Official Luthiers Forum!

Sorry if this is old news . . .
http://www.woodshopnews.com/news/news-d ... 5m-verdict

I've been predicting this for some time. The major saw manufacturers got some bad legal advise on this one. These verdicts will keep coming down until the manufacturers step up and include this technology. If the verdicts don't put them out of business first.

Is this for real? I'm just a newbie here but really????

What's your take on this?

I grew up where you used an axe and you paid the consequences for negligence.... I don't get the world today...

forgive me I probably should not have responded to this....... forgive me...

I guess breathalizer start inhibiters on cars cant be far off then ....

Next up .. router stop, chainsaw stop, chisel stop, and douzouki stop ...

_________________
Tony Karol
www.karol-guitars.com
"let my passion .. fulfill yours"

Everyone hurts themselves, I recently got my pinky caught in a powersander (don't ask) and lost my fingernail and tip of my finger. Fortunately the nail is growing back which the Dr didn't think would happen.

Speaking as one that did run a thumb through a table saw , I don't blame the manufacturer I blame myself. I do not agree that litigated safety is good thing. I am so sick and tired of everyone is a victim thinking I can puke. There are consequences for stupidity and one has to learn to pay the price.
The Constitution guaranties us certain rights, Making an ass out of oneself is one of them . While true negligence by a manufacturer should be punished , a person buying a tool that is designed to cut things should have the brains to know if it cuts wood ,it will cut pinkies. READ THE SAFETY SHEET !!!!!. FOLLOW THE SAFETY PROCEDURES . I if you don't , expect a bad result for a bad decision .
As Todd Stock points out , most injuries are a result of kickback accidents , That meant the person operating the tool did something WRONG. If you want the Saw Stop on your saw ,get it but don't make us all have to get it. I still have my thumb and it still works so yes I was lucky . My 2 Cents >

_________________
John Hall
blues creek guitars
Authorized CF Martin Repair
Co President of ASIA
You Don't know what you don't know until you know it

The only thing I see in this is shameless promotion of his product by the inventor. What a win, win situation for him. If they make it a mandatory safety device on table saws, where can I buy stock?

This ought to be good...

_________________
http://www.birkonium.com CNC Products for Luthiers
http://banduramaker.blogspot.com

I get a little more nauseous each time I see one of these. I might hit the puke line yet, we'll see! If anything, I think the solution is to have idiot waivers on every product with a sharp edge on it: "I am knowingly buying something designed to cut things and take full responsibility if I cut myself with it. -Joe Sixpack"

I'm sure in short order someone's going to get $2M for hurting themselves while running with scissors beside the pool! Crayola will testify that their plastic-blade scissors could have never punctured a lung.

_________________
Bob Garrish
Former Canonized Purveyor of Fine CNC Luthier Services

You're not looking hard enough then - You've recognized part of it, but not all of it.

_________________
http://www.birkonium.com CNC Products for Luthiers
http://banduramaker.blogspot.com

I I think the solution is to have idiot waivers.......



Bob, the next invention, "Idiot Stop"

Today Sawstop is applied to wood saws.
Tomorrow they'll put it on meat saws.
This is just vegans forcing their agenda.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

Forty years ago I set up punch presses in a large custom shop. Some guy wanted to see what would happen if he stuck his finger into the notching die on a 15 ton press. Probably didn't hurt too much when it happened cause it went through like a hot knife cutting butter, leaving a nice clean stump, and then the blood started. That's idiot to a whole different level and there is no way to protect against those who are willing to maime themselves for a quick buck. Accidents do happen, and there are also plenty just waiting to happen.

Tim

Forty years ago I set up punch presses in a large custom shop. Some guy wanted to see what would happen if he stuck his finger into the notching die on a 15 ton press. Probably didn't hurt too much when it happened cause it went through like a hot knife cutting butter, leaving a nice clean stump, and then the blood started. That's idiot to a whole different level and there is no way to protect against those who are willing to maime themselves for a quick buck. Accidents do happen, and there are also plenty just waiting to happen.

Tim

This is different perspective, but in theory, whoever is paying the medical and welfare bills for the injured parties should have the right to make the laws regarding safety. Perhaps a copy of a health insurance policy should be required to purchase an unprotected tool, otherwise this will cost the public in health care costs as well as the litigation. Is the emphasis behind a legal requirement to have a saw stop on a tool about protecting an end user or about protecting public funds.

In our local paper, my home county is preparing to close all 11 libraries this year to close the budget gap, this will save $700,000, most of us would prefer public tax money to be used to keep these libraries open then to pay medical bills for those from the

Of course then it gets ugly from there, perhaps a gallon of nitro lacquer should have a lid that recovers its own fumes. It seems that if a product is going to cause a potential liability to public funds the public should be able to deal with that liability from the source. The public can no longer afford to keep stitching and medicating those who are careless.


If these were voluntary devices that one could install to cut personal insurance costs on your vehicle, many would blow for the savings. We are required to show proof of insurance when registering a car, and how much we pay for that insurance is based upon the potential liability of the vehicle and the driver. So perhaps Home Depot should sell the tool for two prices, one if the customer has proof of insurance, or charge for a required policy if the customer is without. Then the cost of the liability can stay off the public books.

A DMV for table saw purchases? Now I am really scared.
Rob

_________________
http://shastaguitar.com/
http://www.kalimbakit.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/comfyfootgr ... ature=mhee
http://www.facebook.com/robert.renick.7

hey, i think it's a rediculous ruling. before one uses any power tool, stop to think before you turn it on.
i do this now more than ever. fingers don't grow back.

Of course, someone reading a two page summary can exercise better judgment than 12 citizens who were there for the whole trial and deliberated about it. All that extra time and information just blurs your clear vision.

We beat this way past death already. But hey, if it was fun the first time, let's dig it up and beat it to death again!

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

I like Filippo's analogy, if you want a Volvo, buy a SawStop. But the difference is that the SawStop will not (as yet) do everything that my Unisaw will. There are (from my understanding) limitations on various blade sizes and on moisture content of the wood. So that just forces people to undertake even more dangerous options to complete tasks that require smaller blades or processing less dry material, increasing risk of injury do to improper tool use. My day job is in occupational health and safety so I my ears always perk up when I hear of new safety devices (an occupational hazard (pardon the pun)). The sawstop does have some benefits and if my work required ripping kiln dried oak boards all day long and I had some shallow swimmer employed to do that then maybe the SawStop would be on the list. Cost is not really an issue, I paid $2500 for my Unisaw 15 years ago and I still wonder why I waited so long to get it.

Anyway, the ruling is another reason I like living in Canada. So far these types of decisions are far and few between in this country. The bad part is that these decisions are built into the cost of the tools so we all pay for them everytime we need another tool (insurance premiums or tool prices...I choose insurance, it eliminates the $4-600/hr lawyers fees entered into the mix). I too am nausiated by these types of decisions that we all end up paying for in the end.

Shane

_________________
Canada

What gets me is that a competitors owner can testify against other companies. What this guy is doing is not trying to prevent accidents but trying to force the government to make it mandatory to make others use his technology which will make him rich. I can't wait to see what happens when some idiot out there showing off try to test sawstops safety feature and it fails because of something simple like leaky capacitors or a bad chip in the electronics. Years of working around electronics I would never put my safety in sawstops technology....Mike

But Gass did put his faith in his technology (although he stated he was nervous!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=E3mzhvMgrLE&NR=1

This issue may have been hammered to death already but I see nothing wrong with continuing discussion on issues where new information comes to rise. Most people here have read many of the reviews of this saw and its benefits in FWW and other trade journals and have discussed the merits (and de-merits) of this technology to become informed so most comments are likely based on a higher level of understanding than PROBABLY any of the lawyers, the judge or the jury members in this litigation. I have acted as expert in a few litigations and in most cases the real issues are often overlooked and the judgement tends to go to which council was better prepared and was able to better present their arguement. This again may be an oversimplifacation but really the issue here APPEARS to be that Ryobi had an opportunity to get the technology, they initiated proceeding to get the technology (which may indicate that they believed the technolgy had merit) but failed to complete the process and that is what is being presented as the reason that this fella can't use his hand any longer. I call BS and maybe Ryobi should have said they didn't want the technolgy and until it was law (I hope this does not happen...) to have the technology should they really be required to have it?! We all have a responsibilty to understand the limitations of our equipment and follow the processes to ensure we use them safely. I have a couple of bent figures from my re-saw that indicates I was not always fully following this advice. But I chose not to pass the cost of my lesson on to the rest of you by suing the manufacturer of the saw and saw blades because the saw company made something that spins too fast and the blade company makes their blades too sharp (and since I re-sharpened them I might have had to include myself in that process and adjust the price of my wood to cover the costs of the litigation..... )

I think Gass has a great invention, but it may not be for everyone. The video I posted a link too shows the stress imparted on the saw when this thing discharges and I wonder how many times this device can function before it will cause damage to the saw itself. Once someone gets to fully trust that there is not a concern for a cut finger will they become less afraid/respectful of the saw? Just in time for the device to fail? That would worry me, and what about larger companies where some employees may see having this device discharge as a means to an extra coffee break......The list goes on. Someday I am be a convert but today, I will stick with my unisaw and I begrudge no one for choosing the SawStop.

Shane

_________________
Canada

No new information has come to light. It's the same case that we discussed in March. Oh, wait, there is one new thing--that Ryobi decided it had no grounds for an appeal, so it let the verdict stand.

The trial lasted about 4 weeks. 12 people spent a full day, five days a week on it. They heard hours of expert testimony. But since we are woodworkers and read saw reviews, we are better able to judge this case after reading a news article and seeing what the issue "APPEARS" to be. Right.

We can do this again in another two months. Righteous indignation is good fun.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

More than a hundred million people vote in the election, and near half of them are 'wrong' every time. The idea that twelve random people, bored witless for four weeks, will make a well thought out and balanced decision based on objectively analyzing a slew of data they have no interest in (past seeing an end to its presentation) is questionable to me.

I'm pretty sure more than one person commenting here has spent more time in front of a table saw than the whole jury would have if they'd spent the four weeks in a wood shop. If there was no mechanical failure of the saw (ie: the shaft didn't snap and fling the blade at him) then how much more information do you really need than 'guy stuck his hand in a table saw and blamed it on someone else'?

_________________
Bob Garrish
Former Canonized Purveyor of Fine CNC Luthier Services

Are you sure about that?

Are you sure that it wasn't the power tool industry trying to suppress a revolutionary technology because it might dip into profits?

This isn't black and white.

All that's really illustrated here is how much the whole system is screwed up.

A guy invents a revolutionary technology and gets snubbed by every major manufacturer out there basically thanks to our legal system. He then starts his own company, gets vindictive and starts sticking it to all the companies that screwed him to begin with. The biggest winners here are the lawyers on either side.

_________________
http://www.birkonium.com CNC Products for Luthiers
http://banduramaker.blogspot.com

Legally, the question is a simple one: Is the cost of the safety feature more or less expensive than the value of the injuries that would be avoided if the safety feature were in place? If the safety feature is cheaper than the value of all the lost fingers from tablesaw accidents, then a saw without it is considered "unreasonably dangerous," and it is deemed to be "defective." The "defective" label renders the manufacturer strictly liable for the injuries. It does not matter whether the user is negligent.

We can debate whether that should be the law, but it has been the law for many years. And that's why airbags, GFIs, blade guards, are standard features. Given that the law is what it is, I would have been surprised if 12 people didn't find modern tablesaws defective.

But we all pay for that at the tool store. This guy will get nothing more out of this than the insurance premiums he was intitled to on the first place. This litigation appears entirely as a lawyer's "make work project" that at the end of the day will result in two things:

1) Tools will cost more
2) The courts decide the benefits of safety devices rather than labs and law makers

I can't see how this is either efficient or beneficial

Shane

_________________
Canada