On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 22:09:28 -0500, Hank Gillette wrote:
In article ,
Dave Hinz wrote:

I'm not in favor of requiring safety equipment that hasn't been proven.

You're not? You seemed to be before.

I'm sorry that I gave that impression. My point was supposed to be that
mandatory safety equipment is not inherently bad. I also assumed that it
was a given that it should be proven to work before being required.

Then how do you reconcile this with supporting the Sawstop non-product
folks?