Well, we could certainly debate this ad nauseam. Please note that I did
not say that he had disdain for humanity, and if you choose to believe
that his motives for having his device mandated by law were completely
altruistic, perhaps you might consider that he did not offer to give it
away; he offered to license it.
Suffice it to say that I personally am tired of having new laws passed
every time some special interest decides something is in their or
everyone else's best interest.


Mike Berger wrote:
We've all heard this anecdotally. How much direct knowledge do you
really have of the inventor's greed and disdain for humanity?
Even if he lobbied to have the device made mandatory, maybe it
was because of his own blood-draining experience and was completely
altruistic.

Meanwhile, manufacturers of everything we consume lobby AGAINST
consumer safety, encouraging the government to let them use more
dangerous components and make more wasteful products. Do you have
a car or truck? How altruistic do you think the vehicle manufacturers
are?

Russ wrote:

I however can't get over the greedy inventor's attempt to legislate
his device into every saw in the US. When his invention wasn't snapped
up by all of the major manufacturers as he assumed it would, he
lobbied to make it illegal to manufacture or import saws without a
safety device (his being the only one that would meet the
requirements) installed.