Traves writes:

Good luck with that, but lemme tell yas somtin. . .
if the bleeding heart liberals get a hold of this one, you'll have the
sawcops at your door in a few years asking to see if you got a sawstop
installed on your old TS.

Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans with a
conservative bent?

Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

They may well be. I doubt that they are on the side of the "bought by
trial lawyers" Democrats.

Phil

Charlie Self wrote:
Traves writes:


Good luck with that, but lemme tell yas somtin. . .
if the bleeding heart liberals get a hold of this one, you'll have the
sawcops at your door in a few years asking to see if you got a sawstop
installed on your old TS.


Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans with a
conservative bent?

Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

PC writes:

They may well be. I doubt that they are on the side of the "bought by
trial lawyers" Democrats.

Dunno. But I was told that all the owners of SawStop were lawyers...enginers,
too, but also lawyers.

It really doesn't pay to use political labels in such situations, unless you
have an absolute love of being wrong 70 or 80% of the time.

Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

"Traves W. Coppock" wrote in message:

Good luck with that, but lemme tell yas somtin. . .
if the bleeding heart liberals get a hold of this one, you'll have the
sawcops at your door in a few years asking to see if you got a sawstop
installed on your old TS.

Kinda like registering your handguns . . . once they know you've got a TS -
you're screwed. :-) I wonder if they'll levy a tax on the things and if
they'll fine you without having one? Then when they come out each year and
"test" your sawstop (at about a $125 fee of course) who will have to pay for
the weiner? And who replaces it when the gov't idiot says : "It's okay
now. Go ahead and replace it and fill out the new paperwork within 2
weeks."

Oh - I can see the proverbial "snowball" rolling downhill on this one!


Jums

But then again . . .

I live in Texas and since we're going through a re-districting battle down
here - maybe they'll have Houston in the Gulf of Mexico before it's all said
and done and we won't have to worry about it! LOL!

Jim

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.



No, emails are easily deletedand ignored. Remember that sawstop first tried
to make a run by offereing their product to the public and not enough people
were interested. They presumably have a lot of capital tied up in
developing the product and want to recover their money. They are doing
whatever they can think of.

If you want to object where it counts, the agency they are lobbying must be
informed of our extreme disapproval. Who is it they are lobbying?
Hopefully some elected body.

Frank

"Frank Ketchum" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.



No, emails are easily deletedand ignored. Remember that sawstop first
tried
to make a run by offereing their product to the public and not enough
people
were interested. They presumably have a lot of capital tied up in
developing the product and want to recover their money. They are doing
whatever they can think of.

If you want to object where it counts, the agency they are lobbying must
be
informed of our extreme disapproval. Who is it they are lobbying?
Hopefully some elected body.



CPSC -answered my own question

After looking at their website, I couldn't find an email address for
concerns over pending legislation, but there is the general info address of
and their toll free number 800-638-2772

If SawStop is truly interested in safety and that is their primary
objective they could make this technology available to all comers at a
modest cost. I suspect that the reluctance of manufacturers to embrace
the technology is not just the cost of incorporating the hardware
changes but also a hefty license fee to SawStop. Has SawStop disclosed
what the licensing terms are? Are they too onerous for a manufacturer
to embrace them?

SawStop in my opinion has one objective: to make money. Since they
can't sell to willing customers they want the Government to force
customers to buy. This is wrong.

I have seen similar attempts waged by folks making air quality sensors.
Watch for the use of those to be mandated broadly soon. The free market
is a wonderful thing, for Government to destroy it by marketing
selectively under the guise of safety is reprehensible.

Phil

David B. Chamberlain wrote:
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:03:58 -0400, "4 out of 5 dentists" wrote:

I'm thinking of how that guy who invented the intermittent windshield
wiper was ripped off. basically cars didn't have them until his patent
ran out.


But really now... Should something like that even have received a
patent? Many of cars never had intermittent wipers. So, being of at
least average intelligence, we used one hand to hit the switch every
once in a while.

It is hardly an "invention" to put a delay on it.

-zach

"Zach Tomas" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:03:58 -0400, "4 out of 5 dentists" wrote:

I'm thinking of how that guy who invented the intermittent windshield
wiper was ripped off. basically cars didn't have them until his
patent
ran out.


But really now... Should something like that even have received a
patent? Many of cars never had intermittent wipers. So, being of at
least average intelligence, we used one hand to hit the switch every
once in a while.

It is hardly an "invention" to put a delay on it.

-zach


Well then by that reasoning, dusk to dawn lights shouldn't have a patent
because anyone of average intelligence can turn on a light switch.

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.

While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand how this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?

The govt has long played a role in mandated "safety" - are you simply saying
"Enough is enough?"

Thanks

"tnfkajs" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That
gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do
not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort
money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate
them.

While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand
how this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?

The govt has long played a role in mandated "safety" - are you simply
saying
"Enough is enough?"

Thanks


Airbags and seatbelts protect you from other people's carelessness over
which you have no control. Tablesaw safety is not affected by outside
factors unless you have someone come into your shop and randomly turn
the saw on and off.

Saw stop is petitioning to have their device legislated as mandatory
equipment on all table saws sold in the US. When the device first came out I
was behind them 100% but I have no tolerance for this type of "marketing"
and as such have removed my support from them. If you want more info, the
actual petition is on Sawstop's own web site and you can draw their own
conclusions.

Good luck
Rob


"4 out of 5 dentists" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


--
David Chamberlain





while trying to remain impartial, could you provide some info
on this ??

Side note. Sawstop used to be one of the vendors that frequented and was
welcomed to this forum. That stopped when they started to hear what they
didn't want to hear...that the WW community was turning against them because
of the way they're choosing to goto market... Guess they weren't "real"
woodworkers after all..

Rob


"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


--
David Chamberlain



remove nospam to reach me

The most significant difference to me is that I don't recall seat belts
and air bags being patented and held as intellectual property by just
one company.

Phil

tnfkajs wrote:
"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...

If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives

you

an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money

from

private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand how this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?

The govt has long played a role in mandated "safety" - are you simply saying
"Enough is enough?"

Thanks

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
tnfkajs wrote:

While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand
how this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?


How this differs is that those items are (were) not covered by
comprehensive patents keeping anyone else from producing a comparable
product to meet the government's requirements. SawStop is covered by
such a patent.




There are plenty of companies that make airbags and seatbelts.
There's COMPETITION, not a monopoly. That's not so bad.

CJ

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the SawStop
system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half to one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end saw.
The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the way
we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie

Do not forget that the new cartridges are $69 each. I don't know what
hitting that aluminum block does to your sawblade.
If you do some math it hardly sounds effective for a lot of the situations
you would want it to protect against. They claim that it will cut 1/8" if
you are moving at 1 foot per second. So move at 4 ft per second and you get
a 1/2 inch cut - OUCH!. When a hand slips I usually find it is moving far
faster than 1 foot per second. I can easily imagine it moving ten times that
fast.

Oh, and Leon, even with an 1/8 cut you might still require a trip to the
emergency room, you might be spared some of the rehabilitation though.

-Jack

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:37:18 GMT, "Jim Mc Namara"
wrote:

I wonder if they'll levy a tax on the things and if
they'll fine you without having one? Then when they come out each year and
"test" your sawstop (at about a $125 fee of course) who will have to pay for
the weiner? And who replaces it when the gov't idiot says : "It's okay
now. Go ahead and replace it and fill out the new paperwork within 2
weeks."

And have us come and test the new one before you cut any wood with it
to make sure it is functional...

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:57:09 -0400, Phil wrote:

If SawStop is truly interested in safety and that is their primary
objective they could make this technology available to all comers at a
modest cost. I suspect that the reluctance of manufacturers to embrace
the technology is not just the cost of incorporating the hardware
changes but also a hefty license fee to SawStop. Has SawStop disclosed
what the licensing terms are? Are they too onerous for a manufacturer
to embrace them?

It occurs to me that if the regulatory bodies voided patent rights if
a particular device was mandated fewer companies would petition to get
their pet idea required.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

"Charlie Spitzer" wrote in message
...

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That
gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do
not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the SawStop
system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half to
one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end saw.
The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the way
we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie


it's against the law to remove or retrofitting out parts of your car. what
makes you think that won't happen here?

Ever been to a speed shop, a hot rod/motorcycle show or a dragstrip? What
people do to machinery on their own is largely outside the law. It would
make some interesting test cases, though.
-- Ernie

"JackD" wrote in message ...

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That
gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do
not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the SawStop
system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half to
one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end saw.
The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the way
we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie

Do not forget that the new cartridges are $69 each. I don't know what
hitting that aluminum block does to your sawblade.
If you do some math it hardly sounds effective for a lot of the situations
you would want it to protect against. They claim that it will cut 1/8" if
you are moving at 1 foot per second. So move at 4 ft per second and you
get
a 1/2 inch cut - OUCH!. When a hand slips I usually find it is moving far
faster than 1 foot per second. I can easily imagine it moving ten times th
at
fast.

Oh, and Leon, even with an 1/8 cut you might still require a trip to the
emergency room, you might be spared some of the rehabilitation though.

Yeah, if the blade is moving at 4000rpm and the reaction time is 5
milliseconds, all those sharp little teeth make a full revolution+. It's a
lot easier, cheaper and less painful to be careful. :-)
-- Ernie

"Kevin P. Fleming" wrote in message
news:l%gPa.565$u51.77@fed1read05...
tnfkajs wrote:

While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand how
this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?


How this differs is that those items are (were) not covered by
comprehensive patents keeping anyone else from producing a comparable
product to meet the government's requirements. SawStop is covered by
such a patent.

Ah ha! I knew there was a reason I agreed with all of you!

Seriously - missed that cogent point of the thread.

Ok - so if the Feds mandate SawStop then they should force SS to license the
technology for a pittance.
Then we let competition back into the mix. We should end up with better and
cheaper SawStop clones.

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"Charlie Spitzer" wrote in message
...

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That
gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do
not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort
money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate
them.


There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase
by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the SawStop
system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half to
one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end
saw.
The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the
way
we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie


it's against the law to remove or retrofitting out parts of your car.
what
makes you think that won't happen here?

Ever been to a speed shop, a hot rod/motorcycle show or a dragstrip? What
people do to machinery on their own is largely outside the law. It would
make some interesting test cases, though.
-- Ernie


sure. next time you're there, ask them what the penalty is for disabling an
airbag (without proper authorization), venting freon, or removing a
catalytic converter and putting in a straight pipe. granted, one has to be
caught, but don't you think there'll be ts police?

"Charlie Spitzer" wrote in message
...

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"Charlie Spitzer" wrote in message
...

"Ernie Jurick" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in
message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That
gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you
do
not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort
money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate
them.


There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase
by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the
SawStop
system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half
to
one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches
the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end
saw.
The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the
way
we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a
fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie


it's against the law to remove or retrofitting out parts of your car.
what
makes you think that won't happen here?

Ever been to a speed shop, a hot rod/motorcycle show or a dragstrip?
What
people do to machinery on their own is largely outside the law. It would
make some interesting test cases, though.
-- Ernie


sure. next time you're there, ask them what the penalty is for disabling
an
airbag (without proper authorization), venting freon, or removing a
catalytic converter and putting in a straight pipe. granted, one has to be
caught, but don't you think there'll be ts police?

I'd love to see them try to get a warrant.
-- Ernie

Charlie Self wrote:

Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans with a
conservative bent?

They must be. If they were liberal leaning Democrats they would be trying to
push through a tax bill to make everyone pay for the SawStop, even if they didn't
own a tablesaw.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

In article , Phil
wrote:

SawStop in my opinion has one objective: to make money.

That's the objective of every business, and it's the objective of
researching and developing an idea like SawStop into a product. As it
should be, of course.


Since they
can't sell to willing customers they want the Government to force
customers to buy. This is wrong.

Yep, that's bad. Unfortunately, it's the easy way to make money: force
people to give it to you at gunpoint. To avoid being charged with
armed robbery, you use the government's guns to collect the money for
you.

Kevin

In article , tnfkajs
wrote:

While I tend to agree with you on this - can you help me understand how this
differs from airbags and seat belts and (in some states) helmets?

It doesn't, other than the issue of patent-protected exclusivity.


The govt has long played a role in mandated "safety" - are you simply saying
"Enough is enough?"

I don't know about David, but it surpassed "enough" with the very first
law protecting people from themselves. On a national (U.S.) level,
that was probably the first regulations of narcotics in the 1930s (?).

Kevin

I like the part in the petition where they state that the average
consumer does not have enough information to make an informed choice,
but the CPSC does have enough information. If they truly believed
that, they could publish the information to the general public to help
educate them, and then see if their product is purchased. This could
be accomplished by including an information pamphlet with each saw
instead of the complete system already installed.

It sounds like they just do not believe in the marketability of their
own product enough to use fair market practices.



On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:06:49 GMT, "Rob Stokes"
wrote:

Saw stop is petitioning to have their device legislated as mandatory
equipment on all table saws sold in the US. When the device first came out I
was behind them 100% but I have no tolerance for this type of "marketing"
and as such have removed my support from them. If you want more info, the
actual petition is on Sawstop's own web site and you can draw their own
conclusions.

Good luck
Rob


"4 out of 5 dentists" wrote in message
...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
an email address of


Everyone should send them a polite email telling them that you do not
appreciate a private company using a government agency to extort money
from
private citizens. Maybe a few thousand emails will help educate them.


--
David Chamberlain





while trying to remain impartial, could you provide some info
on this ??

Kevin Craig snarls:

It really doesn't pay to use political labels in such situations, unless
you
have an absolute love of being wrong 70 or 80% of the time.

Then why did you?

I noted then, "Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans
with a
conservative bent?"

The only politics in that statement is an attribution of probable political
party.

You find that offensive? Mistaken?



Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

Jack Novak writes:

Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans with a
conservative bent?

They must be. If they were liberal leaning Democrats they would be trying to
push through a tax bill to make everyone pay for the SawStop, even if they
didn't
own a tablesaw.

Yeah, but as it is, they'll force them on everyone, and the Republicans will
borrow enough money to give to the rich to make sure they can afford at least
three.

Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

"Zach Tomas" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:03:58 -0400, "4 out of 5 dentists" wrote:

I'm thinking of how that guy who invented the intermittent windshield
wiper was ripped off. basically cars didn't have them until his patent
ran out.


But really now... Should something like that even have received a
patent? Many of cars never had intermittent wipers. So, being of at
least average intelligence, we used one hand to hit the switch every
once in a while.

It is hardly an "invention" to put a delay on it.

it may have been in the fifties, a solid state switch in the auto
would be a new thing, a new application of modern electronics.

if you want to poo poo somebody do it to the guy who invented the
windshield in the first place ... it's all his fault.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 22:55:26 +0000, Charlie Self wrote:


I noted then, "Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans
with a
conservative bent?"

The only politics in that statement is an attribution of probable political
party.

You find that offensive? Mistaken?

Baseless.

-Doug

In article ,
leah says...
Traves writes:

Good luck with that, but lemme tell yas somtin. . .
if the bleeding heart liberals get a hold of this one, you'll have the
sawcops at your door in a few years asking to see if you got a sawstop
installed on your old TS.

Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans

Given the current behavior a la Medicare Prescription drug benefits,
letting Teddy Kennedy craft the education bill, the unconstitutional
denial of free speech rights in the campaign finance reform bill, you
could be correct.


with a
conservative bent?


Hardly. More descriptive labels here would be "statist" /
"libertarian -- with a small 'l'". The statist believes in the over-
riding interest of the state over the individual, while the anti-statist
libertarian holds that the state should limit its reach and exercise
only the minimum power needed to maintain peace and secure borders.
Unfortunately, we have been electing way too many statists of varying
degrees from both parties. It used to be that the Republican party was
predominantly anti-statist and promoted smaller federal government.
This sadly appears to have changed, with a competition between both
parties to see who can provide more "benefits" and "entitlements" in
order to win votes.


Charlie Self

If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to.
Dorothy Parker

In article ,
Ernie Jurick wrote:
...
Yeah, if the blade is moving at 4000rpm and the reaction time is 5
milliseconds, all those sharp little teeth make a full revolution+.

4000rpm = 66.7 revolutions/second.
5ms = .005 second

66.7 x .005 = .3 revolutions.

Still very unpleasant - but not a full revolution.

It's a lot easier, cheaper and less painful to be careful. :-)

Of course - but even careful folks can have accidents.
--
--henry schaffer

In article ,
says...
I like the part in the petition where they state that the average
consumer does not have enough information to make an informed choice,

.... the mark of the true statist, the opinion that the "general public"
is just too @#$% stupid and ignorant to know what is good for it.


but the CPSC does have enough information.

but the government (i.e. the state) is an all-knowing, all-wise, and
beneficient entity that needs to coddle and mother the poor doddering
fools under its care to keep them from hurting themselves or others.

Pretty sickening attitude IMNSHO.

If they truly believed
that, they could publish the information to the general public to help
educate them, and then see if their product is purchased. This could
be accomplished by including an information pamphlet with each saw
instead of the complete system already installed.




It sounds like they just do not believe in the marketability of their
own product enough to use fair market practices.



Having failed to win the market, they now turn to using the iron fist
of government to accomplish their ends.

In article ,
says...

"David B. Chamberlain" wrote in message
...
If you go to the SawStop website, there is a contact page. That gives
you
.... snip

There's an even bigger issue, Dave. This is from their FAQ:

"How much will a saw with the SawStop system cost?

We estimate that the retail price of a contractors saw will increase by
approximately $50-100 after a manufacturer retools to add the SawStop system
as original equipment."

Now, we all know that a "manufacturer's estimate" is about one-half to one
quarter of the actual retail price increase by the time it reaches the
customer. This thing could wind up doubling the cost of a lower-end saw. The
safety increase is marginal. Most of us would wind up junking it the way we
do with blade guards. If it becomes mandatory I plan to make a fortune
selling retrofitting kits.
-- Ernie


Nice thought, particularly if implementation of SS causes accompanying
loss of precision, alignment or other problems.

However, I will bet dimes to donuts that the clever so-and-so's making
the rules will have already thought of that, and in crafting their
regulations will make removal and/or alteration of an SS equipped saw,
or providing retrofits for said saws a felony in the same manner as
removing or altering a car's emission control system.

In article , Charlie Self
wrote:

Kevin Craig snarls:

It really doesn't pay to use political labels in such situations, unless
you
have an absolute love of being wrong 70 or 80% of the time.

Then why did you?

I noted then, "Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans
with a
conservative bent?"

The only politics in that statement is an attribution of probable political
party.

You find that offensive? Mistaken?

I find it a use of political labels. Two posts later in the thread,
you (correctly) said that it doesn't pay to use political labels in
such situations.

Offensive? No. Ironic? Yes.

That's why I wanted to know if you intended it as sarcasm when you
implied the SawStop owners were Republicans with a conservative bent.
I can't imagine any basis for your statement otherwise, and it leaves
me scratching my head as to your possible meaning.

Kevin

In article ,
says...


Tim Douglass wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:57:09 -0400, Phil wrote:


If SawStop is truly interested in safety and that is their primary
objective they could make this technology available to all comers at a
modest cost. I suspect that the reluctance of manufacturers to embrace
the technology is not just the cost of incorporating the hardware
changes but also a hefty license fee to SawStop. Has SawStop disclosed
what the licensing terms are? Are they too onerous for a manufacturer
to embrace them?


It occurs to me that if the regulatory bodies voided patent rights if
a particular device was mandated fewer companies would petition to get
their pet idea required.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com


1: Legally, they can't do that.

Are you sure? The supreme court just refused to hear a case, and left
standing a decision that says copyrighted codes can be freely
distributed once they are incorporated into laws. Granted this isn't a
patent, but the government seems to think they can do anything they say
they can do.

http://www.gtwassociates.com/answers/veeck.htm

Patent attorneys IIRC

ROTFLMAO


"Nova" wrote in message
...
Charlie Self wrote:

Wanna bet that the owners of Sawstop are registered Republicans with a
conservative bent?

They must be. If they were liberal leaning Democrats they would be trying
to
push through a tax bill to make everyone pay for the SawStop, even if they
didn't
own a tablesaw.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA