advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

So, there will be a sudden growth in machinery sales outlets in Canada
& Mexico, just near border crossing points. Grizzly, Jet, etc will set
up some large warehouses nearby, improving employment in those
'foreign' areas too. Wonder if they can get a "foreign aid' grant as
well?

As well, existing saws will go up in value, even old junkers will be
worth refurbishing.


regards
Bruce

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike Paulsen
wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

Funny the document discusses all kinds of incidents from table saws
then ends up focusing on Saw Stop which addresses only contact with
blade accidents. Wot a surprise!

This may be a good thing but no surprise that a particular manufacturer
is driving it.

------------
"Mike Paulsen" wrote in message ...

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike Paulsen wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.

On Sep 29, 9:28*am, "
wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike Paulsen wrote:
advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

* "A. Background
* On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
* ( petitioners ) requested that we require performance standards for a system
* to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign. *

Billions.

That's not how it works. The guy has a new and improved mouse trap,
he's a lawyer and he knows how to work the system.

If you or I came up with a new and improved mouse trap that's related
to safety, has potentially many millions in sales, and we stuck with
it for many years, we could have our own legislation, too.

R

On 9/29/2011 9:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(€œpetitioners€�) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


Probably as much as all of the other "inventors" who have coerced the
government into making their devices safety requirements.

I am waiting for the government to required the little plastic "save a
deers life alerts" to be required on all cars because of the number of
deer accidents.

If you invent something the best way to make it pay is to say it is a
safety device and pay off government workers in a regulatory agency to
get it to be made a required safety device on something.

In article , says...

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

Looks like Sawstop is still at it. Somebody needs to shoot that loon
and his lawyers and burn the place to the ground.

If he wants to sell saws fine. If he wants to make it law that
everybody buy his product, he needs to be taken down.

In article , says...

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

Did you notice that the docket number has been removed? So no way to
protest it in a meaningful fashion.

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really needs
government control?

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:50:30 -0400, k-nuttle
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 9:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


Probably as much as all of the other "inventors" who have coerced the
government into making their devices safety requirements.

For instance?

I am waiting for the government to required the little plastic "save a
deers life alerts" to be required on all cars because of the number of
deer accidents.

If you invent something the best way to make it pay is to say it is a
safety device and pay off government workers in a regulatory agency to
get it to be made a required safety device on something.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just Wondering wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really needs
government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of government's
damned business.

On 9/29/11 11:34 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:50:30 -0400,
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 9:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


Probably as much as all of the other "inventors" who have coerced the
government into making their devices safety requirements.

For instance?


Al Gore.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:41:44 -0500, -MIKE- wrote:

On 9/29/11 11:34 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:50:30 -0400,
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 9:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


Probably as much as all of the other "inventors" who have coerced the
government into making their devices safety requirements.

For instance?


Al Gore.

"Safety requirement(s)"? ...but your point is taken.

" wrote in
news
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just Wondering
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike
wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements
to address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer,
et al. (“petitioners”) requested that we require performance
standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contact
with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has
contributed to Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really
needs government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of
government's damned business.

They require ground fault interruptors, really good grounding and a host
of other safety-related things. Why not this? I agree, it looks like it
should be personal option, but I'd like to get a discount on my medical
insurance for having a sawstop ... (Which I don't have (yet))

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 9/29/11 11:43 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:41:44 -0500, wrote:

On 9/29/11 11:34 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:50:30 -0400,
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 9:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


Probably as much as all of the other "inventors" who have coerced the
government into making their devices safety requirements.

For instance?


Al Gore.

"Safety requirement(s)"? ...but your point is taken.

Yes, all that silly "cap & trade (tax)" and other government "emissions"
mandates are for our collective "safety."


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/29/2011 12:35 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really needs
government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of government's
damned business.

I agree. But what surprises me is that health care providers haven't
tried to make it their business. Someone who uses sharp tools is
probably more likely to be cut by one than someone who doesn't own any.
Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use
a TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

Han wrote:
" wrote in
news
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just Wondering
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike
wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements
to address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James
Fulmer, et al. (“petitioners”) requested that we require
performance standards for a system to reduce or prevent
injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has
contributed to Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder
how many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there
actually are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the
country really needs government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of
government's damned business.

They require ground fault interruptors, really good grounding and a
host of other safety-related things. Why not this? I agree, it
looks like it should be personal option, but I'd like to get a
discount on my medical insurance for having a sawstop ... (Which I
don't have (yet))

Well... if we're going to legislate these things to protect us from
everything that could hurt us, then why not legislate menopausal and
post-menopausal wives? Hell - a lot more harm comes from them than from
table saws...

--

-Mike-

On 29 Sep 2011 16:52:38 GMT, Han wrote:

" wrote in
news
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just Wondering
wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike
wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements
to address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer,
et al. (“petitioners”) requested that we require performance
standards for a system to reduce or prevent injuries from contact
with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has
contributed to Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really
needs government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of
government's damned business.

They require ground fault interruptors, really good grounding and a host
of other safety-related things. Why not this? I agree, it looks like it
should be personal option, but I'd like to get a discount on my medical
insurance for having a sawstop ... (Which I don't have (yet))

The federal government does no such thing! If you find an insurance carrier
that gives a discount for a SawStop, or for that matter a flat roof, who
cares?! Your choice and theirs.

I wouldn't buy a SawStop!
didn't

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:58:41 -0400, Bill wrote:

On 9/29/2011 12:35 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:24:04 -0600, Just wrote:

On 9/29/2011 7:28 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 23:17:45 -0500, Mike wrote:

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

"A. Background
On April 15, 2003, Stephen Gass, David Fanning, and James Fulmer, et al.
(“petitioners”) requested that we require performance standards for a system
to reduce or prevent injuries from contact with the blade of a table saw."

I wonder how much Stephed Gass (SawStop's inventor, BTW) has contributed to
Obama's re-election campaign.


I realize that table saws are inherently dangerous. But I wonder how
many injuries (needing something more than a band-aid) there actually
are per man-hour of use. Is this an area where the country really needs
government control?

FWIG, it's not infinitesimal, but you're right. It's none of government's
damned business.

I agree. But what surprises me is that health care providers haven't
tried to make it their business. Someone who uses sharp tools is
probably more likely to be cut by one than someone who doesn't own any.
Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use
a TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

How about that bicycle in your garage? Skis? Is your garage messy? Is your
lawn as smooth as a putting green? good grief

On 9/29/11 12:52 PM, Han wrote:

They require ground fault interruptors, really good grounding and a host
of other safety-related things. Why not this? I agree, it looks like it
should be personal option, but I'd like to get a discount on my medical
insurance for having a sawstop ... (Which I don't have (yet))

My home and life insurance companies never asked about a shop or power
tools, so I am pretty sure I wouldn't get a discount. Don't really need
health insurance in Canada, so I don't know about it being on the list
of questions.

--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this particular one.

--

-Mike-

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


How about that bicycle in your garage? Skis? Is your garage messy?
Is your lawn as smooth as a putting green? good grief

Depends on where you play. Where my league plays - yes my lawn is as smooth
as their greens. Of course...

--

-Mike-

wrote
The federal government does no such thing! If you find an insurance
carrier
that gives a discount for a SawStop, or for that matter a flat roof, who
cares?! Your choice and theirs.

I wouldn't buy a SawStop!
didn't


Our workman's comp carrier is strongly recommending them. I don't know if
they discount rates though, since we have no saws at work.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:17:44 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this particular one.

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware, crap
company.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 20:14:53 +0200, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:


wrote
The federal government does no such thing! If you find an insurance
carrier
that gives a discount for a SawStop, or for that matter a flat roof, who
cares?! Your choice and theirs.

I wouldn't buy a SawStop!
didn't


Our workman's comp carrier is strongly recommending them. I don't know if
they discount rates though, since we have no saws at work.

Great. Have at it. I much prefer my Unisaur, at less than half the price.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:18:56 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:


How about that bicycle in your garage? Skis? Is your garage messy?
Is your lawn as smooth as a putting green? good grief

Depends on where you play. Where my league plays - yes my lawn is as smooth
as their greens. Of course...

Perhaps you should pay more for your insurance because you golf in a dangerous
cow pasture.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:17:44 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this
particular one.

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware,
crap company.

I disagree. they are a for profit company. It's to their advantage to
leverage everything they can to command market share. Most of the
discussions here are far too altruistic - as if Saw Stop should be doing
something more "nobel". Hell - they're about making money. God bless them
for going for it in what ever way they can do it. Don't understand why
anyone would call them a crap company.

--

-Mike-

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:18:56 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


How about that bicycle in your garage? Skis? Is your garage messy?
Is your lawn as smooth as a putting green? good grief

Depends on where you play. Where my league plays - yes my lawn is
as smooth as their greens. Of course...

Perhaps you should pay more for your insurance because you golf in a
dangerous cow pasture.

Unfortunately - not too far from the truth...

--

-Mike-

On 9/29/2011 11:58 AM, Bill wrote:

Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use a
TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

I'm among those in the "table saw" accident statistics.

Mine wasn't plugged in, nor did it have a blade mounted, but the ER
classed it, for insurance purposes, as a "table saw injury".

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

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article , says...

advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to
address table saw blade contact injuries.

September 14, 2011

http://www.cpsc.gov/LIBRARY/FOIA/FOI...f/tablesaw.pdf

Looks like Sawstop is still at it. Somebody needs to shoot that loon
and his lawyers and burn the place to the ground.

If he wants to sell saws fine. If he wants to make it law that
everybody buy his product, he needs to be taken down.

At the very least any new law mandating "xyz" should include
mandatory provisions which invalidate all patents, copyrights, etc
relating to "xyz". This would be for the greater good and in
the public interest.
Art

Artemus wrote:

At the very least any new law mandating "xyz" should include
mandatory provisions which invalidate all patents, copyrights, etc
relating to "xyz". This would be for the greater good and in
the public interest.

Why in the world would you suggest such a thing as that? I could see it if
you had suggested that the wording of any legislation should be loose enough
to specify alternatives, and not be so specific as to mandate one particular
solution, but to suggest invalidating patents, copyrights, etc. does not
even make sense. I heartily disagree that it would be in the greater good
of the public interest, and even further argue that the public interest is
not sufficient cause for that type of behavior.

--

-Mike-

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:54:36 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:17:44 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this
particular one.

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware,
crap company.

I disagree. they are a for profit company. It's to their advantage to
leverage everything they can to command market share. Most of the
discussions here are far too altruistic - as if Saw Stop should be doing
something more "nobel". Hell - they're about making money. God bless them
for going for it in what ever way they can do it. Don't understand why
anyone would call them a crap company.

Wrong! I don't do business with unethical companies. Period.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:28:25 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 9/29/2011 11:58 AM, Bill wrote:

Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use a
TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

I'm among those in the "table saw" accident statistics.

Mine wasn't plugged in, nor did it have a blade mounted, but the ER
classed it, for insurance purposes, as a "table saw injury".

Does a splinter off the cut wood count?

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware,
crap company.

I disagree. they are a for profit company. It's to their advantage
to leverage everything they can to command market share. Most of the
discussions here are far too altruistic - as if Saw Stop should be
doing something more "nobel". Hell - they're about making money.
God bless them for going for it in what ever way they can do it.
Don't understand why anyone would call them a crap company.

Wrong! I don't do business with unethical companies. Period.

I guess it's all in what one considers unethical.

--

-Mike-

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:40:49 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

wrote:

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware,
crap company.

I disagree. they are a for profit company. It's to their advantage
to leverage everything they can to command market share. Most of the
discussions here are far too altruistic - as if Saw Stop should be
doing something more "nobel". Hell - they're about making money.
God bless them for going for it in what ever way they can do it.
Don't understand why anyone would call them a crap company.

Wrong! I don't do business with unethical companies. Period.

I guess it's all in what one considers unethical.

Inventing a widget, getting the government to require said widget, and
refusing to sell said widget freely, is unethical to most normal minds. Yes,
Gass makes the Snidely Whiplash list. Nope, not going to happen.

On 9/29/2011 1:44 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:17:44 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this particular one.

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware, crap
company.

I'd have to call that a classi case of cutting off your nose to spite
your face.

In my situation, "I" come first regardless of who makes it. I'm not
going to get hung up on a detail if I will be protected.

On 9/29/2011 4:30 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:28:25 -0500, wrote:

On 9/29/2011 11:58 AM, Bill wrote:

Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use a
TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

I'm among those in the "table saw" accident statistics.

Mine wasn't plugged in, nor did it have a blade mounted, but the ER
classed it, for insurance purposes, as a "table saw injury".

Does a splinter off the cut wood count?

Only if you are dumb enough to go to the ER for that splinter to be
removed. ;~)

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:22:05 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/29/2011 1:44 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:17:44 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:


I wouldn't buy a SawStop!


I would - but that's a whole different discussion than this particular one.

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice hardware, crap
company.

I'd have to call that a classi case of cutting off your nose to spite
your face.

Maybe. I don't buy electronics off the back of a truck, either.

In my situation, "I" come first regardless of who makes it. I'm not
going to get hung up on a detail if I will be protected.

Not sure how this applies here.

On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:25:26 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/29/2011 4:30 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:28:25 -0500, wrote:

On 9/29/2011 11:58 AM, Bill wrote:

Reminiscent of Bill Clinton, if any one asks, "When I saw I don't use a
TS--and if I do, I leave it unplugged!".

I'm among those in the "table saw" accident statistics.

Mine wasn't plugged in, nor did it have a blade mounted, but the ER
classed it, for insurance purposes, as a "table saw injury".

Does a splinter off the cut wood count?

Only if you are dumb enough to go to the ER for that splinter to be
removed. ;~)

OTOH, if the splinter was that bad.... ;-)

I thought of that after I pressed SEND.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:40:49 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The reason I wouldn't is *exactly* this discussion. Nice
hardware, crap company.

I disagree. they are a for profit company. It's to their
advantage to leverage everything they can to command market share.
Most of the discussions here are far too altruistic - as if Saw
Stop should be doing something more "nobel". Hell - they're about
making money. God bless them for going for it in what ever way
they can do it. Don't understand why anyone would call them a crap
company.

Wrong! I don't do business with unethical companies. Period.

I guess it's all in what one considers unethical.

Inventing a widget, getting the government to require said widget, and
refusing to sell said widget freely, is unethical to most normal
minds. Yes, Gass makes the Snidely Whiplash list. Nope, not going
to happen.

Well - they did try to sell it long before they went the route of the
government approach.

--

-Mike-