Latest from CPSC on the Tablesaw Issue

[Ben Hatcher]

I propose the following solution that will satisfy both the advocates of doing what's best for society and those who want to protect their personal choice/responsibility. Allow manufacturers to make two versions! Both should be the same price. In the event of a blade strike, one version should prevent injury. The other version will continue to mangle as usual but will also be required to notify the local institutions of society (911-dispatcher, hospital, etc.) that someone with a strong sense of personal responsibility has just injured himself. They would then be further instructed that in order to respect the patient's wishes they are to resist any socialistic tendencies and/or human compassion and provide only the medical attention he can afford to pay for up front.

[ben searight]

I respectfully disagree.
I pay for my electricity, buy and grow my food, pay fuel taxes, TV? (I don't get that), pay for my phone, and my medical care.
I guess I am just an antique fossil who still believes in freedom, but don't worry, we will all die off soon and we will leave the world to those who don't remember or care what freedom was.
BTW, I am not against Saw Stop technology, but I will not replace my Powermatic 66 any time soon.
Dave

Your electricity costs are subsidized by the fact power companies are given free access to public rights-of-way (your bill would be $1000 a month if they had to buy their own) same for phone companies, cable TV and all other utilities. You food purchases are regulated for safety by the FDA. Depending on what state you live in your gas tax money may or may not cover the costs of constructing/maintaining the highway system. The education of the doctors that treat you is subsidized in the form or grants, scholarships, and very low interest loans.

I'm going to get off the politics now, we've already been warned (Sorry Bruce)

I do not own one but i think the SawStop is a great idea. I'm not sold on the particular technology (I don't like the damage to the blade, the expense of the cartridges, and the down time). I think in the end consumers will get something much better than SS at a much lower cost.

[Anthony Whitesell]

I do not own one but i think the SawStop is a great idea. I'm not sold on the particular technology (I don't like the damage to the blade, the expense of the cartridges, and the down time).

I was just thinking the same thing. I went over to the whirlwind tool website to see what infomation they provided on how their system works and intergrates to the machine, but they just have a bunch of videos and no substance. After watching them, I'm curious on two things. 1) How does he get the bandsaw to stop so quickly without any electrical modifications (quoted from the website)? 2) How does he stop the blade on the table saw without the arbor spinning free? If you recall the nut tights in the opposite direction the motor spins. With both the blade and motor free this causes the nut to tighten. If the motor stop suddenly, the momentum of the blade could brake the arbor nut loose, especially when using a dado blade. (I believe this is one reason the SawStop went with a blade brake design instead of a motor or arbor break.

[Kevin W Johnson]

You'd have to check with an employment lawyer to be sure but I don't believe that what you suggest would pass legal muster. The reason is that it's very hard to separate "voluntary" from "required". Think about this scenario: the boss comes in and makes your suggestion to the employees and tells them to think it over. Later,the boss calls in one person and confides that anyone who doesn't agree to your proposal will be laid off. So when s/he goes back and asks for the employees decision, they all agree to it. The boss just accomplished what is prohibited in the law. I'm pretty sure the employees cannot voluntarily agree to something that's prohibited.

Mike

Mike, can you answer the question for what it is? Forget what the employer can and cannot do legally.

[dave toney]

I don't get your point, you seem to be arguing against something I never said or intimated.
I am not against all cooperative arrangements at all, I never said a man is an island unto himself.
I DID say that collectivism leads to authoritarianism, such as "I have to pay when so and so does so and so".
I believe every person is responsible for himself, his needs, and his own safety and those things are not up to a vote by the majority.
The Saw Stop is a fine idea, but it would be a bad idea to mandate it on all saws, the market can decide that.
Freedom does carry some risks, but I think it is well worth it.
I don't personally think politics should be off limit, as long as no name calling, insults, or ad-hominem attacks are made.
Discussion brings enlightenment.
Dave

[Kevin W Johnson]

I don't think that by failing to offer a safety system the manufacturers are making themselves immune to litigation. Quite the opposite is probably true as demonstrated by the Ryobi decision recently. If a safety system is available and the manufacturer fails to implement it, they'll be held negligent. They'd be much better off as far as liability to offer the safety system.

Mike

And this simply shouldnt be the case when the consumer is free to buy a competitors product that offers the device and chooses not too.

[Mike Henderson]

And this simply shouldnt be the case when the consumer is free to buy a competitors product that offers the device and chooses not too.

As a society, we have always believed that manufacturers should not be able to sell unsafe products. The definition of "unsafe" is an evolving standard. At one time, a certain type of crib was acceptable to sell, but as we learned more about the dangers inherent in it, that particular design of crib was deemed unsafe and banned from the market. You can't buy one of those cribs new.

Table saws are in a similar situation now. In the past, it was not possible to build a safer table saw. Now it is. Based on the advance of technology, we may decide, as a society, that the older design, which in light of the new technology is now considered unsafe, should no longer be sold. If we decide that the older design is "inherently unsafe" I don't see why we should allow it to continue to be sold as a new product.

Mike

[Mike Henderson]

Mike, can you answer the question for what it is? Forget what the employer can and cannot do legally.

Since what you propose is not legal, your question is moot. There's no reason to hypothesize about things which are not possible.

mike

[ben searight]

I don't get your point, you seem to be arguing against something I never said or intimated.
I am not against all cooperative arrangements at all, I never said a man is an island unto himself.
I DID say that collectivism leads to authoritarianism, such as "I have to pay when so and so does so and so".
I believe every person is responsible for himself, his needs, and his own safety and those things are not up to a vote by the majority.
The Saw Stop is a fine idea, but it would be a bad idea to mandate it on all saws, the market can decide that.
Freedom does carry some risks, but I think it is well worth it.
I don't personally think politics should be off limit, as long as no name calling, insults, or ad-hominem attacks are made.
Discussion brings enlightenment.
Dave

My point is that everyone of us is occasionally the "so and so that does so and so" and everyone else pays.

[ben searight]

As a society, we have always believed that manufacturers should not be able to sell unsafe products. The definition of "unsafe" is an evolving standard. At one time, a certain type of crib was acceptable to sell, but as we learned more about the dangers inherent in it, that particular design of crib was deemed unsafe and banned from the market. You can't buy one of those cribs new.

Table saws are in a similar situation now. In the past, it was not possible to build a safer table saw. Now it is. Based on the advance of technology, we may decide, as a society, that the older design, which in light of the new technology is now considered unsafe, should no longer be sold. If we decide that the older design is "inherently unsafe" I don't see why we should allow it to continue to be sold as a new product.

Mike

I'm not sure this is the same as the faulty cribs, closer to lawn darts in my estimation. You couldn't look at the crib sitting in your childs room and determine it was dangerous and could kill your baby. Lawn darts were clearly dangerous from the outset. Anyone, (at least anyone on this forum) can tell you that a TS can hurt you therefore, don't put you fingers in the blade. I think that's where the peoples resistance comes from. You know it's dangerous, use it at your own risk.

That being said, I'm with you, if you can build a better TS please do so.

[Leo Graywacz]

It comes down to

You can't fix stupid.

Even with the SS safety equipment someone is bound to get severely hurt on it. Maybe fall and knock a chunk off their skull on the corner of the cast iron table.

[ben searight]

It comes down to

You can't fix stupid.

Even with the SS safety equipment someone is bound to get severely hurt on it. Maybe fall and knock a chunk off their skull on the corner of the cast iron table.

And they'll sue because the table wasn't stamped steel and MDF.

[Kevin W Johnson]

Since what you propose is not legal, your question is moot. There's no reason to hypothesize about things which are not possible.

mike

My point is show that the general populace simply wants to put the full responsiblility of their safety on someone else, and when they have to share that burden (financially), they make different descisions. If you're unwilling to admit that, so be it.

[Mike Henderson]

My point is show that the general populace simply wants to put the full responsiblility of their safety on someone else, and when they have to share that burden (financially), they make different descisions. If you're unwilling to admit that, so be it.

Well, given that the person who has the accident suffers the consequences, I think they have a pretty strong interest in their own safety. Sort of like the story of ham and eggs. The chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

Mike

[Kevin W Johnson]

It comes down to

You can't fix stupid.

Even with the SS safety equipment someone is bound to get severely hurt on it. Maybe fall and knock a chunk off their skull on the corner of the cast iron table.

You got that right. All those little warnings and labels you see on products, and you think "who in the world is that stupid", is there simply because someone was in fact, that stupid.