Ok I pretty much lurk here except to milk you guys for information
once and a while, but the SawStop posts and safety debates have piqued
my interest. I work in a shop with about a dozen other guys and we've
got a couple sliding table saws, a couple Unisaurs and a couple of the
big 12-14" Deltas too. The only saw that really ever has the blade
guard in place is the Altendorf slider, and that's probably on 1/3 of
the time - when someone's breaking down a pile of plywood for cabinet
box parts. And then it's really only used for the dust collection.
In the 5 years I've been at the shop we've had exactly one hand injury
from a table saw, and that was a guy doing a groove in a very small
part that he admits he never should have done anyway, and couldn't
possibly have done it with the guard in place. (He basically put a
little groove in the tip of a finger - two stitches.) When I go over
to the slider, for example, and I need to rip a strip of plywood for
say a stretcher, if that guard is in place I push it right out of the
way. I just don't like reaching my hand around that big plastic thing
wondering where in the heck the blade is - I like to be able to see
the spinning blade (through my (almost) ever present safety glasses)
so I can keep my hand away from it. I feel like those guards might
actually make things more unsafe WHILE CUTTING. Now if someone's
going to walk by a saw and slip and fall into a spinning blade,
well..what in the hell is he doing anyhow? I mean seriously - if you
can't walk around your shop without falling into the top of a table
saw, you've got bigger issues to address than a blade guard. And in
the case of the whole Whirlywind versus SawStop debate I'd have to
come down decidedly on the SawStop side of things - if it was a choice
between one or the other. (But there's not much chance of me buying a
$3000 saw any time soon...and if I were I'd be getting a really nice
used Tannewitz with a feeder or something along those lines.)

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

On Jan 23, 10:46*am, Jay Pique wrote:
Ok I pretty much lurk here except to milk you guys for information
once and a while, but the SawStop posts and safety debates have piqued
my interest. *I work in a shop with about a dozen other guys and we've
got a couple sliding table saws, a couple Unisaurs and a couple of the
big 12-14" Deltas too. *The only saw that really ever has the blade
guard in place is the Altendorf slider, and that's probably on 1/3 of
the time - when someone's breaking down a pile of plywood for cabinet
box parts. *And then it's really only used for the dust collection.
In the 5 years I've been at the shop we've had exactly one hand injury
from a table saw, and that was a guy doing a groove in a very small
part that he admits he never should have done anyway, and couldn't
possibly have done it with the guard in place. *(He basically put a
little groove in the tip of a finger - two stitches.) *When I go over
to the slider, for example, and I need to rip a strip of plywood for
say a stretcher, if that guard is in place I push it right out of the
way. *I just don't like reaching my hand around that big plastic thing
wondering where in the heck the blade is - I like to be able to see
the spinning blade (through my (almost) ever present safety glasses)
so I can keep my hand away from it. *I feel like those guards might
actually make things more unsafe WHILE CUTTING. *Now if someone's
going to walk by a saw and slip and fall into a spinning blade,
well..what in the hell is he doing anyhow? *I mean seriously - if you
can't walk around your shop without falling into the top of a table
saw, you've got bigger issues to address than a blade guard. *And in
the case of the whole Whirlywind versus SawStop debate I'd have to
come down decidedly on the SawStop side of things - if it was a choice
between one or the other. *(But there's not much chance of me buying a
$3000 saw any time soon...and if I were I'd be getting a really nice
used Tannewitz with a feeder or something along those lines.)

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. *Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. *Proper technique and feed rate are key. *A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. *Guards? *I'm just not a fan.

Ask people about their opinions on seatbelts or airbags or any other
safety device. Separate the answers into two groups - Safety Device
Kept Them Kicking vs. No Personal Experience With It. See if you
notice a correlation between a positive opinion on the safety device
and which group they fall in.

I understand your point, and agree that a lot of safety devices
require an adjustment in use/behavior, but you obviously have never
been injured so the topic is a theoretical one for you.

Ask a guy what he'd do if he caught his wife in bed with another guy
and then _have_ him catch his wife in bed with the other guy. My
suggestion, regardless of the guy's answer to the theoretical
question, don't be the other guy in the second scenario.

R

"RicodJour" wrote in message
...

Ask people about their opinions on seatbelts or airbags or any other
safety device. Separate the answers into two groups - Safety Device
Kept Them Kicking vs. No Personal Experience With It. See if you
notice a correlation between a positive opinion on the safety device
and which group they fall in.

When I was a kid we didn't have bike helmets. But when my wife and I got
mountain bikes some years back they came with helmets so we wore them. It
didn't take long before my wife took a fall that split her helmet in half,
but she didn't have a scratch on her. Needless to say we replaced that
helmet before we went riding again. Today I wouldn't dream of riding a bike
without a helmet--as you say, I'm in the Now We Know group.

"Jay Pique" wrote in message
...
Ok I pretty much lurk here except to milk you guys for information
once and a while, but the SawStop posts and safety debates have piqued
my interest. I work in a shop with about a dozen other guys and we've
got a couple sliding table saws, a couple Unisaurs and a couple of the
big 12-14" Deltas too. The only saw that really ever has the blade
guard in place is the Altendorf slider, and that's probably on 1/3 of
the time - when someone's breaking down a pile of plywood for cabinet
box parts. And then it's really only used for the dust collection.
In the 5 years I've been at the shop we've had exactly one hand injury
from a table saw, and that was a guy doing a groove in a very small
part that he admits he never should have done anyway, and couldn't
possibly have done it with the guard in place. (He basically put a
little groove in the tip of a finger - two stitches.) When I go over
to the slider, for example, and I need to rip a strip of plywood for
say a stretcher, if that guard is in place I push it right out of the
way. I just don't like reaching my hand around that big plastic thing
wondering where in the heck the blade is - I like to be able to see
the spinning blade (through my (almost) ever present safety glasses)
so I can keep my hand away from it. I feel like those guards might
actually make things more unsafe WHILE CUTTING. Now if someone's
going to walk by a saw and slip and fall into a spinning blade,
well..what in the hell is he doing anyhow? I mean seriously - if you
can't walk around your shop without falling into the top of a table
saw, you've got bigger issues to address than a blade guard. And in
the case of the whole Whirlywind versus SawStop debate I'd have to
come down decidedly on the SawStop side of things - if it was a choice
between one or the other. (But there's not much chance of me buying a
$3000 saw any time soon...and if I were I'd be getting a really nice
used Tannewitz with a feeder or something along those lines.)

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

I don't use that guard as most of my cutting can not be done with it on.
However seat belts are a different thing. Save me 3 times as I could
maneuver with out sliding on the seat an losing control. 1 a large dog at
night that could have been a child, hard to tell with oncoming lights. 2 a
deer that came out of the brush fast. 3 a idiot that came on the highway
with out stopping I was able to go off road and back on with good control..
Had a friend that refused to use seat belts, was injured because of this in
an accident. Second time he was killed when a drunk hit him and as the car
rolled he was ejected an car landed on him. His wife had belt on and
received a cut finger. WW

You probably have nbo idea how many more times seatbelts have saved your
life or prevented injury to you.

You forgot to mention the guy, in the other car, wearing a seatbelt, that
stayed behind the wheel, and controlled still his car, after being hit or
sufferring another incident to dislodge his driving position.



"WW" wrote in message
. ..
I don't use that guard as most of my cutting can not be done with it on.
However seat belts are a different thing. Save me 3 times as I could
maneuver with out sliding on the seat an losing control. 1 a large dog at
night that could have been a child, hard to tell with oncoming lights. 2 a
deer that came out of the brush fast. 3 a idiot that came on the highway
with out stopping I was able to go off road and back on with good control..
Had a friend that refused to use seat belts, was injured because of this in
an accident. Second time he was killed when a drunk hit him and as the car
rolled he was ejected an car landed on him. His wife had belt on and
received a cut finger. WW

In article , "WW" wrote:

However seat belts are a different thing. Save me 3 times as I could
maneuver with out sliding on the seat an losing control. 1 a large dog at
night that could have been a child, hard to tell with oncoming lights. 2 a
deer that came out of the brush fast. 3 a idiot that came on the highway
with out stopping I was able to go off road and back on with good control..
Had a friend that refused to use seat belts, was injured because of this in
an accident. Second time he was killed when a drunk hit him and as the car
rolled he was ejected an car landed on him. His wife had belt on and
received a cut finger. WW

I'm a firm believer in seat belts. Some years back, there was an accident on
one of the country roads a mile or so from where we lived at the time. Someone
crossed the center line, not sure which driver, but the result was a head-on
collision at some 50mph each between a full-size pickup truck and a compact
car on the order of a Fiesta or something similar. The seatbelted elderly
couple in the Fiesta had ankle injuries. The UNbelted 30something driver of
the pickup was pronounced dead at the scene.

*A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. *Guards? *I'm just not a fan.

I think most pro shops do eventually take off all the guards. I think
as a pro you do somehwat repetitive processes and become aware of safe
vs non-safe motions. Regardless, while your experience has been very
little blood, the national statistics are pretty clear and hundreds of
people loose digits and worse every year.

Here is a quote from a lawyer who takes saw injury cases.

"Every 9 minutes a person in the United States is injured using a
table saw. Ten people everyday suffer amputations. "

Every nine mimutes. Wow, I would not want to be that person or one of
those other 10 people. You think they would become more careful after
a while.

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

On 1/23/2011 3:05 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related".

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

DAMHIKT

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote in message
...


Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related".

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

How many? 50%? 5%? Makes a big difference, just saying some accidents
didn't involve a spinning blade doesn't give us useful information, it's
like telling someone to wade across a river with an average depth of only
two feet.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:36:00 -0800, "DGDevin"
wrote:



"Swingman" wrote in message
m...


Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related".

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

How many? 50%? 5%? Makes a big difference, just saying some accidents
didn't involve a spinning blade doesn't give us useful information, it's
like telling someone to wade across a river with an average depth of only
two feet.

His point was NOT is not claiming how MUCH to adjust the numbers as to
the "related"...just that there IS an adjustment to be made. The fact
is that it's kinda like when MADD "cites" teen alcohol related
accidents...if a PASSENGER in the OTHER car was drunk, MADD will still
use it as a teen+alcohol=BAD things accident.

That is one reason why I'd like to see MADD just go the hell away

On Jan 23, 5:36*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:36:00 -0800, "DGDevin"



wrote:

"Swingman" *wrote in message
m...

Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related"..

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

How many? *50%? *5%? *Makes a big difference, just saying some accidents
didn't involve a spinning blade doesn't give us useful information, it's
like telling someone to wade across a river with an average depth of only
two feet.

His point was NOT is not claiming how MUCH to adjust the numbers as to
the "related"...just that there IS an adjustment to be made. The fact
is that it's kinda like when MADD "cites" teen alcohol related
accidents...if a PASSENGER in the OTHER car was drunk, MADD will still
use it as a teen+alcohol=BAD things accident.

That is one reason why I'd like to see MADD just go the hell away

That's curious. And by curious I mean stupid and myopic.

You've never seen something the person driving hadn't? When I'm in
the 'nervous seat', as my brother and I call it, I'm paying at least
as much attention as the driver.

R

wrote in message ...


His point was NOT is not claiming how MUCH to adjust the numbers as to
the "related"...just that there IS an adjustment to be made.

Without knowing how much of an adjustment it's kind of pointless, what if
it's .05%?

The fact
is that it's kinda like when MADD "cites" teen alcohol related
accidents...if a PASSENGER in the OTHER car was drunk, MADD will still
use it as a teen+alcohol=BAD things accident.

Their shift to being almost a temperance organization is what caused the
group's founder to leave. They've become one of those self-contained
bureaucracy-religions that serves itself more than a public need. They
absorb a lot of the money they raise too and get poor grades from
organizations that rate the efficiency of charities. Too bad, they did good
work once upon a time.

On 1/23/2011 3:36 PM, DGDevin wrote:


"Swingman" wrote in message
...


Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related".

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

How many? 50%? 5%? Makes a big difference, just saying some accidents
didn't involve a spinning blade doesn't give us useful information, it's
like telling someone to wade across a river with an average depth of
only two feet.

You proved my point ...

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote in message
Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

Yeah, that reminds me of the time when I dropped the tablesaw on my foot.
The hospital gave me a crutch and called the sore foot a table saw injury.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 15:10:52 -0600, Swingman wrote:

On 1/23/2011 3:05 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

31.5k/yr is too many, for sure.

Look at how many people unnecessarily go to the hospital when a simple
bandage would do the trick. That alone drives up insurance rates.


Take such statistics with a grain of salt. Operative word is "related".

Injuries are routinely classified as "table saw related" even when
involving a table saw without a blade attached and/or not plugged in.

And look at the number of simple falls people make each year is way
above that number. No tools necessary:

Older adults - 2.2 million non-fatal injury falls, 18k of those fatal.
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreation...dultfalls.html

One tool necessary:
In 1996 there were 18,900,000 US auto accidents.
http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus...number_in.html

--
"I probably became a libertarian through exposure to tough-minded
professors" James Buchanan, Armen Alchian, Milton Friedman "who
encouraged me to think with my brain instead of my heart. I
learned that you have to evaluate the effects of public policy
as opposed to intentions."
-- Walter E. Williams

On 2011-01-23 22:04:29 -0500, Larry Jaques
said:

Look at how many people unnecessarily go to the hospital when a simple
bandage would do the trick. That alone drives up insurance rates.

And look at those who don't make the trip, figuring (incorrectly) that
the simple bandage would do the trick. Maybe they get lucky... and the
injury "sort of" heals. Result, a body part that "sort of" works, but
not at peak condition. Or perhaps an advanced surgical repair is needed
to correct the original damage PLUS the damage done by not attending
properly to the injury in the first place.

Now who's run up the insurance rates, hah?

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:44:21 -0500, Steve
wrote:

On 2011-01-23 22:04:29 -0500, Larry Jaques
said:

Look at how many people unnecessarily go to the hospital when a simple
bandage would do the trick. That alone drives up insurance rates.

And look at those who don't make the trip, figuring (incorrectly) that
the simple bandage would do the trick. Maybe they get lucky... and the
injury "sort of" heals. Result, a body part that "sort of" works, but
not at peak condition. Or perhaps an advanced surgical repair is needed
to correct the original damage PLUS the damage done by not attending
properly to the injury in the first place.

Now who's run up the insurance rates, hah?

You're right. I was considering only the semi-intelligent people.
There are far too many otherwise out there for it to be profitable.
But every little bit helps when you're $13T in debt and have massive
deficits adding to it each year...

--
If you can solve your problem, then what is the need of worrying?
If you cannot solve it, then what is the use of worrying?
-- Shantideva

On Jan 23, 4:05*pm, "SonomaProducts.com" wrote:
*A splitter is

absolutely a great thing. *Guards? *I'm just not a fan.

I think most pro shops do eventually take off all the guards. I think
as a pro you do somehwat repetitive processes and become aware of safe
vs non-safe motions. Regardless, while your experience has been very
little blood, the national statistics are pretty clear and hundreds of
people loose digits and worse every year.

Here is a quote from a lawyer who takes saw injury cases.

"Every 9 minutes a person in the United States is injured using a
table saw. *Ten people everyday suffer amputations. *"

Every nine mimutes. Wow, I would not want to be that person or one of
those other 10 people. You think they would become more careful after
a while.

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

My question is if 31,500 went to the ER, what did the other 534,170
(estimated) people do (assuming one injury each!) and how did the
study know how to estimate it with that degree of accuracy?

I've injured myself a whole bunch of times on jobs with 'only' two
visits to the ER, and I never reported the other times to anyone. Am
I in trouble?

R

In article , RicodJour wrote:

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

My question is if 31,500 went to the ER, what did the other 534,170
(estimated) people do (assuming one injury each!) and how did the
study know how to estimate it with that degree of accuracy?

I think you missed the point: 565,670 injuries in an 18-year period is
(approximately) 31,500 *per year*.

On Jan 23, 9:16*pm, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article , RicodJour wrote:



And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

My question is if 31,500 went to the ER, what did the other 534,170
(estimated) people do (assuming one injury each!) and how did the
study know how to estimate it with that degree of accuracy?

I think you missed the point: 565,670 injuries in an 18-year period is
(approximately) 31,500 *per year*.

Right. Doh!

R

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

My question is if 31,500 went to the ER, what did the other 534,170
(estimated) people do (assuming one injury each!) and how did the
study know how to estimate it with that degree of accuracy?

I think you missed the point: 565,670 injuries in an 18-year period is
(approximately) 31,500 *per year*.


And vehicle accidents cause 50,000 Deaths ...

--
"He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! "
Brian's Mum

In article , "Lobby Dosser" wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

My question is if 31,500 went to the ER, what did the other 534,170
(estimated) people do (assuming one injury each!) and how did the
study know how to estimate it with that degree of accuracy?

I think you missed the point: 565,670 injuries in an 18-year period is
(approximately) 31,500 *per year*.


And vehicle accidents cause 50,000 Deaths ...

Not any time recently, they haven't.

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

Living in furniture manufacturing country, I would argue the opposite.

A person making the same types of cuts for hours at a time tend to get bored
and then sloppy, and forget to be careful. Then the finger leaves the hand.

I think everyone would be surprised how easy you can get used to using
guards, for most cuts.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
says...

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

Living in furniture manufacturing country, I would argue the opposite.

A person making the same types of cuts for hours at a time tend to get bored
and then sloppy, and forget to be careful. Then the finger leaves the hand.

I think everyone would be surprised how easy you can get used to using
guards, for most cuts.

The thing is, if you're making the same cut for hours at a time, it's
cost effective to make jigs and fixturing specific to that cut and to
incorporate guards and to put up and take down the setup.























-.
0

On Jan 24, 9:27*am, "J. Clarke" wrote:
In article ,
says...



"SonomaProducts.com" wrote

Again note: "Non-occupational" I think pros are more careful.

Living in furniture manufacturing country, I would argue the opposite.

A person making the same types of cuts for hours at a time tend to get bored
and then sloppy, and forget to be careful. *Then the finger leaves the hand.

I think everyone would be surprised how easy you can get used to using
guards, for most cuts.

The thing is, if you're making the same cut for hours at a time, it's
cost effective to make jigs and fixturing specific to that cut and to
incorporate guards and to put up and take down the setup.

I see. Pros are more careful so they don't need guards, and pros are
the only ones that spend enough time cutting that it is cost effective
(again, skew word at work) for them to make guards, hence no one needs
guards. Yep. Ironclad reasoning, fer sure.

R

On 2011-01-24 10:41:18 -0500, RicodJour said:

I see. Pros are more careful so they don't need guards, and pros are
the only ones that spend enough time cutting that it is cost effective
(again, skew word at work) for them to make guards, hence no one needs
guards. Yep. Ironclad reasoning, fer sure.

R

And never match wits in battle against a Sicilian?

On 1/23/2011 4:05 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:

Here is a quote from a lawyer who takes saw injury cases.

"Every 9 minutes a person in the United States is injured using a
table saw. Ten people everyday suffer amputations. "

And then seriously another study by Science Daily says
"A recent study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy
of The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital found that
from 1990-2007, an estimated 565,670 non-occupational table saw-
related injuries were treated in US hospital emergency departments,
averaging 31,500 injuries per year."

Anytime I see stats quoted by anyone, I wonder how they arrived at the
number? Who did the counting? What was their objective. Saw Stop
people count differently than Delta people, for example.

In any case, 31,500/year = .5 Every 9 minutes, not 1 every 9 minutes,
making someone off by what, just 50%? Just saying...

--
Jack
4 million people die from second hand smoke every day....
http://jbstein.com

On Jan 26, 10:34*am, Jack Stein wrote:

Anytime I see stats quoted by anyone, I wonder how they arrived at the
number? *Who did the counting? *What was their objective. *Saw Stop
people count differently than Delta people, for example.

In any case, 31,500/year = .5 Every 9 minutes, not 1 every 9 minutes,
making someone off by what, just 50%? * *Just saying...

Not arguing with you, but if you're talking about accident rates I
would imagine that most of the accidents occur when people are awake,
right? So the 'day' is not 24 hours.

R

"Jay Pique" wrote in message
...


So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

The problem is perception, people who are doing unsafe things often perceive
they're in no danger. That guy next to you on the freeway who has a cell
phone in one hand and a coffee in the other, steering with his knee--he
thinks he can get away with that because in his view he's a good
driver--that something is about to happen two cars ahead that he hasn't
foreseen doesn't enter into his perceptions. The same thing happens in the
shop, like a hidden knot in a piece of wood that is about to cause a power
tool to do something you didn't expect. I agree that paying attention and
proper technique are vital to safety, but sometimes things happen that
aren't necessarily your fault, and then it's nice to have a backup that
keeps the blade out of your hand.

On Jan 23, 10:46*am, Jay Pique wrote:

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. *Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. *Proper technique and feed rate are key. *A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. *Guards? *I'm just not a fan.

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose. Splitters and
pawls are a big help against kickback. So is keeping your
machine tuned up -- a blade that heels in against the fence is
liable to grab and fire a board like a rail gun.

"Father Haskell" wrote in message
...
On Jan 23, 10:46 am, Jay Pique wrote:

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose. Splitters and
pawls are a big help against kickback. So is keeping your
machine tuned up -- a blade that heels in against the fence is
liable to grab and fire a board like a rail gun.

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square. Caught
between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down to the
tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in ER. THEN
I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. WW

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:08:43 -0700, "WW" wrote:


"Father Haskell" wrote in message
...
On Jan 23, 10:46 am, Jay Pique wrote:

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose. Splitters and
pawls are a big help against kickback. So is keeping your
machine tuned up -- a blade that heels in against the fence is
liable to grab and fire a board like a rail gun.

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square. Caught
between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down to the
tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in ER. THEN
I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. WW

The worst "kick back" (really the reverse) I've had was with my RAS. I was
sawing into a 1" cedar board when it grabbed the blade and the carriage came
at me. I had a few kicks when I was ripping with it, too. More than one
board hit the wall. I've had no kicks on my table saw, yet.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:08:43 -0700, "WW" wrote:


"Father Haskell" wrote in message
...
On Jan 23, 10:46 am, Jay Pique wrote:

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose. Splitters and
pawls are a big help against kickback. So is keeping your
machine tuned up -- a blade that heels in against the fence is
liable to grab and fire a board like a rail gun.

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square.
Caught
between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down to the
tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in ER.
THEN
I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. WW

The worst "kick back" (really the reverse) I've had was with my RAS. I
was
sawing into a 1" cedar board when it grabbed the blade and the carriage
came
at me. I had a few kicks when I was ripping with it, too. More than one
board hit the wall. I've had no kicks on my table saw, yet.

I will not rip with a RAS, and will not allow my students to rip with it,
either.

In my opinion, there is not enough control of the stock while doing this,
and far too many "bad things" can happen. It can pull your hand into the
blade, or shoot the stock at you. I shudder when thinking about it.
--
Jim in NC

On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:22:06 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:08:43 -0700, "WW" wrote:


"Father Haskell" wrote in message
...
On Jan 23, 10:46 am, Jay Pique wrote:

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose. Splitters and
pawls are a big help against kickback. So is keeping your
machine tuned up -- a blade that heels in against the fence is
liable to grab and fire a board like a rail gun.

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square.
Caught
between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down to the
tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in ER.
THEN
I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. WW

The worst "kick back" (really the reverse) I've had was with my RAS. I
was
sawing into a 1" cedar board when it grabbed the blade and the carriage
came
at me. I had a few kicks when I was ripping with it, too. More than one
board hit the wall. I've had no kicks on my table saw, yet.

I will not rip with a RAS, and will not allow my students to rip with it,
either.

In my opinion, there is not enough control of the stock while doing this,
and far too many "bad things" can happen. It can pull your hand into the
blade, or shoot the stock at you. I shudder when thinking about it.

That's kinda why my RAS hasn't been used in 15 years[*], and why I bought the
Unisaur.
[*] Thinking about it, it was last together before we moved *to* VT, in '93.

The worst "kick back" (really the reverse) I've had was with my RAS. I
was
sawing into a 1" cedar board when it grabbed the blade and the carriage
came
at me. I had a few kicks when I was ripping with it, too. More than one
board hit the wall. I've had no kicks on my table saw, yet.

I will not rip with a RAS, and will not allow my students to rip with it,
either.

In my opinion, there is not enough control of the stock while doing this,
and far too many "bad things" can happen. It can pull your hand into the
blade, or shoot the stock at you. I shudder when thinking about it.

Not trying to stir up too much crap, but as someone that uses a RAS to
rip sheet stock on a fairly regular basis, I'm curious as to how you
can have your hand pulled into the blade when ripping.

As I see it, on a TS, you are pushing a piece of wood into the
spinning blade while using a fence to guide the stock and the blade
sticks UP thru the material...on a RAS, you push the stock into the
spinning blade, using a fence, and the blade is above the stock. With
these set-ups, the TS pulls the material down to the table and the RAS
pulls the stock up to the blade guard...so the same effect, really.

Mike

"WW" wrote

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square.
Caught between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down
to the tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in
ER. THEN I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. WW

That is a violation of my "table saw rules" number 5.

It goes something like "The measurement of the wood touching the fence must
be 1.5 times the distance the fence is from the blade, unless the
measurement of the wood against the fence is more than 4 times the length of
the saw blade that is above the table."

In the case of a 16 by 16, they would be required to run it with a miter
gauge, or sled, or a different saw.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:

"WW" wrote

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square.
Caught between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger
down to the tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7
stitches in ER. THEN I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down.
Works great. WW

That is a violation of my "table saw rules" number 5.

Perhaps you would be willing to post your other table saw rules too (I'd
just soon not learn them the hard way)?

Thanks,
Bill


It goes something like "The measurement of the wood touching the fence
must be 1.5 times the distance the fence is from the blade, unless the
measurement of the wood against the fence is more than 4 times the
length of the saw blade that is above the table."

In the case of a 16 by 16, they would be required to run it with a miter
gauge, or sled, or a different saw.

On Jan 25, 8:05*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"WW" wrote

Been there. Kickback with a 3/4 inch plywood about 16 inches square.
Caught between fence and blade took off spinning and peeled a finger down
to the tendon. Could watch tendon move as I bent my finger. 7 stitches in
ER. THEN I bought the set of 2 pawls that hold wood down. Works great. *WW

*That is a violation of my "table saw rules" number 5.

If you are serious and you really do have a set of rules, post them,
please. I'm curious.

I have a set of rules...unfortunately, I can't post them as most of
them are dirty. The rest are just obscene.

R

"Father Haskell" wrote

In 40 years, I've seen lots of kickback, but never anyone getting
bit. Not sticking your fingers into the blade is the best protection
against having to relearn how to pick your nose.

In my 18 years or so of teaching, I have only had one student have a serious
accident. One too many, though. (knocking on wood, here)

He was using a table saw to ease the corners of a piece he was going to turn
on a lathe. He was one of my best students, so I was not watching him like
a hawk. He made a couple very bad decisions that I though that he should
know better, the wood kicked back, and he jumped and placed his hands on the
table to catch himself. Problem is, he chose the one place on the table
that had a two finger remover blade spinning. They put most of one finger
back on, but he lost about half of one finger.

Now, the guard is on, if it is possible to use while making a cut. If it is
not, an alternate guarding system is set up, or they don't use the saw.
Period.
--
Jim in NC

"Jay Pique" wrote

So I guess I have no real point other than to say that I think safety
in the shop is at least 95% using good commone sense and keeping your
eye on things. Feeling how the wood and the saw are responding is key
for me. Proper technique and feed rate are key. A splitter is
absolutely a great thing. Guards? I'm just not a fan.

I was about like most people when it comes to TS guards, in that they take
them off. When I started teaching high school students, liability concerns
dictated that I had to use the guard.

After a while, I came to realize that the guard was really not a problem,
for most operations. When there are cuts that need to be made and a guard
can not work, I come up with another shop built guard to protect hands and
fingers.
--
Jim in NC