On 1/24/2012 8:26 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 1/24/2012 7:48 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 1/23/2012 5:49 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 1/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/21/2012 6:25 PM, Swingman wrote:

Yes, it is expensive to set it off. Cartridge and blade.

You guys are wise. IMO, only a fool, with a single employee who's
job description included operating a table saw, would not have a
SawStop today.

Cheap at fifty times the price ...

Let's see, one guy had 7 false one's in a couple of years and one
grill that nicked a fing-ee that likely happened because of
carelessness brought on by lack of respect enabled by the SS.

$100 for a good blade, $80 for the replacement mechanism, times 8,
times 50... $72,000.

I think it would be close to "not cheap" at fifty times the price,
at least I know no one that would own or use a tsaw with those
sort of numbers mandated.

As an employer, I'd take your $72k for 8 incidents any day over a
jury award of $1.5 million for each incident ... $12,000,000, or
over 1300 times the price.



Ryobi just learned that lesson.

You mean they aren't appealing that decision? That is a crime
against humanity, and an undeserved plum for Gass.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, what has it cost to for defense?

Like it or not, that is the US law system. If it had been a "frivolous"
suit, you could countersue, I think. IANAL!!!

Btw, I like the system in other countries, where you can be forced to
pay the expenses of the winner of a suit, if the winner is the
defendant. But that doesn't apply here (yet?).


On paper that sounds good but jurys are paid off every where and big
business has more money to spend than you or I. We may not be able to
afford to be in the right.

Cut'em off public health insurance and make him pay his own premiums
for being a danger to himself.

------------
"Leon" wrote in message
...
Jack, you sound exactly like all the people that eventually did have an
accident. Almost verbatim your words came out of their mouths.
The longer you go with out having an accident the closer you are to
having one.

--------------
On 1/24/2012 9:08 AM, Jack wrote:
To be really safe, the gov't would have to mandate we stay on the
couch,
with a remote so we don't slip on an empty gov't approved potato chip
bag on the way to the gov't controlled TV.

LUCKY you!

Make sure you cancel your auto insurance and cut off the seat belts
too.

-
"Jack" wrote in message ...
As an individual user with 50 years of no incidents under my belt, I'll
take 3 new pickup trucks over $72,000 wasted in false trips.

On 1/24/2012 9:39 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 6:49 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 1/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/21/2012 6:25 PM, Swingman wrote:

Yes, it is expensive to set it off. Cartridge and blade.

Cheap at fifty times the price ...

$100 for a good blade, $80 for the replacement mechanism, times 8, times
50... $72,000.

I think it would be close to "not cheap" at fifty times the price, at
least I know no one that would own or use a tsaw with those sort of
numbers mandated.

As an employer, I'd take your $72k for 8 incidents any day over a jury
award of $1.5 million for each incident ... $12,000,000, or over 1300
times the price.

As an individual user with 50 years of no incidents under my belt, I'll
take 3 new pickup trucks over $72,000 wasted in false trips.


Tick tock, be careful Jack.

On 1/24/2012 12:01 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:27:37 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 01:11:41 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:20:31 -0500, Jack wrote:

Perhaps, but in newsgroups, the correct method of emphasizing text is
capitalization of said text. Bold/underlined and so on doesn't work, so
capitalization it is.

Bold does work in most news readers. Just surround a word or a phrase
with asterisks *like this*.

Bold doesn't work in one of the largest and best readers, Agent.
-dashes-, _underscores_, and /slashes/ can also be used for emphasis.

Multiple exclamation points and question marks show the naiveté of the
user.


from: http://www.hoax-slayer.com/do-not-use-all-capitals.html

Also, a message written in all capitals is harder to read.

Nobody said anything about ALL caps. Mike told YOU there was no reason
for *you* to use caps to make _your_ point. I say caps are a fine way
to emphasize text to make /your/ point, just as -you- did in [your] message.

Jack
Those who trade liberty for security have neither


In blocks
of text rendered in all capitals, words lose their "shape" because
they are all the same height. Each word becomes a uniform rectangle.
Most people read and quickly recognize words by looking at their
overall shape. We do not read by visualizing words one letter at a
time.

Capital letters are best left for their intended usage and, SPARINGLY
to emphasize a particular word or phrase.

On 1/23/2012 11:41 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

I know riving knifes are now required to be **UL Compliant**.
I do not know the significance of this compliancy (perhaps someone can
address this), but it's not hard for me to imagine what the next
requirement of UL Coompliancy could be for table saws.

UL compliance only pertains to newly purchased items. It has nothing to do
with existing products. As for new compliancy requirments - that's for new
stuff. When was the last time the UL Police showed up at your house to
inspect and demand an update to your 20 year old toaster or steam iron?

How about THIS Mike. Someone *kills* you for using too many capital
letters. Your wife sells your Tsaw to some clown on Craigslist. He
chops off his arm because your saw is not "UL" compliant and has no
guard, no riving knife, no SS tech.

Of course he sues your widowed wife for $12000000000000 dollars because
of her negligence to have readily available safety crap installed before
selling you the damned beast!!!!!!! He claims he is having trouble
whacking off with one hand, big a dick as he is. Your widow refuses to
give him a hand, ergo the large $suit.

He wins, hand down...

Jack
A boiled egg is hard to beat.

On 1/23/2012 1:54 PM, Just Wondering wrote:

The problem is, if the regulation was put into effect, every TS
manufacturer would have to buy technology from the SawStop company. A TS
that retails for $600 today would cost $1200 tomorrow. Sure, you could
disable the SS, but if you wanted to buy a TS at all, you'd have to pay
twice as much for the saw as as you would in a free market.

Not really. You could buy Mikes saw after someone kills his sorry ass:-)

On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

What if the Gov't mandates SS tech. What if SS refuses to sell your
(Texas) company SS tech because Goss is a lawyer, and he hates anything
Texas?

Then what?

Jack
Not from Texas, so I'd be safe...

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 1/24/2012 9:08 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 6:33 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/21/2012 6:25 PM, Swingman wrote:

Yes, it is expensive to set it off. Cartridge and blade.

You guys are wise. IMO, only a fool, with a single employee who's
job description included operating a table saw, would not have a
SawStop today.

Don't need no steenking saw stops...

Jack

Now I will have to say to trip the mechanism that many times you
also will have factor in positive trips that actually saved a finger
or hand.

Lets say one time in 50, at Approximately $25,000~$35,000 per
incident to cover emergency surgery and reconstruction and
rehabilitation and perhaps a prosthetic and lost wages, TIMES 8
equals $200,000~$280,000,

Yes cheap at 50 times the price.

Well I don't have one, nor a blade guard, nor a rive, and after 50
years of doing this, never nicked one fing-ee. Nor did either of my
brothers, nor did my dad. At my age, I would think owning one might
be a good idea, but, I don't need no steenking gov't dick head
mandating I buy one with a every new saw purchase.

Jack, you sound exactly like all the people that eventually did have
an accident. Almost verbatim your words came out of their mouths.
The longer you go with out having an accident the closer you are to
having one.

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then having
had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's elementary in
statistics. Roll 2 dice. You can calculate the chances for snake-eyes,
if nobody tampered with the dice. The next time you roll those same
dice, the chances for snake eyes are the same. Now, the chances for
rolling snake eyes some time increase with the number of rolls allowed.

To be really safe, the gov't would have to mandate we stay on the
couch, with a remote so we don't slip on an empty gov't approved
potato chip bag on the way to the gov't controlled TV.

To be really safe, don't cut off your nose to spite your face.




--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On paper that sounds good but jurys are paid off every where and big
business has more money to spend than you or I. We may not be able to
afford to be in the right.

There are law systems without juries that work just as well as those with
....

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:56:15 -0500, Jack wrote:

Nobody said anything about ALL caps. Mike told YOU there was no reason
for *you* to use caps to make _your_ point. I say caps are a fine way
to emphasize text to make /your/ point, just as -you- did in [your]
message.

I take *your* point :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 1/24/2012 9:08 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 6:33 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/21/2012 6:25 PM, Swingman wrote:

Yes, it is expensive to set it off. Cartridge and blade.

You guys are wise. IMO, only a fool, with a single employee who's
job description included operating a table saw, would not have a
SawStop today.

Don't need no steenking saw stops...

Jack

Now I will have to say to trip the mechanism that many times you
also will have factor in positive trips that actually saved a finger
or hand.

Lets say one time in 50, at Approximately $25,000~$35,000 per
incident to cover emergency surgery and reconstruction and
rehabilitation and perhaps a prosthetic and lost wages, TIMES 8
equals $200,000~$280,000,

Yes cheap at 50 times the price.

Well I don't have one, nor a blade guard, nor a rive, and after 50
years of doing this, never nicked one fing-ee. Nor did either of my
brothers, nor did my dad. At my age, I would think owning one might
be a good idea, but, I don't need no steenking gov't dick head
mandating I buy one with a every new saw purchase.

Jack, you sound exactly like all the people that eventually did have
an accident. Almost verbatim your words came out of their mouths.
The longer you go with out having an accident the closer you are to
having one.

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then having
had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's elementary in
statistics. Roll 2 dice. You can calculate the chances for snake-eyes,
if nobody tampered with the dice. The next time you roll those same
dice, the chances for snake eyes are the same. Now, the chances for
rolling snake eyes some time increase with the number of rolls allowed.

To be really safe, the gov't would have to mandate we stay on the
couch, with a remote so we don't slip on an empty gov't approved
potato chip bag on the way to the gov't controlled TV.

To be really safe, don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

Ummmm do you really believe that some one can do wood working for 50
years and and "never nick one finger?
I believer that "x" is actually greater than zero.

Lets be real here.

On 1/24/2012 11:04 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

What if the Gov't mandates SS tech. What if SS refuses to sell your
(Texas) company SS tech because Goss is a lawyer, and he hates anything
Texas?

Then what?

Jack
Not from Texas, so I'd be safe...



That is a big what if and speculation. It is common knowledge that
SawStop wants to sell the technology and if they decided not sell the
technology that is required, that would form a monopoly.

On 1/24/2012 10:55 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 11:41 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

I know riving knifes are now required to be **UL Compliant**.
I do not know the significance of this compliancy (perhaps someone can
address this), but it's not hard for me to imagine what the next
requirement of UL Coompliancy could be for table saws.

UL compliance only pertains to newly purchased items. It has nothing
to do
with existing products. As for new compliancy requirments - that's for
new
stuff. When was the last time the UL Police showed up at your house to
inspect and demand an update to your 20 year old toaster or steam iron?

How about THIS Mike. Someone *kills* you for using too many capital
letters. Your wife sells your Tsaw to some clown on Craigslist. He chops
off his arm because your saw is not "UL" compliant and has no guard, no
riving knife, no SS tech.

Of course he sues your widowed wife for $12000000000000 dollars because
of her negligence to have readily available safety crap installed before
selling you the damned beast!!!!!!! He claims he is having trouble
whacking off with one hand, big a dick as he is. Your widow refuses to
give him a hand, ergo the large $suit.

He wins, hand down...

Jack
A boiled egg is hard to beat.

And that example is exactly why the government is going to end up taking
care of people that make those kind of comments.
You make a pretty good defense for SawStop.

On 1/24/2012 12:16 PM, Han wrote:
Leon wrote

Jack, you sound exactly like all the people that eventually did have
an accident. Almost verbatim your words came out of their mouths.
The longer you go with out having an accident the closer you are to
having one.

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then having
had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's elementary in
statistics.

People ain't dice though. There are two good reasons the chances of an
accident increase over time. One is complacency. Get too nonchalant
and whack, one less fing-ee. The other is age. The longer you go w/o
accident, the older ya get. The older ya get, the more useless ya get
and one day, whack, another fing-ee bites the dust....

Perhaps the Gov't should mandate anyone buying/using a saw past the age
of 60 or 65 MUST buy a SS.

Jack
You know you are getting old when everything either dries up or leaks.

In article
Jack writes:
On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

What if the Gov't mandates SS tech. What if SS refuses to sell your
(Texas) company SS tech because Goss is a lawyer, and he hates anything
Texas?

Then what?

What if flying unicorns poop rainbows? Then what?

You act as if this is a new and unusual concept. The law has been
there, done that. This article doesn't cover legally mandated,
just standards mandated, but the situation is about the same:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasona...tory_licensing

--
Drew Lawson
"Please understand that we are considerably less interested
in you than you are."
-- Madeleine Page, on the deep truths of alt.folklore.urban

On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Han wrote:

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then having
had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's elementary in
statistics. Roll 2 dice. You can calculate the chances for snake-eyes,
if nobody tampered with the dice. The next time you roll those same
dice, the chances for snake eyes are the same. Now, the chances for
rolling snake eyes some time increase with the number of rolls allowed.

Personally, I prefer Bayesian probability over maturity of chances. LOL!

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 1/24/2012 12:42 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in

Well I don't have one, nor a blade guard, nor a rive, and after 50
years of doing this, never nicked one fing-ee. Nor did either of my
brothers, nor did my dad. At my age, I would think owning one might
be a good idea, but, I don't need no steenking gov't dick head
mandating I buy one with a every new saw purchase.

Ummmm do you really believe that some one can do wood working for 50
years and and "never nick one finger?
I believer that "x" is actually greater than zero.

I, nor did the folks I mentioned, ever nick a finger on a table saw, or
any power saw for that matter. You can believe it or not, makes no
never mind to me. Never got nicked on my shaper, jointer, planer, band
saw, jig saw, routers, or drill press either. I did jab my elbow into
the live center (and drill) in my lathe a number of times. I keep doing
it too, and it always ****es me off.

Oh, I did cut my finger cleaning grease off my planer blades when
delivered new, packed in grease, but it wasn't running, or being used,
it was being installed. I also cut my finger once chopping up a pepper
for an omelet, but we're talking table saws and the like right?

Lets be real here.

Always.

On that note (being real), no one in this thread was talking about every
man woman and child being forced to buy a table saw, and, *I* was not
talking about never being nicked in my life, ever, from _anything_. I
was specifically talking about the subject, table saws and more
specifically where a SS would have been needed. Your insinuations to
the otherwise are not *real*, other than /really/ disingenuous.

Jack
A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse

On 1/24/2012 12:16 PM, Jack wrote:

People ain't dice though. There are two good reasons the chances of an
accident increase over time. One is complacency. Get too nonchalant and
whack, one less fing-ee. The other is age. The longer you go w/o
accident, the older ya get. The older ya get, the more useless ya get
and one day, whack, another fing-ee bites the dust....


The principle of _risk-compensation effect_: "When people feel safer,
they take more chances, so the total level of safety remains constant".

IOW, more SS's on the market will not necessarily result in fewer table
saw accidents, although the severity may arguably decrease, at least at
this stage of the game.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Jack wrote:

Perhaps the Gov't should mandate anyone buying/using a saw past the age
of 60 or 65 MUST buy a SS.

Is there any statistical evidence that woodworkers over 60 are more
likely to injure themselves on power tools than those under 60?

On 1/24/2012 12:45 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 11:04 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

What if the Gov't mandates SS tech. What if SS refuses to sell your
(Texas) company SS tech because Goss is a lawyer, and he hates anything
Texas?

Then what?

Jack
Not from Texas, so I'd be safe...

That is a big what if and speculation. It is common knowledge that
SawStop wants to sell the technology and if they decided not sell the
technology that is required, that would form a monopoly.

Actually they would have a monopoly anyway, since no one would be
allowed to sell the product w/o approval from them. INAL, but I don't
think anyone could force SS to license me to sell their product. Do you
think you could put SS tech on the saws you make w/o buying/paying SS?
Patent holders have rights you apparently don't know about.
SS is not pushing this legislation because they give a damn about your
fingers.

Jack
Ninety-nine percent of all lawyers give the rest a bad name

On 1/24/2012 12:47 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 10:55 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 11:41 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

I know riving knifes are now required to be **UL Compliant**.
I do not know the significance of this compliancy (perhaps someone can
address this), but it's not hard for me to imagine what the next
requirement of UL Coompliancy could be for table saws.

UL compliance only pertains to newly purchased items. It has nothing
to do
with existing products. As for new compliancy requirments - that's for
new
stuff. When was the last time the UL Police showed up at your house to
inspect and demand an update to your 20 year old toaster or steam iron?

How about THIS Mike. Someone *kills* you for using too many capital
letters. Your wife sells your Tsaw to some clown on Craigslist. He chops
off his arm because your saw is not "UL" compliant and has no guard, no
riving knife, no SS tech.

Of course he sues your widowed wife for $12000000000000 dollars because
of her negligence to have readily available safety crap installed before
selling you the damned beast!!!!!!! He claims he is having trouble
whacking off with one hand, big a dick as he is. Your widow refuses to
give him a hand, ergo the large $suit.

He wins, hand down...

Jack
A boiled egg is hard to beat.

And that example is exactly why the government is going to end up taking
care of people that make those kind of comments.
You make a pretty good defense for SawStop.

If I can save one finger, it will all be worth it...

Jack

On 1/24/2012 1:42 PM, Drew Lawson wrote:

What if flying unicorns poop rainbows? Then what?

Some ****ing lawyer will figure a way to sue the **** out of flying
unicorns pooping rainbows. What do YOU think would happen?

Jack

On 1/24/2012 1:11 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/24/2012 12:47 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 10:55 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 11:41 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

I know riving knifes are now required to be **UL Compliant**.
I do not know the significance of this compliancy (perhaps someone can
address this), but it's not hard for me to imagine what the next
requirement of UL Coompliancy could be for table saws.

UL compliance only pertains to newly purchased items. It has nothing
to do
with existing products. As for new compliancy requirments - that's for
new
stuff. When was the last time the UL Police showed up at your house to
inspect and demand an update to your 20 year old toaster or steam iron?

How about THIS Mike. Someone *kills* you for using too many capital
letters. Your wife sells your Tsaw to some clown on Craigslist. He chops
off his arm because your saw is not "UL" compliant and has no guard, no
riving knife, no SS tech.

Of course he sues your widowed wife for $12000000000000 dollars because
of her negligence to have readily available safety crap installed before
selling you the damned beast!!!!!!! He claims he is having trouble
whacking off with one hand, big a dick as he is. Your widow refuses to
give him a hand, ergo the large $suit.

He wins, hand down...

Jack
A boiled egg is hard to beat.

And that example is exactly why the government is going to end up taking
care of people that make those kind of comments.
You make a pretty good defense for SawStop.

If I can save one finger, it will all be worth it...

Jack

Now you are coming around. LOL Fun playing tag with you Jack.

Swingman wrote in
:

On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Han wrote:

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then
having had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's
elementary in statistics. Roll 2 dice. You can calculate the
chances for snake-eyes, if nobody tampered with the dice. The next
time you roll those same dice, the chances for snake eyes are the
same. Now, the chances for rolling snake eyes some time increase
with the number of rolls allowed.

Personally, I prefer Bayesian probability over maturity of chances.
LOL!

I wasn't trying to say that in the course of using powertools one doesn't
either get more complacent or more experienced/careful. Due to the few
not so good experiences, I'm more careful now than earlier in life ...

And looking up Bayesian probability, I got confused early on, so quit
further "research" on that subject ... grin.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 1/24/2012 2:03 PM, Han wrote:
wrote in

Personally, I prefer Bayesian probability over maturity of chances.
LOL!

And looking up Bayesian probability, I got confused early on, so quit
further "research" on that subject ...grin.

Basically, if your coin flips heads twenty times in a row, disregard
"maturity of chances" as the basis for future bets, and go with the
obviously sufficient evidential probability that the coin is somehow
influenced in that direction.

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
http://gplus.to/eWoodShop

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:17:08 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/24/2012 7:48 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 1/23/2012 5:49 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 1/23/2012 5:03 PM, Jack wrote:
On 1/21/2012 6:25 PM, Swingman wrote:

Yes, it is expensive to set it off. Cartridge and blade.

You guys are wise. IMO, only a fool, with a single employee who's
job description included operating a table saw, would not have a
SawStop today.

Cheap at fifty times the price ...

Let's see, one guy had 7 false one's in a couple of years and one
grill that nicked a fing-ee that likely happened because of
carelessness brought on by lack of respect enabled by the SS.

$100 for a good blade, $80 for the replacement mechanism, times 8,
times 50... $72,000.

I think it would be close to "not cheap" at fifty times the price,
at least I know no one that would own or use a tsaw with those sort
of numbers mandated.

As an employer, I'd take your $72k for 8 incidents any day over a
jury award of $1.5 million for each incident ... $12,000,000, or over
1300 times the price.



Ryobi just learned that lesson.

You mean they aren't appealing that decision? That is a crime against
humanity, and an undeserved plum for Gass.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, what has it cost to for defense?

Win or lose, it -will- raise the price of tools from Ryobi in the
future. The judge and jury on that one ought to be horsewhipped.
If anything, the contractor and Osorio were equally to blame, not the
sawmaker. I hope the appeal reverses it completely.
****ES ME OFF, IT DOES!

--
The most powerful factors in the world are clear
ideas in the minds of energetic men of good will.
-- J. Arthur Thomson

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:39:17 -0500, Jack wrote:
As an individual user with 50 years of no incidents under my belt, I'll
take 3 new pickup trucks over $72,000 wasted in false trips.

Just one question Jack. How will you show your face here if you chop
one of your fingers off? How will you ever live down the shame?

Sorry, that's two questions. Feel free to answer one or both.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:31:52 -0500, "m II" wrote:
Seems to me Joseppi was right!

You are ignorant of how legal cases work. When you go to a lawyer you
are muzzled or you don't get no money and your lawyer walks away from
you.

You just love playing the ass don't you? Sure there will be a muzzle
order in effect. But, people talk. News reporters can be just as
determined as the most vile paparazzi. Are you actually stupid enough
to think that kind of information would stay unrevealed?

Sorry my mistake. From day one, you've demonstrated your ignorance and
stupidity here with most every message you've posted.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:04:36 -0500, Jack wrote:

On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

Oh, it WOULD be Saw-Stop, one way or the other, because they'd sue
the ass of anyone infringing on their iron-clad bogus patent. It wuld
be SS supplied, or SS Licensed

What if the Gov't mandates SS tech. What if SS refuses to sell your
(Texas) company SS tech because Goss is a lawyer, and he hates anything
Texas?

Then what?

Jack
Not from Texas, so I'd be safe...

The hole finger for sure.

-------------
"Jack" wrote in message ...
If I can save one finger, it will all be worth it...

Jack

You are not much fun when you lose!

-------------
"Dave" wrote in message
...
Sorry my mistake. From day one, you've demonstrated your ignorance and
stupidity here with most every message you've posted.

You don't know Jack...

----------
"Jack" wrote in message ...
On that note (being real), no one in this thread was talking about
every
man woman and child being forced to buy a table saw, and, *I* was not
talking about never being nicked in my life, ever, from _anything_. I
was specifically talking about the subject, table saws and more
specifically where a SS would have been needed. Your insinuations to
the otherwise are not *real*, other than /really/ disingenuous.

Jack
A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse

We'll be watching for new nicknames with missing strings of letters in
the text.

------------
"Dave" wrote in message
...
Just one question Jack. How will you show your face here if you chop
one of your fingers off? How will you ever live down the shame?

Sorry, that's two questions. Feel free to answer one or both.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:16:36 -0500, Jack wrote:

On 1/24/2012 12:16 PM, Han wrote:
Leon wrote

Jack, you sound exactly like all the people that eventually did have
an accident. Almost verbatim your words came out of their mouths.
The longer you go with out having an accident the closer you are to
having one.

Not true. If the chances of anyone having an accident are X, then having
had no accidents doesn't increase your chances. That's elementary in
statistics.

People ain't dice though. There are two good reasons the chances of an
accident increase over time. One is complacency. Get too nonchalant
and whack, one less fing-ee. The other is age. The longer you go w/o
accident, the older ya get. The older ya get, the more useless ya get
and one day, whack, another fing-ee bites the dust....

Perhaps the Gov't should mandate anyone buying/using a saw past the age
of 60 or 65 MUST buy a SS.

Jack
You know you are getting old when everything either dries up or leaks.
Most guys I know missing a digit lost it while they were "young and
invincible", before they had accumulated enough experience to work
safely. And most lost it to a skill-saw, not a table saw.
I know of more hide lost to jointer-planers and belt sanders and
angle grinders than to table saws by a factor of 10 or more.

And the angle grinders bite even when the shroud is installed
properly.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:52:55 -0500, Jack wrote:

On 1/24/2012 12:42 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 11:16 AM, Han wrote:
Leonlcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in

Well I don't have one, nor a blade guard, nor a rive, and after 50
years of doing this, never nicked one fing-ee. Nor did either of my
brothers, nor did my dad. At my age, I would think owning one might
be a good idea, but, I don't need no steenking gov't dick head
mandating I buy one with a every new saw purchase.

Ummmm do you really believe that some one can do wood working for 50
years and and "never nick one finger?
I believer that "x" is actually greater than zero.

I, nor did the folks I mentioned, ever nick a finger on a table saw, or
any power saw for that matter. You can believe it or not, makes no
never mind to me. Never got nicked on my shaper, jointer, planer, band
saw, jig saw, routers, or drill press either. I did jab my elbow into
the live center (and drill) in my lathe a number of times. I keep doing
it too, and it always ****es me off.

Oh, I did cut my finger cleaning grease off my planer blades when
delivered new, packed in grease, but it wasn't running, or being used,
it was being installed. I also cut my finger once chopping up a pepper
for an omelet, but we're talking table saws and the like right?

Lets be real here.

Always.

On that note (being real), no one in this thread was talking about every
man woman and child being forced to buy a table saw, and, *I* was not
talking about never being nicked in my life, ever, from _anything_. I
was specifically talking about the subject, table saws and more
specifically where a SS would have been needed. Your insinuations to
the otherwise are not *real*, other than /really/ disingenuous.

Jack
A wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse
Every saw nick I've ever gotten was when I was a kid using a coping
saw. There's a few knuckles that still bear the evidence over 45 years
later. (I think it's been 50 years since the last bout with the coping
saw blade at about age 9.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:11:29 -0500, Jack wrote:

On 1/24/2012 12:47 PM, Leon wrote:
On 1/24/2012 10:55 AM, Jack wrote:
On 1/23/2012 11:41 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:

I know riving knifes are now required to be **UL Compliant**.
I do not know the significance of this compliancy (perhaps someone can
address this), but it's not hard for me to imagine what the next
requirement of UL Coompliancy could be for table saws.

UL compliance only pertains to newly purchased items. It has nothing
to do
with existing products. As for new compliancy requirments - that's for
new
stuff. When was the last time the UL Police showed up at your house to
inspect and demand an update to your 20 year old toaster or steam iron?

How about THIS Mike. Someone *kills* you for using too many capital
letters. Your wife sells your Tsaw to some clown on Craigslist. He chops
off his arm because your saw is not "UL" compliant and has no guard, no
riving knife, no SS tech.

Of course he sues your widowed wife for $12000000000000 dollars because
of her negligence to have readily available safety crap installed before
selling you the damned beast!!!!!!! He claims he is having trouble
whacking off with one hand, big a dick as he is. Your widow refuses to
give him a hand, ergo the large $suit.

He wins, hand down...

Jack
A boiled egg is hard to beat.

And that example is exactly why the government is going to end up taking
care of people that make those kind of comments.
You make a pretty good defense for SawStop.

If I can save one finger, it will all be worth it...

Jack
If you don't lose your finger on a table saw you'll find somplace
else to stick it where it doesn't belong and lose it anyway.

Mine came awfull close with an air hammer - I just ended up with
bone-meal from the knuckle out, and a permanently fat/flat finger tip.

On 1/24/2012 4:24 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:04:36 -0500, wrote:

On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

Oh, it WOULD be Saw-Stop, one way or the other, because they'd sue
the ass of anyone infringing on their iron-clad bogus patent. It wuld
be SS supplied, or SS Licensed

Oh, I did not realize that you had inside information on SawStop.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:55:01 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/24/2012 4:24 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:04:36 -0500, wrote:

On 1/23/2012 2:59 PM, Leon wrote:

Let's just simplify it a bit. Anyone buying a NEW legal table saw IN
THE US would be forced to buy a SawStop.

No you could buy any brand you wanted, it would not have to be SawStop.

Oh, it WOULD be Saw-Stop, one way or the other, because they'd sue
the ass of anyone infringing on their iron-clad bogus patent. It wuld
be SS supplied, or SS Licensed

Oh, I did not realize that you had inside information on SawStop.



Don't need inside information. I know how patent lawyers work.

Swingman wrote in
:

On 1/24/2012 2:03 PM, Han wrote:
wrote in

Personally, I prefer Bayesian probability over maturity of chances.
LOL!

And looking up Bayesian probability, I got confused early on, so quit
further "research" on that subject ...grin.

Basically, if your coin flips heads twenty times in a row, disregard
"maturity of chances" as the basis for future bets, and go with the
obviously sufficient evidential probability that the coin is somehow
influenced in that direction.

I like that idea. They got rich because they fixed the rules ...
(ducking)

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid