AB 2218 dead, but...

[dangre]

From the LA Times:
Advocates seek new table-saw safety rules


After California bill fails, supporters of new technology to prevent injuries ask U.S. agency to act.

Full article: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep...afety-20120906

[GerryR]

. . . telling us how to live and protect ourselves. Of course, I don't believe that "the love of money" is at the root of this; it is purely for the love and safety of mankind. Right.

It is a great invention, but notice that even in the demo-video, when an actual finger was used, the "person under test" dipped his hand in water to lower his skin resistance and then approached the blade at an extremely slow speed; neither action would normally be used when pushing a board through a saw. But, if you live in the sweaty, humid south, I guess you will be all set.

[Cochese]

. . . telling us how to live and protect ourselves. Of course, I don't believe that "the love of money" is at the root of this; it is purely for the love and safety of mankind. Right.

It is a great invention, but notice that even in the demo-video, when an actual finger was used, the "person under test" dipped his hand in water to lower his skin resistance and then approached the blade at an extremely slow speed; neither action would normally be used when pushing a board through a saw. But, if you live in the sweaty, humid south, I guess you will be all set.

My fingertips are about the only thing that doesn't sweat. I'm screwed.

[Pappy]

Opponents pointed out that the bill would efectively create a monopoly for Gass.

"Gass holds about 90 patents that other tool makers contended could make it expensive, if not impossible, for rival manufacturers to match his technology because of the risk of patent-infringement lawsuits."

"Gass dismissed opponents' charges that he would benefit financially from the bill and stressed that he doesn't need the added business.

"Sales so far this year are up 25% over last year," he said. "We're doing great, making good money. Whether they mandate it in California doesn't make much difference to me.""

YEAH, RIGHT!

[cabinetman]

Most of the complaints are about the money. The retailers are complaining about the costs incurred, and the money they will lose due to the added costs. The saw users are complaining what the enhancements will cost.

Meanwhile, users spend extra money on their saw to equip them with "safety equipment", such as blade guards, riving knives, and anti-kickback pawls. I don't hear much discussion on the money that would be saved by the safety issues of the saw, such as medical expenses, loss of work, insurance savings, etc. Not to mention the actual tragedy of having the "accident" in the first place.

Of the table saw injuries, I'm betting that those saws weren't equipped with the safety devices that were supposed to be on their saw. Those operators just stuck their fingers into a running blade.

While the complaints are still about how much Gass will make, so what. He invented it. He spent his money developing it. He paid for the patents. He deserves the money. I can't blame him one bit. It's all about the money. IMO, whatever the extra cost would be, is better than going to the ER, carrying fingers in a ziplock bag.

There's been an ongoing controversy about Saw Stop, and Steve Gass. For those that may have missed the threads on Saw Stop and Steve Gass, and want to read more, here are a few...

http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass
http://bt3central.com/showthread.php...highlight=gass

.

[GerryR]

Most of the complaints are about the money. The retailers are complaining about the costs incurred, and the money they will lose due to the added costs. The saw users are complaining what the enhancements will cost....

...While the complaints are still about how much Gass will make, so what. He invented it. He spent his money developing it. He paid for the patents. He deserves the money. I can't blame him one bit....

None of the getting "the money" bothers me, but I shouldn't be forced by government mandate to have to buy a system I don't want or need. They're my fingers and none of anybody's business if I decide to operate my saw without the guards, or whatever. This truly would be a government mandated monopoly.

I expect he hasn't sold enough saws with this system on them to even know what the MTBF for the system is. Remember, everything fails eveutually, and when someone looses a finger(s) with that system on the saw, then the fur is going to fly. I would like to see more testing, even with just hot dogs, with the wood being pushed through the saw at a normal rate of speed. Babying a piece of wood through the saw with a hot dog on it, at a snails pace, isn't a real-world test.

Like I said, it's a great idea, but it should be my choice as to whether I want to spend the extra money for such a system, not someone who thinks they just know what is better for me. Maybe just learnig how to use the saw properly would be a better place to start!

[cabinetman]

Like I said, it's a great idea, but it should be my choice as to whether I want to spend the extra money for such a system, not someone who thinks they just know what is better for me. Maybe just learnig how to use the saw properly would be a better place to start!

With that same thinking, why need seatbelts and airbags. Why should it be anybody's business what happens to our body in an accident. BTW, we pay extra for those.

I do agree with you...learning to use the saw properly is a better place to start.

.

[GerryR]

With that same thinking, why need seatbelts and airbags. Why should it be anybody's business what happens to our body in an accident. BTW, we pay extra for those.

I do agree with you...learning to use the saw properly is a better place to start.

.

Not trying to argue in any way, but I don't think adults should be forced to where seatbelts or buy airbags either. I know people who have died because they had a seat belt on and couldn't get out of a rolled car. Admittedly, that is less likely to happen, and seatbelts help in the "minor" accident category, but why should anybody be forced to where them. Airbags, on the other hand are known for causing more injuries in the minor accident category, but are a major help in head-ons. When you start imposing your values on someone else in these types of matters, where do draw the line? The saying goes like this, "We don't see things as they are; we see things as we are." BTW, I do wear my seatbelt This is off track, somewhat and I'll quit here, as we could go back and forth forever on things like this.

Regards, Gerry

[Pappy]

I don't have a problem with Gass making money off his invention, but more the methods he tried to use to force it on the market with government intervention. One of the reasons for manufacturers rejecting the Saw Stop as an add-on was that the contract proposals protected him from liability in the event of a failure.

[All Thumbs]

I don't have a problem with Gass making money off his invention, but more the methods he tried to use to force it on the market with government intervention. One of the reasons for manufacturers rejecting the Saw Stop as an add-on was that the contract proposals protected him from liability in the event of a failure.

Agreed.

If he is so certain he would not benefit from licensing his patents, let him donate them to the public domain.

[vaking]

There is one more aspect of this that has not received proper attention. The invention definintely has merit and its use but it adds cost to the saw and also fair amount of weight. There was enough said about cost but not weight. Extra weight might not be a big deal for a stationary table saw (contractor saw or cabinetmaker saw that are installed in a permanent workshop) but will be a big problem for saw that is supposed to be movable, either benchtop saw or jobsite saw. Notice that Sawstop does not offer any small versions, all they have are stationary saws. At the same time most accidents happen with smaller saws. This may be because they were used improperly (benchtop saw used on a floor by flooring installer) or because people who use smaller saws tend to be less trained but all the versions of proposed law don't make distinction between different types of table saws and try to apply the requirements to all table saws. I am afraid such a broad version of law will effectively kill the concept of mobile saw altogether.
Now, what do you think will happen if we suddenly pass a law that says that mobile versions of table saw are unsafe and no longer legal? What will be a response from a flooring installer or a carpenter who has his jobsite saw in the truck?
I know that I can take a circular saw and mount it upside down creating home-made version of a mobile table saw. I think this version is even less safe that current mobile versions but so far it is legal. How many people will have to resort to less safe versions as a result of such law? I am not sure amount of accidents will decrease overall, there will be less accidents with table saws but more accidents with circular saws.

[tommyt654]

Ya mean like this,lol ,,http://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/tls/3262059539.html or maybe this one , http://atlanta.craigslist.org/wat/tls/3262053819.html