Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
|
#2
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:52:59 -0700, Tom wrote:
http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/...-big-money-in- tablesaw-lawsuit Ridiculous! But wait! My pocket knife doesn't have that technology either! I'm rich! -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#3
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
|
#4
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:07:41 -0700, "LDosser" wrote:
"dustyone" wrote in message ... All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Do you really think that the costs wouldn't be prohibitive? You do understand that SawStop has a legal monopoly on this technology for another couple of decades. |
#5
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
wrote in message ... On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:07:41 -0700, "LDosser" wrote: "dustyone" wrote in message ... All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Do you really think that the costs wouldn't be prohibitive? You do understand that SawStop has a legal monopoly on this technology for another couple of decades. It would be bad enough if it only effected tablesaws but, with lawyers being what they are, it could have serious consequences. A car gets T boned in the drivers door. The driver sues the manufacturer because his car does not come with side impact airbags as some other cars do. This could be extended to lots of things. |
#6
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
And will all contractors need to install SawStop on their older
machines, or else subject themselves to being sued by any worker using their tool? A worker will end up having to supply his own tools, if push comes to shove. Sonny |
#7
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:02:01 -0700, "CW" wrote:
wrote in message .. . On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:07:41 -0700, "LDosser" wrote: "dustyone" wrote in message ... All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Do you really think that the costs wouldn't be prohibitive? You do understand that SawStop has a legal monopoly on this technology for another couple of decades. It would be bad enough if it only effected tablesaws but, with lawyers being what they are, it could have serious consequences. A car gets T boned in the drivers door. The driver sues the manufacturer because his car does not come with side impact airbags as some other cars do. This could be extended to lots of things. Really, that's where we *are* |
#8
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On 3/21/2010 9:52 AM, dustyone wrote:
All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Curt Blood Improvement in safety is important, but something must be said for personal responsibility. Unless the saw itself malfunctioned in some way, the onus for safety rests with the operator. The greatest "improvement in safety" would be to ban the use of all table saws. Saws would then be 100% safe. I don't see that as a practical solution, however. At work, I teach HS woodshop, we use a SawStop. Considering some of the kids I get in my beginning classes, it was a wise investment. While I still am an "absolute *******" about safety in school, I do breathe a bit easier having this particular saw there. At my home shop I use a more traditional saw. Safety is my responsibility. I have a good guard that I use, I have push sticks of various configurations and most importantly, I know and utilize good practices of saw safety. Having been in the business for a long time, and having worked with my father for many years prior to that, I have met many woodworkers (some of whom, unfortunately, have also been woodshop teachers) missing one or more body parts. I can safely state that every individual with whom I have ever spoken who has lost a digit to a saw knew full well that it was his own fault, and not the fault of the manufacturer. I accept the fact that, perhaps, some of you may know of some digitless operators who blame their tool, but I personally know of none. Perhaps it is everything that I currently see around me of individuals placing the blame on outside forces, but I, for one, am growing tired of this. If I choose to work when I am tired or inebriated, that is my own stupidity. If I do not know how to operate a saw safely that is my own stupid choice. The manufacturer did not force me to operate their saw, I chose to operate it, and I must be willing to take responsibility for my decision. Even with the SawStop, there is a key that turns off the safety mechanism. Should I turn it off, should I be able to sue them for providing this turn off mechanism? I believe that there are some countries that do not allow the use of dado blades on home saws. (Limits on arbor length?) This, as I understand it, is to make saw operation mor safe. Maybe I am strange, but I don't want the government telling me that I can't use a dado blade because they believe that I am too ignorant to use it safely. I try to avoid "****ing matches" on the rec and I don't mean to start one, but I had to have my say. Glen |
#9
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
|
#10
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
"Glen" wrote in message
m... On 3/21/2010 9:52 AM, dustyone wrote: All, snip Perhaps it is everything that I currently see around me of individuals placing the blame on outside forces, but I, for one, am growing tired of this. If I choose to work when I am tired or inebriated, that is my own stupidity. If I do not know how to operate a saw safely that is my own stupid choice. The manufacturer did not force me to operate their saw, I chose to operate it, and I must be willing to take responsibility for my decision. Even with the SawStop, there is a key that turns off the safety mechanism. Should I turn it off, should I be able to sue them for providing this turn off mechanism? Someone Will! |
#11
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:44:34 -0400, the infamous "J. Clarke"
scrawled the following: No, that's going to come later after the precedent that the government can force you to buy something is established. They'll save the American power tool industry by passing a law that says that everyone _must_ buy an American made table saw whether they want one or not. Of course Sawstop is going to be screwed because theirs are Chinese. What? He's selling cheap Chiwanese **** at THOSE triple prices? That CSing MFing SOB weasel deserves to go _down_! -- If we attend continually and promptly to the little that we can do, we shall ere long be surprised to find how little remains that we cannot do. -- Samuel Butler |
#12
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Mar 22, 12:16*pm, Glen wrote:
On 3/21/2010 9:52 AM, dustyone wrote: All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? *Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. *Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Curt Blood Improvement in safety is important, but something must be said for personal responsibility. *Unless the saw itself malfunctioned in some way, the onus for safety rests with the operator. *The greatest "improvement in safety" would be to ban the use of all table saws. *Saws would then be 100% safe. *I don't see that as a practical solution, however. At work, I teach HS woodshop, we use a SawStop. *Considering some of the kids I get in my beginning classes, it was a wise investment. While I still am an "absolute *******" about safety in school, I do breathe a bit easier having this particular saw there. At my home shop I use a more traditional saw. *Safety is my responsibility. *I have a good guard that I use, I have push sticks of various configurations and most importantly, I know and utilize good practices of saw safety. *Having been in the business for a long time, and having worked with my father for many years prior to that, I have met many woodworkers (some of whom, unfortunately, have also been woodshop teachers) missing one or more body parts. *I can safely state that every individual with whom I have ever spoken who has lost a digit to a saw knew full well that it was his own fault, and not the fault of the manufacturer. *I accept the fact that, perhaps, some of you may know of some digitless operators who blame their tool, but I personally know of none. Perhaps it is everything that I currently see around me of individuals placing the blame on outside forces, but I, for one, am growing tired of this. *If I choose to work when I am tired or inebriated, that is my own stupidity. *If I do not know how to operate a saw safely that is my own stupid choice. *The manufacturer did not force me to operate their saw, I chose to operate it, and I must be willing to take responsibility for my decision. *Even with the SawStop, there is a key that turns off the safety mechanism. *Should I turn it off, should I be able to sue them for providing this turn off mechanism? I believe that there are some countries that do not allow the use of dado blades on home saws. *(Limits on arbor length?) *This, as I understand it, is to make saw operation mor safe. *Maybe I am strange, but I don't want the government telling me that I can't use a dado blade because they believe that I am too ignorant to use it safely. I try to avoid "****ing matches" on the rec and I don't mean to start one, but I had to have my say. Glen Glen, you make some interesting points. I would hope that we could all agree that if blade stop technology were available on all table saws, we would be able to work more safely. One other point in this discussion is that there are times that, despite our expertise and care, accidents do happen. It would be little comfort to know that it was nobody's fault that I now had only nine digits. So, I wouldn't mind having the added security of knowing that this technology was in place. As I see it, the whole personal responsibility/lawsuit thing is a separate issue. There will always be people who will want to place blame for their mistakes on others, as well as lawyers who will represent them. Not much to be done about that. Greed on the part of the Saw Stop people is also a major factor in this, especially if Mr. Jaques is correct. It would seem to me that the inventor would have made a killing with a more modest per unit fee over a broader market, and this technology would indeed be on nearly every saw. Curt Blood Larry Jaques View profile More options Mar 22, 8:46 pm On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:57:42 -0700 (PDT), the infamous scrawled the following: The inventor, a Speaking Weasel (lawyer) had offered the licensing to other saw companies for a set fee per unit plus EIGHT PERCENT OF THE SAW'S PRICE. That raises a cabinet saw's price by OVER THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS. With the amount of money it would instantly give to him I can't see why he'd withdraw the offer. If the idiot had said "A couple grand for the license and a buck or two per unit." the devices would likely already be on every single new saw coming out of all factories. But the #%^&%^&*! wanted more, a lot more. -- |
#13
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
Glen typed much truth: snip Improvement in safety is important, but something must be said for personal responsibility. Unless the saw itself malfunctioned in some way, the onus for safety rests with the operator. The greatest "improvement in safety" would be to ban the use of all table saws. Saws would then be 100% safe. I don't see that as a practical solution, however. snip I try to avoid "****ing matches" on the rec and I don't mean to start one, but I had to have my say. Glen And you said it very well, thanks for doing so. Phil |
#14
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
dustyone said an odd thing with this: snip Glen, you make some interesting points. I would hope that we could all agree that if blade stop technology were available on all table saws, we would be able to work more safely. One other point in this discussion is that there are times that, despite our expertise and care, accidents do happen. It would be little comfort to know that it was nobody's fault that I now had only nine digits. snip That would be you, dusty. That is the whole point, isn't it? Phil |
#15
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On Mar 22, 12:16*pm, Glen wrote:
On 3/21/2010 9:52 AM, dustyone wrote: All, Isn't it possible that if allowed to stand, this judgement would drive other saw manufacturers to adopt this technology? *Cost would likely be more, at first, but with wider use, the cost would necessarily get lower over time. *Wouldn't this be an improvement in safety for us all? Curt Blood Improvement in safety is important, but something must be said for personal responsibility. *Unless the saw itself malfunctioned in some way, the onus for safety rests with the operator. *The greatest "improvement in safety" would be to ban the use of all table saws. *Saws would then be 100% safe. *I don't see that as a practical solution, however. At work, I teach HS woodshop, we use a SawStop. *Considering some of the kids I get in my beginning classes, it was a wise investment. While I still am an "absolute *******" about safety in school, I do breathe a bit easier having this particular saw there. At my home shop I use a more traditional saw. *Safety is my responsibility. *I have a good guard that I use, I have push sticks of various configurations and most importantly, I know and utilize good practices of saw safety. *Having been in the business for a long time, and having worked with my father for many years prior to that, I have met many woodworkers (some of whom, unfortunately, have also been woodshop teachers) missing one or more body parts. *I can safely state that every individual with whom I have ever spoken who has lost a digit to a saw knew full well that it was his own fault, and not the fault of the manufacturer. *I accept the fact that, perhaps, some of you may know of some digitless operators who blame their tool, but I personally know of none. Perhaps it is everything that I currently see around me of individuals placing the blame on outside forces, but I, for one, am growing tired of this. *If I choose to work when I am tired or inebriated, that is my own stupidity. *If I do not know how to operate a saw safely that is my own stupid choice. *The manufacturer did not force me to operate their saw, I chose to operate it, and I must be willing to take responsibility for my decision. *Even with the SawStop, there is a key that turns off the safety mechanism. *Should I turn it off, should I be able to sue them for providing this turn off mechanism? I believe that there are some countries that do not allow the use of dado blades on home saws. *(Limits on arbor length?) *This, as I understand it, is to make saw operation mor safe. *Maybe I am strange, but I don't want the government telling me that I can't use a dado blade because they believe that I am too ignorant to use it safely. I try to avoid "****ing matches" on the rec and I don't mean to start one, but I had to have my say. Glen Glen, As I read, it became clear that the guy who was injured filed for Workman's Comp, which he got because he was on the job, working with a tool supplied to him by his employer. The WC lawyer on the case decided to recoup some losses, and sued TTI--Ryobi's parent company. Obviously, he saw deeper pockets than most people, as well as a level of blame that most of us (or so I fervently hope) wouldn't. I've used that saw. It has standard safety features, unless you detach them. It was not the guy using the saw who filed the suit: I'd venture a guess he had no say in it. As someone else said, a Speaking Weasel got into the mix early (my apologies to all weasels out there). The U.S. has been in serious need of tort reform for over 40 years now. Care is a great accident reducer, too. I've been banged around and nicked and bit by a variety of tools over the years, including table saws, and damned near tore a knee cap off with poor technique while using a chainsaw, but generally, I've lost nothing but skin in the upwards of 55 years I've been doing such things. My worst injuries came with off-road motorcycles--maybe I should sue to make them pay to fix my knees. Unfortunately, I think the company folded about the time I quit riding. Ah well. It was my fault, anyway. No one held a gun to my head. |
#16
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
Big payout in table saw suit!
On 2010-03-21 21:05:10 -0400, Sonny said:
And will all contractors need to install SawStop on their older machines, or else subject themselves to being sued by any worker using their tool? A worker will end up having to supply his own tools, if push comes to shove. I would imagine liability insurance would be less costly for an employer using SawStop or other safety improvements. Airbags have similarly affected auto insurance -- cost of physical damage to car or property was and is minor in comparison to medical and liabilty costs. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|