HOLY CRAP BIG BROTHER IS COMING TO YOUR SHOP

Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
You can't drive a motorcycle without wearing a helmet - a safety device the government tested to ensure it can save lives in the event of an accident...everything we buy requires some oversight.

Maybe it's the fact that our healthcare is paid by our taxes, but I don't see why requiring a device that can keep people out of the hospital and can save digits or livelihoods is a bad idea. Regardless of how it was proposed, it seems like a good idea that's only hampered by the cost, currently. I'd imagine it'll take years to implement, which gives time for things to be tested and prices to come down.

Asbestos used to be common - now it's not allowed to be used because it's not safe.

Cost-wise, table saw injuries in the US cost 2 Billion per year, apparently...it seems like anything that can prevent that would be a good thing:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4154236/

That being said - I'd imagine that any mandate -if it came - would take many years to implement. Product design, retrofit, etc. can't happen overnight. Even the electric car thing - they're trying to get it implemented, eventually, but there are still 2002 Toyotas on the road.
 
Well, helmets are not mandatory in all States. I know that in Ohio when the seatbelt law was made many many years ago. There was a compromise so that helmets no longer had to be worn for motorcyclists. Yea... go figure. It's not about safety, it's about money, and it's about control. Some of us understand this more than others and cherish our freedoms way beyond what some government entity THINKS is safety.

Like Apollo said to Rocky, when this is all over with, you'll understand it is about more than just this fight.
 
maxwell_smart007 said:
You can't drive a motorcycle without wearing a helmet - a safety device the government tested to ensure it can save lives in the event of an accident...everything we buy requires some oversight.

Maybe it's the fact that our healthcare is paid by our taxes, but I don't see why requiring a device that can keep people out of the hospital and can save digits or livelihoods is a bad idea. Regardless of how it was proposed, it seems like a good idea that's only hampered by the cost, currently. I'd imagine it'll take years to implement, which gives time for things to be tested and prices to come down.

Asbestos used to be common - now it's not allowed to be used because it's not safe.

Cost-wise, table saw injuries in the US cost 2 Billion per year, apparently...it seems like anything that can prevent that would be a good thing:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4154236/

That being said - I'd imagine that any mandate -if it came - would take many years to implement. Product design, retrofit, etc. can't happen overnight. Even the electric car thing - they're trying to get it implemented, eventually, but there are still 2002 Toyotas on the road.
Click to expand...
I can not totally go along with this. If you are going to quote injuries from tablesaw accidents then you need to specify what is a tablesaw accident? Saw stop will not stop kickbacks. It does not stop stupidity. Also then put up the stats for other power tools used in a shop such as routers, circular saws, bandsaw and yes even lathes. These stats were around the same time as Sawstop was invented. Why didn't the government step in and allow free enterprise and allow competition back then? Why all of a sudden? Because the patents are coming due and again it is a money grab thing and they can sugar coat all they want but that is bottom line and always was. Seatbelt laws can be argued both for and against and have been. That is a law I have no problem with because it involves all drivers on the road. Same with Helmets. Each and every year car makers keep upgrading the crash safety of their cars. A tablesaw is an individual thing. If you are going to argue the healthcare route then you better include drugs in that category and prices in pharmaceuticals You bring up asbestos again it took time to find out it was bad for you and the environment and bystanders. Not an individual thing. It is one thing to regulate items that cause harm to others because of one person's actions as opposed to causing harm to oneself. Big difference. Again allow the technology to be available from other sources other than Sawstop but do not make mandatory. That is where the problem lies with me. If it something you want then buy it. Just like how Sawstop tried to command the entire tablesaw market for $$$$$.
 
maxwell_smart007 said:
You can't drive a motorcycle without wearing a helmet - a safety device the government tested to ensure it can save lives in the event of an accident...everything we buy requires some oversight.

Maybe it's the fact that our healthcare is paid by our taxes, but I don't see why requiring a device that can keep people out of the hospital and can save digits or livelihoods is a bad idea. Regardless of how it was proposed, it seems like a good idea that's only hampered by the cost, currently. I'd imagine it'll take years to implement, which gives time for things to be tested and prices to come down.

Asbestos used to be common - now it's not allowed to be used because it's not safe.

Cost-wise, table saw injuries in the US cost 2 Billion per year, apparently...it seems like anything that can prevent that would be a good thing:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4154236/

That being said - I'd imagine that any mandate -if it came - would take many years to implement. Product design, retrofit, etc. can't happen overnight. Even the electric car thing - they're trying to get it implemented, eventually, but there are still 2002 Toyotas on the road.
Click to expand...

I will never agree with this statement "You can't drive a motorcycle without wearing a helmet - a safety device the government tested to ensure it can save lives in the event of an accident...everything we buy requires some oversight."
The problem here is simple.... government overreach into your private life at home.
Consider this, a car manufacturer ups the game and kicks up the car crash safety factor. The cars they make are super safe saving lives right and left in all kinds of crash situations government kind of likes this. The car maker sends lobbyists to the government to push for legislation to mandate the technology they have created it saves lives. The insurance companies jump in and do the same because they want to continue to collect the premiums and not have to pay out the $$$$$$$ in personal injury law suits.
A thought about the impact the insurance companies can have on your private life. Before you brush this off just try to get homeowners insurance if you have a pitbull pet or two.

The slippery slope that this SS thing can create is frighting....... here is why I fear it. Take the car example above logically it could protect an innocent driver, YOU from harm initiated by an IDIOT driver , ME . It easily makes clear sense in a dystopian future I never want to see.
Soon there is legislation percolating to protect innocent citizens by mandating access to a commercial market and products while eliminating similar products that in the opinion of the government doesn't measure up. This is simply obtuse if for no other reason than you cant legislate away "stupid".
How in the world does this SS possibility do anything except protect ME from MYSELF ? There is the problem, the possibility that someone in America can reach into the fundamental freedom and privacy of my day and set the level of safety for the things I do every day.
Simple by limiting availability of products they see as harmful and promoting the products and features they deem beneficial to society.
One last thought, Consider this, nearly 1,000 people a year end up in the emergency room due to accidents with garbage disposals.

The most hazardous activities for all ages are bathing, showering and getting out of the tub or shower. Injuries in or near the bathtub or shower account for more than two-thirds of emergency room visits.

Approximately 40,000 Americans go to hospital emergency rooms every year with injuries sustained while operating table saws. About 4,000 of those injuries – or more than 10 every day – are amputations. Table saw injuries cost the United States approximately $2 billion every year.
Given a dystopian mentality such that a safety device the government tested to ensure it can save lives in the event of an accident...everything we buy requires some oversight." is a world I don't want to see.
It is not SS technology it is the open door at the top of the slippery slope this commercially legislated reach I fear.
calabrese55
 
What saves lives? Safety gadgets on cars? Why were there about 41K traffic deaths in 2023? The most important part of the car is the nut that holds the wheel.
 
calabrese55 said:
The problem here is simple.... government overreach into your private life at home.
Click to expand...

This right here, is actually critically important... Something I didn't think about. Mandating anything in your private life, IS an overreach. I guess when I think of safety regulations, its mostly about things like driving, flight, etc. But, you are right, these are PUBLIC activities where a device, say a poorly thought out breaking system in a car, could endanger the lives of many people.

That is distinctly different from an individual performing private activities in the privacy of their own property. This certainly makes me re-think my earlier position.

Personally, I just want the darn patents to expire, so that they are no longer casting this gargantuan shadow over innovation on this front in the industry. People CLEARLY WANT safety technology. Manadated or not, its a popular feature, and I think saw manufacturers would have taken advantage of that regardless, if they had had the opportunity. In a couple of years, they finally will, once all these darn patents are well and truly EX-PIRED. Maybe the legislation will fail...probably good if it did. I still hope the industry will jump on the chance to integrate safety tech either way, though.
 
egnald said:
It's been nearly 30 years ago that President Reagan said that the 9 most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." Of course it was a joke, but then again as with most jokes, they come with a hint of truth behind them.
Click to expand...
Spot on!!
 
GaryMGg said:
Yea; it wasn't necessarily meant as the personal "you".
Click to expand...
I did not take it as directed towards me personally.

In regards to some of the other comments. The item that irks me the most is that they are using the numbers without any investigation. How many of those injuries occurred when the saw was being used properly and with all supplied guards that were feasible for the operation in place? I read about injuries where the accident occurred when reaching over the blade, but the blade guard was removed and not being used. If they mandated some monitoring that the guard be in place (or override initiated in case of application need) that would be far lesser cost to implement.

The other issue is they want this to expedite this and have it be effective in a few years. This means SawStop will likely be the only major player in the market initially. Regardless if the flesh sensing patent is public, there is still a significant engineering and manufacturing development effort required.
 
I hear the government's is looking at pants with zippers ----- .00001% keep catching their "boys" in the zipper. Buttons or Velcro only.
 
Sawstop is no longer owned by the lawyer/inventor that tried to force his technology on other manufacturers. Festool now owns it and takes what I see as a gentler approach. I saw somewhere that they were putting one of the patents in public domain. For myself a Sawstop is on my shortlist. Regardless of how careful you are it takes a split second for an accident. I've been using my Shopsmith table saw for over 40 years. A Sawstop saved a pen making friends hand. Also a plus that Woodcraft is selling them.
 
Last edited:
Gregf said:
Sawstop is no longer owned by the lawyer/inventor that tried to force his technology on other manufacturers. Festool now owns it and takes what I see as a gentler approach. I saw somewhere that they were putting one of the patents in public domain. For myself a Sawstop is on my shortlist. Regardless of how careful you are it takes a split second for an accident. I've been using my Shopsmith table saw for over 40 years. A Sawstop saved a pen making friends hand. Also a plus that Woodcraft is selling them.
Click to expand...
Can you tell us what your friend was doing that caused the safety to trigger?? What other safety features was he using at the time? Did he use a push stick? Did he have the blade guard on? Was he following tablesaw rules about not using miter with the fence and so on. Like to hear what caused it to trigger. Was he just careless and was not paying close attention what he was doing?
 
jttheclockman said:
Can you tell us what your friend was doing that caused the safety to trigger?? What other safety features was he using at the time? Did he use a push stick? Did he have the blade guard on? Was he following tablesaw rules about not using miter with the fence and so on. Like to hear what caused it to trigger. Was he just careless and was not paying close attention what he was doing?
Click to expand...
He was ripping with a push stick. No blade guard. Not sure exactly what happened, pulled the push stick and hos hand in. Something I could see happening to me.
 
Gregf said:
He was ripping with a push stick. No blade guard. Not sure exactly what happened, pulled the push stick and hos hand in. Something I could see happening to me.
Click to expand...
Well I see these small thin push sticks used alot even in videos https://www.bing.com/shop/productpage?q=POWERTEC+71029+Magnetic+Push+Stick+For+Table+Saw,+Router+Table,+Jointer+Applications,+11.5+Inch+Ergonomic+Design+W/Embedded+Magnets+In+Handle&productpage=true&pdppageoverlay=true&bgscenario=l2&originQuery=tablesaw+push+stick&overlayOfferIds=160601225888,160601479783,160606765691,160636598894,160604456953,162173697443,94592792318,126123198417&overlayId=160604456953&filters=PageType:"9"+scenario:"17"+gType:"12"+gId:"160604456953"+gGlobalOfferIds:"160604456953"&FORM=SHOPIC and I think they should be banned. There is not enough of hold down force applied to the board and if it starts to climb then it will throw your weight forward and you can be off balance and the opposing hand can slip into blade.

You should use push sticks that have a long saddle and the hand hole id high above the blade. these are simple to make as well as better investment if you buy them.

IMGP0311.JPG
 
Learned back in the 60s to repect machines while working in a R&D model shop. The most important thing in the shop is between your ears.
 
Almost hate to enter this part of the conversation, but I have used basic push sticks, which John refers to as the thin push sticks, and had issues. Kick-back without pawls being one of them. Have had bruises on arm and belly to show for it.

Kick-back is dangerous. But, when it comes to getting "pulled in" to a table saw blade (not specifically the post in this thread, have heard it before) it seems to defy physics a bit to me.

The blade rotates towards you and downward. You provide all the force toward the blade. The saw does not have the ability to pull you into it. That is why kick back hurts, it throws the wood at you. If something goes wrong cutting on a table saw and you continue to move towards the blade, it has to because you are pushing towards the blade with more force than you should be using.

Maybe your blade is dull. Maybe your saw is underpowered for the cut/wood you are using. Maybe there is an alignment issue, stress, stress in the wood or a catch on some part of the saw or table. But you are using too much forward force. You don't get pulled into a table saw. You push yourself into a table saw. Obviously unintentionally, but it is your method at fault.

If you feel the need to apply more force to get a piece through a table saw, you should hit that stop button and figure out what is wrong. We have likely all been guilty of forcing it through. But if that force results in a bind, slop, slip, or jumping over a catch the result is either kickback, in which the piece is suddenly gone and you are still moving forward or a sudden loss of the need for all of your force and you lunge toward the blade.

We should STOP and think "what is the worst thing that could happen" when using these tools and decide before it happens how we are going to either overcome it or respond to it.
 
Gregf said:
So a push stick like this could be a problem?View attachment 371900
Click to expand...
Yes they can and I hate those things. There is so little downward pressure on your stock as you push. I like the long saddle type weather it is a block of wood or has a handle cut out. I prefer the handle but like to keep the handle high above the blade. It also is above the fence so that does not get on the way of your hand as you push.
 
There's been a lot of hate on government, and a lot of references to 1984 and Atlas Shrugged. And a lot of reference to the fact that it's all about the money. But I'd like to at least point out some counter-examples. Take, for example, Neuromancer and Altered Carbon. In both cases, the lack of government oversight leads to a world that is run almost entirely by corporations with, at best, a puppet government that bows entirely to corporate interests. It's the opposite extreme of what we see in 1984, and it is just as scary, because the result is the same.

The big difference is that corporate propaganda (otherwise known as advertising) is much more effective than government propaganda. Tobacco companies knew for decades that their products are harmful, yet they continued to associate smoking with attractiveness, popularity, and good health. What changed? Government intervened.

It has recently come out that oil companies knew from their own internal research -- again, decades ago -- that their products would cause climate change. So regardless of whether you personally believe human-caused climate change is a thing, the oil companies believed it way back when, and they actively worked to discredit anyone and everything that pointed to their product causing a problem. Not to mention the many instances where oil companies have moved into an area, removed the oil, wrecked the local environment, caused all sorts of health issues, denied anything was their fault, and left the place in ruins.

Next, consider the gambling industry, which is so detrimental that, in many countries, gambling companies are severely restricted in their advertising. For example, in F1 racing, the Stake F1 team (named after its title sponser, Stake, an online casino) had to change its name and remove all Stake advertising from its car to be able to race in the Australian Grand Prix. Gambling is in every case designed to profit from the misfortune of others. Casinos are designed to keep people in. Alcohol is free to gamblers because it lowers inhibitions and impairs judgment. Ads for sports betting give the impression that if you are "smart," you can beat the system. One current ad has a bunch of guys at a barber shop using the fact that a player's mother will be attending a game as an indicator that the player will score above his average. It's easy money if you believe the ad.

And the gambling industry brings me to my last point, which I've seen multiple times in this thread. While reading the last paragraph, some of you were probably thinking something along the lines of "well it's your own fault if you lose your shirt in a casino." Except the casino who takes your money knows exactly what it's doing, knows it destroys lives, knows it tears families apart, knows it puts people on the street, and knows it creates addicts who will do anything for their fix. So it says "drink responsibly" and puts the gambling addiction helpline in tiny print at the bottom of its ads and then says "we warned you." The current politically correct term I'm talking about is "victim shaming." In this thread, it boils down to the outright claim that if you are hurt with a power tool, it is your own fault for being an idiot. Now don't come back to me claiming I don't think the user has any responsiblity for safety. The user absolutely does have that responsibility. But that responsibility does not rest solely with the user, especially when manufacturers know there is a problem they could solve but choose not to. And we are then trained to think anyone who was hurt is stupid, and they did it to themselves, etc.

So I've listed three huge industries that have knowingly and intentionally hurt innumerable lives because it's all about the money. Consider also the pharmeceutical (opiod epidemic), food (various food contamination issues), auto (VW's "dieselgate" or "emissiongate", various forced recalls), construction (polybutylene pipes), finance (sub-prime banking crisis), housing (large corporations buying up housing so they can jack up the rent and prevent individuals from owning their own homes) and many other industries that have knowingly harmed their customers. Now if you think tool manufacturers are any different, then you ought to think about who's been called stupid on this forum and ponder the saying "that's the pot calling the kettle black." Because time and again, industries of all kinds have shown that, without regulation and oversight, they will exploit their workers, suppliers, communities, environments, and customers in every way they can. With that in mind, you can thank your government for the following: 40-hour work week, overtime pay, worker's compensation, unions, your children not being worked to death in a coal mine, sausage made without rats or their droppings, safe food in your grocery store, clean water, medicine that doesn't kill you, and many other things. Is government perfect? No. Does it sometimes reach too far? CERTAINLY. But before you go crying "government overreach" and "big brother" and "police state," think about the corporate alternative (and this is history, not fiction):
  • You work when you are told to work
  • You receive no extra pay for long hours or unusually dangerous work
  • Workplace safety is nonexistent
  • You are paid poverty wages for a demanding job
  • You are forced to live in company-provided housing and shop at company-run stores that, conveniently, use up your entire paycheck
  • You can be fired at any time, for any reason
  • If you are hurt on the job, you lose your job and receive no compensation, even if it wasn't your fault
  • You get lots of family time because your six-year-old is working right next to you
Add to those these current corporate ills:
  • You can still be fired for almost any reason in many states, even if you've done nothing wrong
  • Your company can decide on a whim that it would rather pay someone in India 1/4 what it pays you to do the same job
  • You can be paid as much as 40% less because you are a woman, too old, too young, or anything other than white
  • You are prevented from forming or joining a union
  • You aren't guaranteed time to use the bathroom because it will affect your productivity
 
Last edited:
I'm on the verge (or well over it, perhaps) of ranting, but there's one other point I'd like to address. I've seen several posts here that say something along the lines of "what about other power tools," and "what about tool X, which is more dangerous than a table saw."

This is a good point. But I have to ask: how could you make a circular saw any safer, without just outlawing it so you have to use a different tool altogether? And if it's so unsafe, why shouldn't we outlaw it?

Cars are inherently unsafe. Before you ever get to user error, you are talking about putting a fragile sack of bones and meat into a 2,000 lb hunk of metal that can (in places) legally travel at 80 miles per hour; filling that hunk of metal with highly toxic, combustable, and even potentially explosive liquids; wrapping your hunk of metal in glass;. putting that hunk of metal on rubber air pillows with a somewhat tenuous grasp of the surfaces they sit on; and so on. Your hunk of metal is so complicated that average users cannot make their own repairs and cannot reliably judge whether the professionals they pay for maintenance/repairs do it properly. And THEN you start to factor in the many potential failings of a human driver, and you compound that by putting millions of other humans in similar hunks of glass-wrapped, explosive-filled, 2000-lb hunks of metal at the same time.

Safety has come a long way since the Model T, but you are still driving a 2,000-lb hunk of metal down the freeway at high speeds. Now I'm taking this to extremes for effect, but if we really want safe, why not go back to horse and buggy, or walking, or just stay home in a padded room altogether? That's easy: because it won't work. We live in the world we do. You mostly need a car in the modern world. Some people can do without, but many cannot.

All that was to say that the reason we don't have safe routers, circular saws, bandsaws, and so on is because there is a certain inherent level of danger to all of these products. Some of them can be made somewhat safer, but at some point can't be made any safer without ceasing to be usable. For example, you can evolve a circular saw into a track saw, but beyond that, what else can you do without rendering it unsuitable for purpose? Not to say that circular saws are currently as safe as they can be, but as with our 2,000-lb hunk of metal moving at 80 mph, there are limits. We ultimately have, and must have, a large disk of metal with sharp teeth spinning at thousands of RPMs that is designed for cutting material that can't readily be put through a table saw or mitre saw. The only truly safe thing to do would be to never use the circular saw, but if you choose to be a woodworker and for whatever reason aren't going to rely solely on hand tools, you'll probably find yourself needing a circular saw or track saw at some point. Not just wanting, but needing, because it's the better (and safer) tool for breaking down a sheet of plywood or 12-ft. board that exceeds your mitre saw's capacity into table-saw-manageable pieces.

So why not simply ban those tools or, on the other end of the spectrum, mandate the same measure of safety as in the table saw? Because we need those tools. Because they do not lend themselves to the same safety measures as the table saw. Because the technology may not be there yet, or may not even exist. Because sometimes, the safety measure cause the tool to cease being that tool.

All that said, why then should we be ok with all these safety regulations for the table saw? Well, because we can have these safety measures on the table saw. Because we have invented blade guards and riving knives and, dare I say it, flesh-sensing technology for the table saw. In the end, it is ridiculous to not have safety features on one product simply because a different product doesn't have them. Should we not have air bags in cars because bicycles don't have them? Now where the government comes into it is more the subject of my last post, so I won't get into it here, but I will just ask, if the government doesn't play some role, do you really think the market will do it on its own?

And finally, someone mentioned how the 40,000 table saw injuries each year represent only 0.01% of the population, and said that they didn't see that as a problem. That's the danger of percentages. It may only be 0.01% of the population, but it's still 40,000 people (with many more affected when you account for family and friends who also have to deal with the tragedy). That's a lot of people. Twice as many as the small town I grew up in. Would you be more outraged if everyone in Fulshear, Texas, population ~40,000 (pulled from a Google search), was hurt/killed? If you want to talk about prioritizing (or triage, if you will), I'll grant that maybe we could focus on something that's causing more than 40,000 injuries per year, but to not see 40,000 people losing fingures, hands, eyes, etc. as a problem is pretty callous in my opinion.
 
RunnerVince said:
I'm on the verge (or well over it, perhaps) of ranting, but there's one other point I'd like to address. I've seen several posts here that say something along the lines of "what about other power tools," and "what about tool X, which is more dangerous than a table saw."

This is a good point. But I have to ask: how could you make a circular saw any safer, without just outlawing it so you have to use a different tool altogether? And if it's so unsafe, why shouldn't we outlaw it?

Cars are inherently unsafe. Before you ever get to user error, you are talking about putting a fragile sack of bones and meat into a 2,000 lb hunk of metal that can (in places) legally travel at 80 miles per hour; filling that hunk of metal with highly toxic, combustable, and even potentially explosive liquids; wrapping your hunk of metal in glass;. putting that hunk of metal on rubber air pillows with a somewhat tenuous grasp of the surfaces they sit on; and so on. Your hunk of metal is so complicated that average users cannot make their own repairs and cannot reliably judge whether the professionals they pay for maintenance/repairs do it properly. And THEN you start to factor in the many potential failings of a human driver, and you compound that by putting millions of other humans in similar hunks of glass-wrapped, explosive-filled, 2000-lb hunks of metal at the same time.

Safety has come a long way since the Model T, but you are still driving a 2,000-lb hunk of metal down the freeway at high speeds. Now I'm taking this to extremes for effect, but if we really want safe, why not go back to horse and buggy, or walking, or just stay home in a padded room altogether? That's easy: because it won't work. We live in the world we do. You mostly need a car in the modern world. Some people can do without, but many cannot.

All that was to say that the reason we don't have safe routers, circular saws, bandsaws, and so on is because there is a certain inherent level of danger to all of these products. Some of them can be made somewhat safer, but at some point can't be made any safer without ceasing to be usable. For example, you can evolve a circular saw into a track saw, but beyond that, what else can you do without rendering it unsuitable for purpose? Not to say that circular saws are currently as safe as they can be, but as with our 2,000-lb hunk of metal moving at 80 mph, there are limits. We ultimately have, and must have, a large disk of metal with sharp teeth spinning at thousands of RPMs that is designed for cutting material that can't readily be put through a table saw or mitre saw. The only truly safe thing to do would be to never use the circular saw, but if you choose to be a woodworker and for whatever reason aren't going to rely solely on hand tools, you'll probably find yourself needing a circular saw or track saw at some point. Not just wanting, but needing, because it's the better (and safer) tool for breaking down a sheet of plywood or 12-ft. board that exceeds your mitre saw's capacity into table-saw-manageable pieces.

So why not simply ban those tools or, on the other end of the spectrum, mandate the same measure of safety as in the table saw? Because we need those tools. Because they do not lend themselves to the same safety measures as the table saw. Because the technology may not be there yet, or may not even exist. Because sometimes, the safety measure cause the tool to cease being that tool.

All that said, why then should we be ok with all these safety regulations for the table saw? Well, because we can have these safety measures on the table saw. Because we have invented blade guards and riving knives and, dare I say it, flesh-sensing technology for the table saw. In the end, it is ridiculous to not have safety features on one product simply because a different product doesn't have them. Should we not have air bags in cars because bicycles don't have them? Now where the government comes into it is more the subject of my last post, so I won't get into it here, but I will just ask, if the government doesn't play some role, do you really think the market will do it on its own?

And finally, someone mentioned how the 40,000 table saw injuries each year represent only 0.01% of the population, and said that they didn't see that as a problem. That's the danger of percentages. It may only be 0.01% of the population, but it's still 40,000 people (with many more affected when you account for family and friends who also have to deal with the tragedy). That's a lot of people. Twice as many as the small town I grew up in. Would you be more outraged if everyone in Fulshear, Texas, population ~40,000 (pulled from a Google search), was hurt/killed? If you want to talk about prioritizing (or triage, if you will), I'll grant that maybe we could focus on something that's causing more than 40,000 injuries per year, but to not see 40,000 people losing fingures, hands, eyes, etc. as a problem is pretty callous in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Now here we go and because I am one who equates other tools to injuries I will counteract your argument. You combined alot of arguments into the same topic but you can not do that. No one is arguing the installment of the SS safety device on tablesaws. It is how and who and why . Remember when SS invented this device, you have to go back to their fight to protect their invention. and the money spent to do this. The extreme power to implement this device with all other manufacturers of tablesaw did not sit well. If SS really cared about safety then why not make it affordable and open to other ideas. IT WAS and IS A MONEY GRAB plain and simple Always has been and still is. Who is to say that this technology could not have been advanced far and beyond what it is today if it was an open ended idea and not tied to greed. probably by today we could have tools that incorporate this technology on routers, circular saws, bandsaws . With todays miniaturization of circuit boards, why not. Bosch proved there is a better method and cheaper method. But weren't allowed to use it here in the US. Competition makes things cheaper and more available and not cornered by one company. My other point is we keep hearing about tablesaw injuries and amputations of fingers. What is the cause for them. Yes SS can save some of these but will that make us more complacent and even lazier than we are. Does this laziness now carry over into use of other tools? Who is to say. As I pointed out. we make our own choices and it is our right. What is available to the public is what we have to choose from. When what we do or use affects other lives than your own then regulations and Gov outreach is needed. I believe that the biggest argument is how this is playing out and who the players are. Someone said that Festool as bought the rights so just maybe this will be the open door that others can step through and expand the technology if allowed. That to me is the crux of the discussion, not weather it is a good idea to put on tablesaws. The market will then take its course and work these into the que and phase out older technology as it normally does. We see this in everything we buy. Do not demand on this so and so date all things must change. The Gov. is seeing this with Battery operated cars. It doesn't work. Natural progression is the way it should be.
 
You can't fix stupid............. wearing belts and suspenders to keep you from tripping over you falling pants mandated by a a legislative body that never learned to dress themselves never works. Natural selection, caveat emptor, laissez-faire makes the best pair of pants.
calabrese55
 
calabrese55 said:
You can't fix stupid............. wearing belts and suspenders to keep you from tripping over you falling pants mandated by a a legislative body that never learned to dress themselves never works.
Click to expand...
I guess if you're gonna call any person injured by a tool stupid, then sure, you can't fix stupid.
Natural selection, caveat emptor, laissez-faire makes the best pair of pants.
Click to expand...
I'll agree with that if we can add "if you're rich" at the end of the sentence. As for natural selection, etc., there's nothing "natural" about a large corporation (or overreaching government, for that matter) putting its thumb on the scale. For laissez-faire to work, there must be a level playing field among workers, companies, and customers, which is not and has never been the case. Caveat emptor is great until you have to make a decision on a product without any way of truly judging that product. Do you say "caveat emptor" to the consumer who bought a Ford Explorer with tires Ford and Firestone knew were faulty but still put on their vehicles? What about to the person who bought tainted beef patties from from a major grocery chain?

The fact is that we live in a world where it's often impossible for us to make truly informed buying decisions because we have no visibility into how our products are made, and even when that information is available, many people lack the deep knowledge necessary to interpret it. To make a truly informed decision on a car, for example, you need expertise in several types of engineering, materials science, electronics, computer programming, welding, and fabrication, all with with specific expertise as relates to automobiles. Do you know anyone with all that expertise? So all we can do is go by reputation, reviews, test drives, etc., none of which does any good if the manufacturer knows about a problem but releases a car anyway.

Look, I know I'm not going to change your mind here. I can't say anyone has changed mine, although there have been some great points from all sides, and I look at a few things differently now. I'm just saying it's not right to put all this blame on us as consumers when half the time you can't even get a decent user manual for the things we buy and when we can't reliably know where manufacturers have cut corners until a problem surfaces and people are hurt/killed.
 
jttheclockman said:
Now here we go and because I am one who equates other tools to injuries I will counteract your argument. You combined alot of arguments into the same topic but you can not do that. No one is arguing the installment of the SS safety device on tablesaws. It is how and who and why . Remember when SS invented this device, you have to go back to their fight to protect their invention. and the money spent to do this. The extreme power to implement this device with all other manufacturers of tablesaw did not sit well. If SS really cared about safety then why not make it affordable and open to other ideas. IT WAS and IS A MONEY GRAB plain and simple Always has been and still is. Who is to say that this technology could not have been advanced far and beyond what it is today if it was an open ended idea and not tied to greed. probably by today we could have tools that incorporate this technology on routers, circular saws, bandsaws . With todays miniaturization of circuit boards, why not. Bosch proved there is a better method and cheaper method. But weren't allowed to use it here in the US. Competition makes things cheaper and more available and not cornered by one company. My other point is we keep hearing about tablesaw injuries and amputations of fingers. What is the cause for them. Yes SS can save some of these but will that make us more complacent and even lazier than we are. Does this laziness now carry over into use of other tools? Who is to say. As I pointed out. we make our own choices and it is our right. What is available to the public is what we have to choose from. When what we do or use affects other lives than your own then regulations and Gov outreach is needed. I believe that the biggest argument is how this is playing out and who the players are. Someone said that Festool as bought the rights so just maybe this will be the open door that others can step through and expand the technology if allowed. That to me is the crux of the discussion, not weather it is a good idea to put on tablesaws. The market will then take its course and work these into the que and phase out older technology as it normally does. We see this in everything we buy. Do not demand on this so and so date all things must change. The Gov. is seeing this with Battery operated cars. It doesn't work. Natural progression is the way it should be.
Click to expand...
All great points. The all-around greed has hurt us as consumers. I think there is potential for safety (or "safety") to make us complacent. Just look at the accidents caused by people trusting the "self-driving" features of some modern vehicles. In previous posts, you've mentioned the importance of education, and I agree there, but getting that education can be difficult these days, when many haven't grown up around these tools, you can't know who on the internet to trust, and you're a better person than I am if you can understand half these user manuals. That needs to be acknowledged.

The only other thing I'd to add is that we should be a lot more careful about the use of terms like "lazy" and (from other's posts) "stupid" and "idiot." Sometimes those are really the root cause, but not always, and often "user error" in its many guises is not the sole factor. We do ourselves a disservice when we assign all accidents to stupid lazy people. When we think of everyone else as stupid, we stop evaluating our own actions and think we can do wrong. Also, we ascribe the entire blame to one party, when there's ample blame to go around. If only stupid people lose fingers on a table saw, why would any manufacturer need to put safety features on their saws? No one thinks of themselves as stupid, so obviously the old traditional saw is fine. We don't need to pay extra money for a SS because we're not suckers, right?
 
RunnerVince said:
I'm on the verge (or well over it, perhaps) of ranting, but there's one other point I'd like to address. I've seen several posts here that say something along the lines of "what about other power tools," and "what about tool X, which is more dangerous than a table saw."

This is a good point. But I have to ask: how could you make a circular saw any safer, without just outlawing it so you have to use a different tool altogether? And if it's so unsafe, why shouldn't we outlaw it?

Cars are inherently unsafe. Before you ever get to user error, you are talking about putting a fragile sack of bones and meat into a 2,000 lb hunk of metal that can (in places) legally travel at 80 miles per hour; filling that hunk of metal with highly toxic, combustable, and even potentially explosive liquids; wrapping your hunk of metal in glass;. putting that hunk of metal on rubber air pillows with a somewhat tenuous grasp of the surfaces they sit on; and so on. Your hunk of metal is so complicated that average users cannot make their own repairs and cannot reliably judge whether the professionals they pay for maintenance/repairs do it properly. And THEN you start to factor in the many potential failings of a human driver, and you compound that by putting millions of other humans in similar hunks of glass-wrapped, explosive-filled, 2000-lb hunks of metal at the same time.

Safety has come a long way since the Model T, but you are still driving a 2,000-lb hunk of metal down the freeway at high speeds. Now I'm taking this to extremes for effect, but if we really want safe, why not go back to horse and buggy, or walking, or just stay home in a padded room altogether? That's easy: because it won't work. We live in the world we do. You mostly need a car in the modern world. Some people can do without, but many cannot.

All that was to say that the reason we don't have safe routers, circular saws, bandsaws, and so on is because there is a certain inherent level of danger to all of these products. Some of them can be made somewhat safer, but at some point can't be made any safer without ceasing to be usable. For example, you can evolve a circular saw into a track saw, but beyond that, what else can you do without rendering it unsuitable for purpose? Not to say that circular saws are currently as safe as they can be, but as with our 2,000-lb hunk of metal moving at 80 mph, there are limits. We ultimately have, and must have, a large disk of metal with sharp teeth spinning at thousands of RPMs that is designed for cutting material that can't readily be put through a table saw or mitre saw. The only truly safe thing to do would be to never use the circular saw, but if you choose to be a woodworker and for whatever reason aren't going to rely solely on hand tools, you'll probably find yourself needing a circular saw or track saw at some point. Not just wanting, but needing, because it's the better (and safer) tool for breaking down a sheet of plywood or 12-ft. board that exceeds your mitre saw's capacity into table-saw-manageable pieces.

So why not simply ban those tools or, on the other end of the spectrum, mandate the same measure of safety as in the table saw? Because we need those tools. Because they do not lend themselves to the same safety measures as the table saw. Because the technology may not be there yet, or may not even exist. Because sometimes, the safety measure cause the tool to cease being that tool.

All that said, why then should we be ok with all these safety regulations for the table saw? Well, because we can have these safety measures on the table saw. Because we have invented blade guards and riving knives and, dare I say it, flesh-sensing technology for the table saw. In the end, it is ridiculous to not have safety features on one product simply because a different product doesn't have them. Should we not have air bags in cars because bicycles don't have them? Now where the government comes into it is more the subject of my last post, so I won't get into it here, but I will just ask, if the government doesn't play some role, do you really think the market will do it on its own?

And finally, someone mentioned how the 40,000 table saw injuries each year represent only 0.01% of the population, and said that they didn't see that as a problem. That's the danger of percentages. It may only be 0.01% of the population, but it's still 40,000 people (with many more affected when you account for family and friends who also have to deal with the tragedy). That's a lot of people. Twice as many as the small town I grew up in. Would you be more outraged if everyone in Fulshear, Texas, population ~40,000 (pulled from a Google search), was hurt/killed? If you want to talk about prioritizing (or triage, if you will), I'll grant that maybe we could focus on something that's causing more than 40,000 injuries per year, but to not see 40,000 people losing fingures, hands, eyes, etc. as a problem is pretty callous in my opinion.
Click to expand...
We live in a broken world filled and lead by broken people for which I am one. We need small government and we need private enterprise (2 more broke organizations) - Russian, Laos, N Korea, China etc. have an interesting alternative.. Despite doctor's smoking back in the day, no one was going to tell me that inhaling smoke was good for me - same for pot, alcohol, crappy food. It is too easy to ignore one's common sense and succumb to the approval of an authority to indulge oneself.
 
100% on the personal decision theme. Unfortunately the CPSC can madate things with no recourse. Look at the silly crap on lawn mowers now. I do reject that there is a money grab by the current patent holder. When or if regulations are in place, they are putting the patent in public domain.

And I wore a MC helmet, and buckled my seat belt before it was mandatory.
 
RunnerVince said:
All great points. The all-around greed has hurt us as consumers. I think there is potential for safety (or "safety") to make us complacent. Just look at the accidents caused by people trusting the "self-driving" features of some modern vehicles. In previous posts, you've mentioned the importance of education, and I agree there, but getting that education can be difficult these days, when many haven't grown up around these tools, you can't know who on the internet to trust, and you're a better person than I am if you can understand half these user manuals. That needs to be acknowledged.

The only other thing I'd to add is that we should be a lot more careful about the use of terms like "lazy" and (from other's posts) "stupid" and "idiot." Sometimes those are really the root cause, but not always, and often "user error" in its many guises is not the sole factor. We do ourselves a disservice when we assign all accidents to stupid lazy people. When we think of everyone else as stupid, we stop evaluating our own actions and think we can do wrong. Also, we ascribe the entire blame to one party, when there's ample blame to go around. If only stupid people lose fingers on a table saw, why would any manufacturer need to put safety features on their saws? No one thinks of themselves as stupid, so obviously the old traditional saw is fine. We don't need to pay extra money for a SS because we're not suckers, right?
Click to expand...
If you do not like the word "LAZY", how about "Complacent" I do not think getting educated is at all difficult these days. In fact there is so many more ways to learn trades these days than yesteryears. I always believe you get out what you put in. You go about things half way that is as far as your knowledge will go. As always is the case, not one person alone can teach you all you need to know about one subject. But what it should do is open doors to want to learn more. As we all say here many times over, there is more than one way to do things and they are not all wrong or not all right. Some people just do not have the ability to work with their hands but they think they can because they saw some video or I can relate going back to Norm Abrams show. He showed many many facets of woodworking and many times he did things that were unsafe such as operate a tablesaw without a blade guard or splitter and other things. But his show was such a hit because it opened people's eyes to creating things with their hands and seeing all the new tools and gadgets. But you can only show so much in a half hour or hour long show. Again I relate back to our little forum here and all the newbies that join. Not one person here has any idea what the ability or knowledge of the person who is asking questions. Then the OP gets mad at people trying to help when they ask for more info. I seen it so many times here. Or you use a word they do not like and comeback with all kinds of rude remarks. I say it many many times here and this gets people anger up but it is so true when questions get asked over and over. Those of us who answer keep cutting our answers shorter and shorter and when I say to OP do a search it is like the world came to an end. That is what I call lazy. being many questions get asked many times over it behooves one to do a search after they get some answers because there are things that just are not said or relayed that may have been said prior when the same question came up. I know many times when answering questions I probably left out simple things because in my mind I know them but forget to pass it on because to me they maybe common sense. It is human nature.

Yes there is always more than one person or company to lay blame on when things do not go well. But you need to learn from mistakes. I learned many of my woodworking skills from my Dad as I grew up and thank him everyday I touch a tool. Technology today is getting smater and smarter and it is making us dumber. If you do not believe me just look at your example of the self driving cars. Enough said. AI is going to be a huge problem.
 
jttheclockman said:
If you do not like the word "LAZY", how about "Complacent"
Click to expand...
Complacent is a much better word.

I agree that education is in some ways better, and certainly easier to access. However, it's also much easier to be misled, especially if you're new to something, even if you're doing your due diligence. In any subject area, there are five types of knowledge:
  1. What you know you know
  2. What you know you don't know
  3. What you don't know you know
  4. What you don't know you don't know
  5. What you think you know
When you're knew to something, you're living in types 2-5. Type 1 is in the next town over. There are so many sources of information, and you lack the experience to make good judgments about a given source.
 
jttheclockman said:
Now here we go and because I am one who equates other tools to injuries I will counteract your argument. You combined alot of arguments into the same topic but you can not do that. No one is arguing the installment of the SS safety device on tablesaws. It is how and who and why . Remember when SS invented this device, you have to go back to their fight to protect their invention. and the money spent to do this. The extreme power to implement this device with all other manufacturers of tablesaw did not sit well. If SS really cared about safety then why not make it affordable and open to other ideas. IT WAS and IS A MONEY GRAB plain and simple Always has been and still is. Who is to say that this technology could not have been advanced far and beyond what it is today if it was an open ended idea and not tied to greed. probably by today we could have tools that incorporate this technology on routers, circular saws, bandsaws . With todays miniaturization of circuit boards, why not. Bosch proved there is a better method and cheaper method. But weren't allowed to use it here in the US. Competition makes things cheaper and more available and not cornered by one company. My other point is we keep hearing about tablesaw injuries and amputations of fingers. What is the cause for them. Yes SS can save some of these but will that make us more complacent and even lazier than we are. Does this laziness now carry over into use of other tools? Who is to say. As I pointed out. we make our own choices and it is our right. What is available to the public is what we have to choose from. When what we do or use affects other lives than your own then regulations and Gov outreach is needed. I believe that the biggest argument is how this is playing out and who the players are. Someone said that Festool as bought the rights so just maybe this will be the open door that others can step through and expand the technology if allowed. That to me is the crux of the discussion, not weather it is a good idea to put on tablesaws. The market will then take its course and work these into the que and phase out older technology as it normally does. We see this in everything we buy. Do not demand on this so and so date all things must change. The Gov. is seeing this with Battery operated cars. It doesn't work. Natural progression is the way it should be.
Click to expand...
This was a money grab when SS was owned by the lawyer that invented it. He lobbied for the requirement of all table saws using his technology. He filed the patent lawsuit against Bosch that prevented them from using their method. The current owner the owners of Festool has stated if the CSPC mandates a table saw safety they will put the primary patent in public domain.
i would bet if approached to license the technology they would be more reasonable than the original inventor. I wouldn't have considered buying SS from him based on his tactic.
 
Last edited:
Gregf said:
100% on the personal decision theme. Unfortunately the CPSC can madate things with no recourse. Look at the silly crap on lawn mowers now. I do reject that there is a money grab by the current patent holder. When or if regulations are in place, they are putting the patent in public domain.

And I wore a MC helmet, and buckled my seat belt before it was mandatory.
Click to expand...

Wait, what's on lawn mowers now?
 
Gregf said:
This was a money grab when SS was owned by the lawyer that invented it. He lobbied for the requirement of all table saws using his technology. He filed the patent lawsuit against Bosch that prevented them from using their method. The current owner the owners of Festool has stated if the CSPC mandates a table saw safety they will put the primary patent in public domain.
i would bet if approached to license the technology they would be more reasonable than the original inventor. I wouldn't have considered buying SS from him based on his tactic.
Click to expand...
Yeah...the money grab was beyond the pale. Egregious move, utterly greedy.

I think the patents should be put into the public domain regardless. Its time the market was free to innovate safety features, laws or no laws.
 
My Husky tractor has the reverse lockout- shuts off if no engaged and I try to back up. However, I found this past week that the cutoff switch under the seat doesn't work. Need to check it and replace if needed. A lady in a neighboring county was thrown from her riding mower. It sliced her buttocks and she left a trail of blood to the house to call 911. Her mower was an older model without the safety switch.
I have to agree with egnald: common sense is much more effective than all the safety devices.
 
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom