# Sawstop (i know , i know) not again!



## cblak (Mar 16, 2012)

Ok, I have come to realize that some people have VERY strong opinions about this topic. I have also realized that there seems to be a bit of miscommunication between the two sides. If I have my way i will never buy anything this company has to offer. It is quite a shame, because the idea of not cutting off my hand sounds quite appealing. I think most, if not all of us, agree that this is a great invention. 
The problem is that one side thinks the government should control everything in our lives and the other wants the freedom of cutting off his own fingers if he so chooses. Its hard not to bring politics into this because thats what this argument is all about! Am i right or am i looking at this all wrong? I think its the way Sawstop has gone about it, that has made most of us (at least on this side of the fence)upset. 
The man who invented it, Mr. Gass, (if i'm not mistaking) is a patent attorney, so he secured all the patents. He then presented this new technology to all the major saw manufactures and demands an outrageous percentage of their profits for permission to use it. When EVERY manufacturer turned him down he decided to start his own company and essentially do his best to make it law that everyone of US has to buy from him. No other company offers this technology because Mr. Gass threatens to sue everyone that comes up with a similar technology. 
Ok, I can appreciate a man trying to protect his own patents and even make a few bucks off a great idea. What I don't appreciate is this man essentially coming into MY shop and telling me that i'm not capable of making my own decisions and that i could be fined if i don't agree with HIS safety requirements!
I have been a professional cabinetmaker for 8 years and have seen my fair share of accidents. Every accident I have witnessed on a table saw was due to blatant misuse or a "kick back" of some sort. So, those of you who advocate for this man and for his reasoning, go out and buy your Sawstop. In a few years when some other guy comes up with an anti-kickback saw , don't complain when you HAVE to buy another saw. 
Our interests in woodworking is what brought us all together. Don't let something like this divide us. If you want a particular tool, get it. If you don't, don't! Lets get out there and build something!


----------



## RandyM68 (Jan 20, 2012)

A lot of people with swallow an endless amount of crap, if it is supposed to protect them. They tell themselves that it is okay. If we save one single life, it is worth it. No it's not.The one thing on earth that is over-abundant, is people. Six billion is more than enough. We try to make sure that the stupidest among us survive to reproduce. Every tall building with roof access, has to have an unclimbable fence to keep idiots from falling off. Smart people stay back away from the edge, they don't even need a warning. A waist high hand rail is plenty, to make sure no one accidently steps off the edge. However, we have to erect a 12 foot fence with barbed wire, and morons still fall off. Personally, I would put up a diving board and stage a competition. Pay your entry fee and take your turn. The best, most stylish dive wins the pot, land in the dumpster for bonus points. Just name your next of kin so I can make out the check. We could put it on Fox and have viewers call in and vote. We won't even have auditions, everyone can play. The more people that play, the bigger the pot gets, enticing more idiots to buy a ticket. Just like the lottery. Steve Gass took a differenent approach. He convinced you that you are all stupid, and you need to but a "fence" from him, to keep you safe from yourself. His way, everyone feels *safe*, we have more idiots than ever before, and he gets rich. My way, we have a great new TV show, a steadily diminishing surplus of morons, and I get rich. In case you think I'm joking, well, not so much. Mail me 20 bucks right now, and I'll put you at the head of the line.


----------



## DocSavage45 (Aug 14, 2010)

The people who really find saw stops valuable are people who have seen the other side. I just cannot afford one? Economics is the world's current dividing line?

One trip to the hospital? The pain of the injury and the bills? The saw stop would probably be considered worth the cost, after this kind of experience.

At present I just "HAVE TO" be deliberate around sharp, powerful tools.


----------



## doncutlip (Aug 30, 2008)

Yes there are idiots out there, and history has shown that every time you make something idiot proof, they improve the idiot. As to the question at hand, while in general I favor personal freedom over regulation, is this a case a bit like seat belts in cars?


----------



## a1Jim (Aug 9, 2008)

I guess some folks need to keep addressing this subject over and over but IMO people who are for it and can afford A SS will buy one and those people who think their being forced into something and that the extra safety is not necessary won't. end of story


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

+1 Jim….


----------



## RandyM68 (Jan 20, 2012)

It is exactly like seat belts. The only reason I wear one is because I have to talk to cops when I don't. Cars are safer if you are wearing a seatbelt in a crash. I totally agree. Saw stops are much safer when you stick your finger in it. I also agree with that. The difference is my table saw will never come come out of nowhere and crash into my finger. That's all on me. I don't need the government to protect me from myself. If I am unable to do that I should die before I have more kids. They'll probably be stupid too.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 21, 2009)

I usually stay out of this fight.

I always wear my seat belt, always did before and don't need no law. My choice and choose to do it.

Same thing with SS, should be my choice. I also don't like the cost it adds to table saws. Could put them out of reach to some. That is wrong.

Government want's to mandate it then they should subsidize the cost, net zero increase to consumers. But yeah I know we'd be paying anyway.

I do have a concern with saws that have it and people that use them, could lead to or amplify complacency. Not good.


----------



## Fuzzy (Jun 25, 2007)

The only part of the original post I have concern with is the validity of the events at that meeting with the industry giants. Yes, he did present them with the opportunity to license his device … I'm not sure what the royalty request was, so I can't opine as to whether it was fair or not … the "industry" unanimously shut him out, standing in solidarity against his device. Then, and only then did he design a great saw around the device and bring it to market.

Now … if he offered it to the industry and they rejected it on merit … that's one thing … BUT … it appears they rejected it based on the fact that it might cost them a few $$$$ to implement it … and, for THAT they should be ashamed. They thought they could ignore him and he would just go away … little did they know just who/what they were dealing with, and now, it's coming back to bite them. I think the recent lawsuit was a joke … BUT … even if the operator was an idiot (he is) the device would have reduced or eliminated his injury, and Makita would be bragging about how they adopted this wonderful technology, saving this man's career and his ability to earn a living. Mr. Gass didn't file this lawsuit … he only testified that he made the technology available and demonstrated it to Makita, and that they rejected it. The jury decided that since Makita was aware that the technology existed that they should have implemented it or developed something similar on their own.

Now, there is little doubt that greed is involved in this whole debate … but just who is the greedy party ??? That, you will have to decide on your own.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

The way I figure it saw stop has saved more hot dogs than fingers.


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

"The problem is that one side thinks the government should control everything in our lives "

That's peculiar.

I know lots of people on all sides of the political spectrum, but not a SINGLE ONE who believes that.

It's hard to preach peace, and then lob grenades, isn't it ?


----------



## ssnvet (Jan 10, 2012)

There's a fatal flaw in the plan to make a mint by getting the gub'ment to require SS….

The gub'ment moves at the speed of a snail and patents expire in 7 years.

SS has been around for quite a while now, and it will be available for a modest upcharge in just a few more years.

It's quite interesting to read up on the history of patent law. If I understand correctly, many of the founding fathers were dead set against it, and the power to issue patents was ascribed to the Federal gub'ment as part of a compromise.

The system has become broken in a bad way and the patent trolls and lawyers are a huge impediment to many advances in technology.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

ssnvet:

From my internet searches a patent is good for 20 years, not 7.

http://www.business-analysis-made-easy.com/How-Long-Is-A-Patent-Good-For.html


----------



## ssnvet (Jan 10, 2012)

I got that number from a program that talked about patented drugs… perhaps that is different, or perhaps they were talking about extensions….

If it's twenty years, I guess we'll have to wait a little longer then….. :^)


----------



## nailbanger2 (Oct 17, 2009)

The issue here is not Gass, nor Osorio, but our courts and gov't. Please read this for details on the case, and notice two things: Osorio had never operated a tablesaw, and he removed two safety features, one of which I don't think any of us would ever operate without.

http://www.jacksonkelly.com/jk/pdf/law360%20products%20liability%20nov.%202011%20guest%20column,%20floyd%20and%20hart.pdf


----------



## irish620 (Jan 30, 2012)

I thought what made America great was our ability to drive innovation and competition ? *Let someone else come up with a new or alternative away to stop a spinning blade*. Patents protect intellectual property, but it's really only those who have the money to protect that patent who prevail. Laws are made for the common people , not the elected officials or lawyers who create and pass them.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 21, 2009)

Fuzzy, there''s another variable in the equation, liability insurance, which I suspect adds cost to every SS not just the device.

Add a safety device, it fails, you get injured, guess what, manufacturer gets sued. Electronics fail. The more of them out there, the better the odds that one is going to fail at the wrong time. Bet lawyers are chomping at the bit waiting.

Could be one of the reasons all the manufacturers didn't want it. That has merit, risking getting sued if the device failed. We don't know.

So design an interlock and if the device doesn't pass diagnostics, saw won't turn on. More cost. And even that wouldn't be 100% so more liability. And that would tick me off royally if a device I didn't want in the first place prevented me from using my saw. And then I'd have to pay to get it fixed because I doubt it would come with a lifetime warranty. Does SS provide that?

So, the device adds cost, the liability insurance to cover it adds cost. I don't want to pay it. Period. Should be my choice. *No* one elses.

And who does it cost? Not the manufacture. We pay it.


----------



## RobWoodCutter (Jul 22, 2009)

I have read many of the dozens of post on SS that seem to extend to hundreds of postes with some folks being for, some against, some down the middle of the road.

For the record, I don't have a SS, I have a PM2000.

But just for the sake of a discussion, let's just for minute remove the "gass" from the disussion.

Let suppose that NASA had developed this flesh sensing technology for the Astronauts to use on the space station, as cutting off a finger in space is not exactly something that easily fixed in orbit. Now let's also say that the Consumer product agency and OSHA decided that this was a great safety feature and that all table saws made after a certain date was required to have one and the technology was not patented and could be freely used by any manufacturer.

1) Would you still be so adamently opposed to this technology being mandated by law?
2) Would you go out and replace your current tablesaw with one?

Rob


----------



## Viking (Aug 26, 2009)

If the government forces this " technology" on all manufactures you won't find any more low end table saws available now for hobby woodworkers. Table saws will start at $1500+. If this creeps into table saws, what's next? Band saws, planers, jointers, drill presses, sanders. A slippery slope to be sure.

I whacked my finger with a hammer a couple of times in my life. Is Hammer Stop next? Where does it end? Will we not be allowed to work wood unless we have a Scott Air Pak on?

My 2 cents worth.


----------



## Viking (Aug 26, 2009)

Rob;

1. Yes!

2. No!

I am solely responsible for safety in my shop.

Randy;

Seat belts are not the same. There is not some unknown person coming out of nowhere, ripping off my guards, and jamming my hand into my table saw blade.


----------



## davidmicraig (Nov 21, 2009)

I think I am beginning to understand the frustration that Gandhi felt when he taught India how to use peaceful means to gain independence from the British only to watch them kill each other afterwards


----------



## GPM (Aug 26, 2010)

Having worked on all sides of these things I can tell you what you may already know - this issue is vastly complicated. There is not an explanation that boils down to a single phrase. It is like trying to pinpoint the cause of poverty. There are many things that are interconnected that make up the total picture.

The guy who invented the saw stop clearly is clever and it is a good idea and he took measures to protect himself. However, none of us knows what he presented to the manufacturers and what he asked from them. It is anyone's guess what happened. They may have decided that the market wouldn't support the added cost. These devices are not cheap. And the replacement pack after it triggers is also expensive. (We all know that the price is nothing compared to losing a digit but that is not how the manufacturers view it)

As for the government, there is always bad and good. In a perfect world people would choose to wear a motorcycle helmet or seat belt or not. However the sheer number of needless head trauma and automobile accident deaths demands consideration of mandatory protection. It is always a balance. I used to roof houses before fall arrest equipment, etc. I would have gladly utilized a harness if they existed at the time. Grounding of power tools was a good thing. Ladders in holes deeper than six feet are a good idea. I don't know if the saw stop falls into this category or not.

For the manufacturers and consumers it might be best if it was offered as an option. This way it can be utilized in schools or factories or wherever accidents are more likely. If a guy wants to run without it that is his choice. If I could get one for free I would take it. It always makes me nervous (as it should) when that blade is spinning knowing the power behind it. I know several 4 fingered carpenters. And these guys are not even close to being careless. It is the same healthy fear I have when I am running a chain saw. Many of these now have kickback brakes on them.

So I vote that the manufacturers offer some version as an option. If the saw stop guy has the patent wrapped up tight as a drum then they are going to have to deal with him but depending upon his life situation I am sure they can give him a reasonable royalty for his ingenious invention. Fair is fair.


----------



## RobWoodCutter (Jul 22, 2009)

"If the government forces this " technology" on all manufactures you won't find any more low end table saws available now for hobby woodworkers. Table saws will start at $1500+. If this creeps into table saws, what's next? Band saws, planers, jointers, drill presses, sanders. A slippery slope to be sure"- Viking

Unfortunately, GASS already has patents for many of the other tools you listed, if the TS law goes into effect, the other tools will follow very quickly to market.
Rob


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

If I want to cut off my fingers, and use them as hot dogs, that's my choice.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 21, 2009)

Rob,

1) No I would not be opposed if it didn't add cost for as long as I own the saw. Meaning if it fails in any way no charge to fix it and if it takes out a blade due to any failure the blade is also replaced at no charge. Yes I would be opposed if it adds cost initially or in the future. (Costs not including if it did it doing what it is supposed to do.)
2) Nope. No way.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 21, 2009)

Rick, yep that is one of my concerns too, pricing out of peoples reach.


----------



## Gator (May 2, 2008)

Is anyone else getting tired of hearing about this…over…and over… and over…. big mean government .. what ever gave you the illusion they could be trusted to do the right thing ?
You know that guy that invented that little coffee cup band so you don't burn your fingers on a hot take out coffee.. I think he is in kahoots with gass too … lets stop using them…

Hey .. how about them Red Sox… !!!!

Gator


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 21, 2009)

Brewers!


----------



## Viking (Aug 26, 2009)

Rob;

Then it is obvious, IMO, that we woodworkers need to support the woodworking equipment industry to stand firm against Gass to stop this now. If someone wants to have the extra measure of protection for your hot dogs that Saw Stop provides, that should be an individual's decision and not mandated by an administration that thinks it knows better than the rest of us. If I screw up and perform an unsafe act, that is on my shoulders to bear the results.

When I was a kid I regularly ran with scissors, ate hot dogs, and rode a bicycle without a helmet. I did install seat belts in my 57 Chevy though and have NEVER endangered my hot dogs by using them as push sticks. ;-)


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

I don't have a SawStop. I wish I could afford one. 
It seems to me the premium between a SawStop Pro Cabinet saw and a other top line cabinet saws is not so great that I would hesitate to buy one if I was in that market.

The government mandates all kinds of crap. What makes this any different?
Electricity is going up and will go up dramatically if all the mandates that are imposed on the power industries are implemented. Mandates are nothing new.

Unless the Supreme court rules it unconstitutional, Obama Care is going to mandate we all buy health insutance, but conveniently after the next election. So there is nothing new about the government mandating private citizens buy particular goods or services.

My understanding of the reason other manufacturers did not buy the liscense to use the SawStop technology was not necessarily because the price was too high, but because of the amount of market they would have to abandon due to liability issues.

i.e How do you sell a line of saws and only offer flesh detecting technology on just the high end saws? Are you not admitting you don't think the users of the inexpensive saws worthy of the same safeguards as everyone else? Or do you include it on all saws and just cease to market any saws below some price where SS tech is not cost effective. This would probably be the end of the sub $800 saw.


----------



## AlaskaGuy (Jan 29, 2012)

If there is one subject I'm not in to, that would be sports. But, you guys go ahead and I'll simply not read those post.


----------



## cblak (Mar 16, 2012)

Doc, im not sure what you meant by "at present i just "HAVE TO" be deliberate around …tools." Do you think with a SS you wont? Please forgive me if i read this the wrong way!

NBeener, judging by your reply, i wonder if you read my entire post or just hunted for something you could pick apart. I thought it would be pretty obvious that i did not mean "EVERYTHING" in our lives. I was just making a broad statement. I am, however, curious about your stance on the subject.

Its not that those of us who are against this proposal are not fond of our own digits, or the fact that we are not willing to spend the money. Its a matter of principle. Does the government have the right to demand we protect ourselves? If so, where does it end? If this passes it just opens the door for them to move further into our homes! 
I am not attacking anyone who owns a SS. You bought it by choice, and Im sure its a great product!

My original post was just an effort to find common ground, so that if/when this is implemented ,it would be because it is what the MAJORITY wants. I don't see they we(woodworkers) are ALL being accurately represented in this matter.


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

I love this topic.
Can't get enough ;-)

I'm not sure the government is either TRYING TO SAY, nor IN EFFECT, SAYING … that it knows better than you.

Economics would indicate that-since Gass has to buck the trend, and couldn't get any takers-this table saw thing has functioned as a bit of a free-market failure.

The estimates, from various sources, say there are about 67,000 medically treated …. 40,000 ER-treated, table saw accidents, each year, in this county, with 10% (4,000) resulting in amputation.

The costs associated with that are pegged-again, by various sources-at about $2.36 BILLION.

Overwhelmingly, those costs are paid by insurers, and/or taxpayers, meaning …. most people are subsidizing these accidents.

Relative to the actual costs OF a table saw, the best estimates about potential cost increases of some sort of flesh-sensing technology is low, considering about 600,000 - 800,000 table saws sold in the US, annually.

Assume a $500 cost for additional safety technology. That equates to an aggregate consumer-borne cost of about $350 MILLION.

Economics dictates that the current way of paying for the injuries and associated costs-everybody pays-imposes an externality that can be better addressed BY the participants IN the activity bearing the responsibility for this cost.

So … as a business guy … I don't get all hypertensive about it. I see it as smart business, and a way TO GET US to "take personal responsibility" for our safety-responsibility that we DO NOT take when we allow the insurance rates of others to be jacked up by some $2.36BN each year.

$350M is MUCH cheaper than $2.36BN, AND … the cost is shifted TO the ones who CREATED it, and NOT to the larger society.

Read some of the CPSC's documents on the matter. They are very thoughtful, and constructed by very bright and thoughtful people.

If this truly IS "the nanny state at work," they got my attention, and I'm interested in hearing more 

So there 

;-)


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

" If this passes it just opens the door for them to move further into our homes!"

Awwwww, crap.

[I say this with a big smile on my face…}

That ship has SOOOOOooooooo sailed.

Shall I walk you through your house, and explain how the dreaded nanny state has made nearly everything in your house better and/or safer ??

I'm truly not some big-government liberal. Those who NEED to (tribalists) will ALWAYS label me, but … if they know me … they'll realize it ain't that easy.

Do you have ANY idea how much safety regulation affects the everyday life of even the Unabomber ?

Is all government good government ? Of course not.

Is Gass just a Good Guy ? No. He's a lawyer-which makes him automatically suspect-and a Capitalist. No more, no less.

Are his motives pure ? Oh, I really doubt it, but … look who starts companies, runs companies, and how they seek to make those companies profitable.

Is he trying to influence legislation though direct and indirect lobbying efforts ? Yup. Welcome to the USA.

But the Chicken Little arguments are really laughable. Gass didn't start it. He doesn't represent the end OF it. He's NOT the last straw, after which the wheels will come OFF the thing.

He's just another guy trying to get rich.

He happens to build a great saw, by all accounts.

He MAY reduce the costs to the REST of us, over time.

I have REAL problems. I just can't get twisted in knots of the SawStop/End Of Civilization thing.

JMHO.
YMMV.
My $0.02.


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

Chadwick:

I apologize. My comment to you was a bit harsh.


----------



## Nate_T (Mar 25, 2012)

I'm going to skirt the politics side. I recently bought a SS. I think I'm perfectly capable of safely operating a table saw, but I have a 6 year old boy who loves to be in the garage on build things with "dad". For me it wasn't the cost of my emergency room visit, it would be never being able to forgive myself for one of his. For me that meant saving a lot longer than planed for a nice saw, but I couldn't do it any other way. I'm also looking into pretty much any way to make the rest of the tools in the shop safer- so if anyone has tips, I'd be glad to hear them.


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

By the way … we HAVE a retired insurance actuary among us.

Wisely, he avoids politics like the plague, here,

But if he were EVER inclined to do so, I would love to hear his thoughts on the economics of this subject. It would be EXACTLY the kind of thing he did for a living.

If you're out there … YOU know who you are ;-)


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

Welcome to LumberJocks, *Nate* !


----------



## Delta356 (Aug 2, 2010)

One thing. I like my DElTA UNISAW, and always will. I'm old school and will trust my finger with my mind…..
Not to say that saw stop makes nice saw. For the price pretty fancy…..

Thanks, Michael Frey
Portland, OR

FREY WOODWORKING INC.


----------



## Viking (Aug 26, 2009)

Neil;

You are correct in one respect. The Federal Government's push to be my nanny is not new, and certainly not specific to the present administration. BUT, this does not mean that we should not push back on this issue.

I am sure that the Saw Stop is a Fine tool but, I should have the individual freedom to buy a Saw Stop, a Uni-Saw, a PM, a $299 special, or whichever table saw I CHOOSE!

Most of the Govt. regulations, that allegedly improve safety, really only protect the idiots like the guy who started this ridiculous lawsuit in the first place by operating a tool he had no business getting within a mile of.

Why don't they just outlaw "idiots"???


----------



## NBeener (Sep 16, 2009)

I'm sorry, Rick, but I believe you ignored my post about economics.

Your right to swing your fist ENDS where another's face begins.

Not everybody who gets injured, annually, by using a table saw really IS an idiot. I know it would be easier for some people to believe they are.

Heck. They may NEED to think those people were all idiots.

But they aren't.

So why shouldn't they/we take "personal responsibility" for our own health care costs.

If you do the math, the average TS injury cost about $35,000.

How many of us could afford that ? How many of us would that break.

For the more severe injuries, involving surgeries, grafts, rehab, etc., the costs go up by an order of magnitude. How many of us could afford THAT ? How many of us would THAT break ?

We're far more inter-connected, as a society, these days than many people would like to believe. The ripples in the pond that EACH of us makes … touch others.


----------



## cblak (Mar 16, 2012)

NBeener its clear that you have done your homework, and i truly respect your opinion. But just because that ship has sailed for you, that does not mean it has for everyone. I don't like the way this country is headed and if their is any chance of saving it, Ill set sail!
If you have REAL problems, why have you devoted so much time to this subject? MOVE ON! You said it all. Gass didn't start it, and this is not the end of it. Why cant it be stopped? The reason its gotten to this point is because we have become so complacent. I believe that discussions like these are a healthy thing and not much different than those that fueled the birth of this nation. I am concerned about this particular subject and so are many others. Its not the end of the world. This I know. This is just another opportunity to stand up for something you believe in. So STAND UP or sit down and write about there is no hope left.


----------



## DannyB (Jan 12, 2009)

First,speaking as a patent attorney, and from what evidence i've seen from the various lawsuits (Osario, et al) on the royalty rate numbers, the royalty rate he asked for was not unreasonable. It was 8% of saw wholesale (*not* retail).

The total royalty rate on the 3G chips in your cellphone is now about 7% (5% to qualcomm, 2-3% to others), and was much higher when 3g phones first came out.
Royalty rates almost always decline over time, btw (Qualcomm's royalty on 4G LTE chips is now 3.25%).

Please also note that delta, ryobi, et al all patent everything they can about their saws, and would happily sue each other into oblivion if it wouldn't cause mutually assured destruction.

Note also that the law they are trying to pass is not supported by "Gass thinks this is a good idea".
That is, the put it in terms of economic harm, and have figures.
As someone said above, these figures show the market for tablesaws is like 300-400 million a year, and the cost of tablesaw injuries is 2.3 billion a year. That's a lot.
The figures also claim (and they have a lot of stuff to back it up, despite claims i've seen that the CPSC is just pulling stuff out of thin air) that 90+% of these injures are preventable.

Some quotes:
"Of the 66,900 emergency room-treated injuries involving table saw 
operator blade contact in 2007 and 2008, approximately 20,700 (30.9%) 
of the injuries occurred on table saws where a blade guard was in use. 
Approximately 44,500 (66.5%) of the injuries occurred on table saws 
that did not have a blade guard attached. The most common reason for 
absence of the blade guard was removal by the consumer (75.0%). An 
estimated 23,800 injuries (35.5%) occurred as a result of kickback of 
the material, including scenarios where kickback of the material caused 
the operator's hand to be pulled into the blade, resulting in a 
laceration injury or amputation."

The CPSC's viewpoint on guard removal seems about right:
" CPSC staff has identified several characteristics of traditional 
blade guard systems that are likely to hinder table saw use and 
motivate consumers to remove them to make performing a cut simpler or 
easier. These characteristics include:
(1) Potential jamming of the workpiece on the guard: Some blade 
guards may jam on the leading edge of the workpiece, requiring the 
consumer to push the workpiece forcefully or to raise the guard 
manually;
(2) Poor visibility caused by the guard: Hood guards can limit 
visibility when lining up cuts and during a cut, especially with 
sawdust accumulation in the guard;
(3) Poor splitter alignment with the blade: A splitter can bend 
over time with use of the table saw. A blade guard system with a 
splitter that is not aligned properly with the blade can make feeding 
the workpiece through the blade increasingly difficult and can actually 
increase the likelihood of kickback; and
(4) Mandatory removal of the blade guard for certain cuts: The 
splitter and blade guard must be removed for certain oversized cuts, 
very narrow cuts, and any type of non-through cut. To switch back to 
typical through cuts, the splitter and guard must be reinstalled in 
keeping with manufacturers' recommendations that blade guard systems be 
used whenever performing a through cut." 
"

So what about kickback?

" Of the 66,900 emergency room-treated injuries involving table saw 
operator blade contact in 2007 and 2008, an estimated 39,600 injuries 
(59.2%) did not occur as a result of kickback of the material. Non-
kickback injury scenarios included situations caused by a lapse in 
attention of the operator, such as reaching over the blade to retrieve 
a cut piece or otherwise not being aware of the blade during a cut. Of 
the 39,600 blade contact injuries that did not occur as a result of 
kickback, lacerations were the most frequent (69.4%) form of injury, 
followed by fractures (11.0%), amputations (9.5%), and avulsions 
(9.5%). The rate of hospitalization was 5.0 percent. CPSC staff did not 
find sufficient information regarding whether kickback caused operator 
contact with the blade in approximately 3,500 of the 66,900 operator 
blade contact injuries."

Basically, 60+% of the injuries are not preventable through kickback prevention.
Even if you assume the kickback injuries and non-kickback injuries cost as much (and by the numbers, it looks like the non-kickback injuries cost more), you are still left with about 1 billion and some change in injuries, and tablesaws are still a net negative.

States, the Fed, and *you* are bearing a lot of this cost (higher insurance premiums, blah blah blah)
It's hard for me to blame either the states or the feds to at least want to get tablesaws to a point where they are not a net negative.

I'm also sure the CPSC would much rather not have the only solution they can proffer to this be flesh sensing technology. I'm sure they would *love* other workable ideas. 
However, this rulemaking has been going on since April, 2003.
That is, in almost a decade, *nobody* other than Sawstop has even proffered an *idea* as to how to help here, only fought against doing anything.

As for politics, it's *exactly wrong* to make this about politics.
Why?
Because none of the companies involved (Gass, PTI, etc) are doing this for political reasons. They don't care about the politics (IE whether it gets the government more or less involved in your life, or anything of the sort)
Absolutely *none* of them give a crap about anything except the money involved.
It's just business.
Lobbying the CPSC (Gass), Lobbying woodworkers (PTI), playing on the political leanings of the average woodworker (PTI), these are techniques to try to win in business. 
Neither side is right, and you shouldn't trust the claims of either side at face value, and don't for a second think that anything other than business is doing this to you. I'm sure they are laughing as woodworkers rail against the government.

You think if the CPSC disappears in this fight, the next step won't be for someone to get UL or another common non-governmental accreditation agency involved? That is what happened with riving knives.

Would you still be as angry if UL required manufacturers to incorporate sawstop-like technology, like they did with riving knives in 2009?
Roughly all the riving knife designs are patented as well, btw.


----------



## Viking (Aug 26, 2009)

Neil;

Who is swinging a fist? Where is that coming from? I said that, in simplest terms, if I want to spend the money on a semi idiot proof tool, it should be MY right to do so, not the governments.

When you, and others profess the statistics on table saw injuries, you always fail to note that the vast majority of them were pilot error and not attributable to others. If you don't know how to use a tool, DON'T USE IT? Simple and no rocket science, regulation, or politics required.

I am a scuba diver which is potentially one of the most dangerous sports there is. When you take a real sport diving course the lessons focus about 95% on safety and 5% on technique. The overwhelming number is sport diving "accidents" are a result of skirting safety procedures or lack of training (resort one day diving schools) I.e., IDIOTS don't make long living divers.

When I was growing up NO ONE had health insurance. If you got hurt you paid the bills and got over it. Paid "by others" HI is a modern day Invention to recruit workers to companies that offered it. Now all have it.

As previously stated "shop safety" is MY responsibility which I accept willingly.

I still have all my fingers and all my hot dogs are safe in the fridge where they belong.


----------



## cblak (Mar 16, 2012)

DannyB, I appreciate the facts you brought to the table. It helps to form an educated opinion on the matter.
The reason I point MY finger at the government, is the mere fact that they allow this sort of thing to happen. The fact that Mr. Gass and others like him can manipulate our government for their personal gain is a shame.


----------



## Viktor (Jan 15, 2009)

Great posts, Neil, make so much since they are almost anti-American. I think the Big Government should just go ahead and make probability theory and economics beyond bumper stickers mandatory in schools, because most people clearly don't understand what you are talking about. Meanwhile we'll keep exercising our freedom by pushing the cost of our own screw-ups onto a greater society.


----------



## Greylion (Jan 31, 2011)

It is very simple. I don't care what the law is I'm not going to buy a Saw Stop. I don't care what the law is I'm going to use what I have because it is what I want.
I want to point out that such a law would give a monopoly to the SS co. and there are plenty of legal hustlers out there who would sue under the Sherman AntiTrust Act no matter how little it has been used.
By the way cblak, thanks for brining this up again - real smart.


----------



## DannyB (Jan 12, 2009)

Just so people don't misunderstand (i've gotten more than a few private messages ),

I actually think most patents harm innovation, and spend a lot of my job fighting them in my industry (Computer hardware and software). I'm just saying, relative to what normal royalty rates are, that what Mr Gass asked for is not outside the norm.


----------



## DannyB (Jan 12, 2009)

Actually, you would not be able to sue under the sherman antitrust act if the law granted a monopoly to SS, as the antitrust act specifically excludes cases like that.

(Note also that patents are government granted on monopolies. They do not grant you the right to make something, they grant you the right to prevent others from making it)


----------



## Greylion (Jan 31, 2011)

Sweet


----------



## Viktor (Jan 15, 2009)

I think if people applied the same standards to software products that they do to SawStop, those who are against the SawStop would also have to cease using their computers (and probably many other things).
Thanks for informative posts, DannyB.


----------

