as well, but he has what I want so I pinch my nose and bear it. Perhaps we should be less upset at his exploiting the system, and more upset at the system that allows for exploits.

[Neil Brooks]

I rarely see it argued that the SS isn't a GOOD saw.

Whether or not you think it's AS good as a Uni or a PM is a pretty personal decision.

Whether or not you approve of Gass's "approach" or "tactics" tends to speak to one's politics ... even if only a little.

And I've never seen a single SS thread where anybody's mind was changed about these couple of issues.

And I don't expect this one to do anything differently

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Neal... I agree with you...these threads never change anyone's mind about the matter. I don't know that I can agree with your statment about political views, however. I hold views on a lot of things that don't necessarily align with any one political philosophy. I find most matters too complex to be over simplified by categorizing it as all in one flavor.....It's not red......not blue.....but it's there

[Ken Fitzgerald]

John,

When people start making comments about the public costs of treating those who are injured by not having SS, it is, IMHO, an indirect attempt to demonize those who either can't afford SS or choose to not buy SS.

When there is an attempt to imply a certain moral high ground by choosing SS. Enough.

IMHO, there is no moral high ground as this isn't question about morality.

It's possible my perception of some posts are wrong about implications of morality or demonizaiton but it's just as possible my perceptions could be right.

I respect the right of everyone to have their opinion and reasons to buy or NOT buy SS.

[Van Huskey]

And I've never seen a single SS thread where anybody's mind was changed about these couple of issues.

I can tell you there have been a lot of people change their minds over threads like this over the years SS has been around.

My personal odyssey while reading threads on forums over the years:

1. interesting idea, over priced, probably isn't fully sorted nor effective and probably attached to an inferior saw
2. wow this actually seems to be proving itself and the saw (ICS at the time) seems really well made
3. (sees ICS for the first time)
4. (uses and ICS for the first time, a friends)
5. directed to SS hotdog video by a forum thread and now believes SS is a great saw with a non-gimmick tech and my next saw will be an ICS
6. directed by forum threads to SS corporate agenda, opinion sours
7. further threads leading to more facts regarding SS's agenda and rerunning my personal risk-benefit analysis has me buying a PM2000 w/riving knife but sans brake


I think the key is most if not all who post in these threads have made their minds up, for what ever reason, however this is a small sampling of the ones that actually read the thread and are potentially influenced by them. Though there are fewer and fewer people who have not made up their minds there are still some on the fence reading this and other threads and being influenced.

[Neil Brooks]

Okay. Very fair, Van.

What I was trying to focus on is less the saw, itself -- what I interpret your post as pointing to -- and more the discussions about Gass's tactics, the concept of a potential mandate, the arguments about whether probability or idiocy plays a larger role in woodworking accidents.

See what I mean ?

In the broadest sense -- admittedly, TOO broad, by definition -- I think there are two things: the saw, and everything around the saw and its marketing.

I've focused more of MY attention on the saw, but don't take anything away from those who have strong opinions about "the other stuff."

It's that latter category that I was pointing out, and that ... I'd guess ... results in few people changing their minds.

I could still be wrong, though. Wouldn't surprise me a bit

[Rob Steffeck]

When there is an attempt to imply a certain moral high ground by choosing SS. Enough.

This sums up my feelings perfectly. When I bought my cabinet saw last year, I was deciding between a General, Unisaw, and SS. I decided on General. One the replies from a SS person was: "Congrats. But I hope you don't regret your decision."

Maybe I took that comment wrong, but it certainly seemed to me that it meant I had made a mistake in my choice.

[Rod Sheridan]

Van, I read most of the online paper where Mr. Gas petioned them to make active sensing technology a requirement for saws.

What surprised me was how many people who are hobby users had finger amputations compared to OSHA governed shops.

The counter argument from the machine manufacturers was that training and safety procedures were enough to prevent accidents, however a 10 year analysis of the data showed that accidents statistics were consistent.

I believe both sides of the argument are true.

The flesh sensing technology is a significant improvement in saw safety.

The use of proper guards and training of operators significantly reduces injuries.

The problem is, only in industry is training common. So central to the ability to work safely, that labour codes in general define a competent person as one who has sufficient training to understand the hazards involved.

I think that's where it comes apart, yes the table saws are safe as designed, when operated by a competent person. The flesh sensing technology adds another layer to the protection, a secondary back up system for times when the primary protection fails. (Guards and training).

The issue is, how do we train people?

I'm not picking on Norm, however I as a hobby user watch Norm use a saw, I learn that guards aren't required for skilled operators.

However this is exactly the reverse of what the safety statistics show us, that shops which comply with OSHA regulations have very few accidents with the saw.

So, I recently bought a Euro slider, certainly not in the Ryobi saw cost bracket, my saw came with a manual that indicated that I can't perform any operation where the guard is removed, and that for some operations I need an overarm guard.

OK, fair enough at $10,000 I'm probably not a new saw user.

How about the $200 saw at the home center? Does it come with a DVD showing people how to use the saw safely? Probably not, however that would be a $10 cost that could really improve safety.

So, how as experienced wood workers could we improve safety?

That's the question, because if we can't do it, someone will do it for us.............Rod.

[Sean Nagle]

I'm not picking on Norm, however I as a hobby user watch Norm use a saw, I learn that guards aren't required for skilled operators.

Rod, good point about training. I'll ask others where they learned to operate the tablesaw. After all, it's not quite obvious. I'll admit that I learned to operate a tablesaw from watching Norm. In the later shows Norm did demonstrate a consistent and competent technique at the tablesaw (earlier shows had some real hair-raising footage if I recall). There were relatively few times where I cringed watching him in the later shows though.

In contrast, I saw a video of Dr. Gass operating a tablesaw. His technique was atrocious. Good thing he invented the device he did, he needed it

[keith micinski]

Where did you find this fact?

The ONLY fact in any of this that is really relevant is that as far as anyone can tell, there has yet to be a major injury on a SawStop. Maybe there has been and I'm ignorant of it, and if so I'll stand corrected, but that's the fact as far as I know. To be clear, this isn't to say that there will never be one, but all the same that's pretty remarkable. Any claim that the technology is somehow making things less safe seems to be verifiably wrong.

John you just made my point for me. I didn't argue that there have been failures. My statement is " Most people believe that getting a Sawstop means that you aren't going to cut your finger off." I might be wrong on the "most" part but I doubt it, one thing I am not wrong on is that owning a Sawstop does not mean you WON'T ever cut your finger off. If you disagree with this statement as a fact then this is there rare case where you are completely wrong. It lessens the risk significantly but does not eliminate it completely. I also never once said that Technology makes something less safe. I said technology can contribute to complacency. I admit that I overstated complacency being the only risk in a shop. What I should have said was "to me complacency is the most dangerous thing in a shop." This is my opinion and up for debate obviously. I do know Osha has found accidents in the work place happen to 40-64 year old people more often then 40-18. The reason they give and the reason that makes sense is not lack of training, its complacency. I'd be willing to bet most people would have guessed that statistic to be the other way around.

By the way if someone wants to own a Sawstop because they are safer table saws then the competitors I have no problem with that. I agree that Sawstop saws are more safe then the other saws. What they aren't though is SAFE. All power tools are inherently unsafe by nature and throwing technology at them does not make them 100% fool proof. This FACT seems to get lost in all of the discussion. I guess this was my main point from the beginning and probably all I should have put in my post to start with.

[John Coloccia]

The ONLY fact in any of this that is really relevant is that as far as anyone can tell, there has yet to be a major injury on a SawStop. Maybe there has been and I'm ignorant of it, and if so I'll stand corrected, but that's the fact as far as I know. To be clear, this isn't to say that there will never be one, but all the same that's pretty remarkable. Any claim that the technology is somehow making things less safe seems to be verifiably wrong.

John you just made my point for me. I didn't argue that there have been failures. My statement is " Most people believe that getting a Sawstop means that you aren't going to cut your finger off." I might be wrong on the "most" part but I doubt it, one thing I am not wrong on is that owning a Sawstop does not mean you WON'T ever cut your finger off. If you disagree with this statement as a fact then this is there rare case where you are completely wrong. It lessens the risk significantly but does not eliminate it completely. I also never once said that Technology makes something less safe. I said technology can contribute to complacency. I admit that I overstated complacency being the only risk in a shop. What I should have said was "to me complacency is the most dangerous thing in a shop." This is my opinion and up for debate obviously. I do know Osha has found accidents in the work place happen to 40-64 year old people more often then 40-18. The reason they give and the reason that makes sense is not lack of training its complacency. I'd be willing to bet most people would have guessed that statistic to be the other way around.

I wish I had an icon for "scratching my head in confuzzlement".

If anyone can find a statement anywhere saying or implying that they feel the SS lends absolute protection, I will eat crow and conceded that at least SOME people think that.

[Chris Padilla]

Van - You already knew that there is a forum function that sends alerts to Ken, Bruce, and Chris whenever you or I sign on. Probably even beeps their blackberry and wakes them up at night.

Not true, not true!!!

[keith micinski]

I wish I had an icon for "scratching my head in confuzzlement".

If anyone can find a statement anywhere saying or implying that they feel the SS lends absolute protection, I will eat crow and conceded that at least SOME people think that.

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Not true, not true!!!

Don't tell either of them that those aren't tasers Chris.

[John Coloccia]

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.

I DO agree with you, Keith.