In none of these cases was I carrying around a spare part which cost a
substantial fraction of the car's original cost.

So you don't carry a spare tire, which costs about the same as a Sawstop
cartridge?

(spare tire/cost of car) (sawstop cartridge + new blade/cost of saw)
Call me a cheap ******* but I'm not carrying around a spare transmission or
engine.
My beef isn't with the cost of sawstop anyway. It is their business
practices.

The point is that if you know you might need the cartridge and you don't
have one reasonably accessible, that is your choice to make and your
error.

Similarly, I could carry around hot tea on my head and it would be my error
if I spill it on my face. Thank goodness no one is legislating that.

But your objections for the most part do not appear to be valid.

Then why didn't the saw makers buy into this device?

This may come as a shock to you but the fact that _your_ objections are
not
valid does not mean that there are not other objections that _are_ valid.
Presumably the saw manufacturers did not buy into it because they saw no
good reason to do so.

Perhaps if you are so good at determining that my objections are not valid,
you may be able to supply some objections which are valid as an example. I'm
just trying to learn here. Please, give an example.

Why didn't the CPSC approve their petition?

Why aren't people lining up to buy this saw?

Because they don't want it?

Oh, so they don't want it is a valid objection, but my personal reasons why
I don't want it are not valid. OK. I've learned something.

Can it all just be conspiracy?

Maybe it can be that we just don't want the thing.

Why?

-j