Nissan 370Z Tech Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,469 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Personally I believe this is useful technology and should be mandated for use on table saws.



Advocates Urge Lawmakers To Make Table Saws Safer

edit / link is dead

What do you think? Should the government step in an save us from ourselves?

edit / It seems this tech is about 8 years old. Saw Stop patented the device and tried to license it, you know, grab a piece of every table saw made without having to actually manufacture a table saw. That didn't work so now they are trying to force a mandate through Congress via lawyer babble.

Great product. Very poor marketing. The tech will eventually be on all table saws but not via government mandate...the big boys will just wait for the patent to expire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,254 Posts
I think it's gonna take me a lot more time to cut whole packs of hot dogs.

Seriously though, if you want to buy a table saw with nanny features, go for it. Me on the other hand, I'd rather buy the cheap table saw with out expensive babysitting features. The market should drive what features table saws have, not the government.

My point is, the government is mandating the table saw companies to either make less money or raise the price of table saws.

If you wanna saw off your fingers, you should have that right.
If you wanna be ejected from your front windshield, you should have that right.
If you wanna crush your ribcage on the steering wheel, you should have the right to buy a car without an airbag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
Cool tech. I'm all for safety, but when is our government going to stop intervening with our lifestyle and private businesses. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I know that's illegal. It's written in the declaration of Independence. I have to buy my garbage containers form the government, they own major car manufactures, ect.. They can monopolize the country like big store companies do, and it's ok for them to do it??? I guess we all get used to conformity and it's our own fault.

I agree 100% with IDRM. Congress have nothing else better to vote on. Glad to see my tax dollars going to good use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,046 Posts
I agree that the free market should drive the market, but safety is important and doesn't sell well. I don't think anyone would argue that seat belts were a good idea, but without federal law, they still wouldn't be in cars. Much like seat belts, this technology has been around for a while, is a really good idea, but hasn't been adopted by anyone except the inventor.

Also, don't forget there is an occupational safety component to this. If my employer can't/won't buy one of these, my fingers are at risk (as a hypothetical, all of our machines at work have different safeguards (that are strictly required by law)).

If this legislation goes through, I hope that they have the sense to give the manufacturers a few years to get new products to market first, and that they don't specify a technology, rather a set of criteria for how it must work (aka don't specify airbags, specify something that cushions an impact).

~Pat
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
This is probably the best solution to this problem that I have seen. I've seen other technologies that will automatically stop the blade, but they all involve some sort of sensor that is installed in the guard or the fence. The problem being is that most general contractors remove the guards right from the get go.

Moving on to Gub'ment regulations... you don't even have to worry about it, some sort of safety interlock feature like this will eventually become the law of the land. Either the government, insurance companies, or saw makers themselves will make this mandatory. You can rest assured that once all of the major competitors have similar working designs, they will bribe congress... er I mean lobby congress to put this into effect. That's because they get an extra boost in sales when millions of companies are forced to buy new saws to keep up with the regulation.

On a side note, I have found that corporations and bureaucracies can produce some truly strange outcomes. Here's an example... during the salad days of the Space Race, my company used to maintain and operate their own private fire department. Some time during the 80's a bean counter decided that it was a waste of money, and now the company contracts out with the city for fire fighting services. OK, since I work in a building that contains flammable materials, OSHA stipulates that fire extinguishers must be placed liberally throughout the building. Great. And since I work near fire extinguishers and with flammable materials, Cal-OSHA requires that I must be trained on how to properly operate one. So the company spends money training me on how to distinguish the different types of fires, and which type of extinguisher to use... on and on. Not just once mind you, I have to re-certify and go through this training on an annual basis.

Now here's where it gets stupid. The company's insurance underwriters don't want employees fighting fires. Period. Which means, despite the aforementioned training, we are instructed that if we see a fire, we are to leave the area and call 911. And as mentioned, the local city fire department will arrive to fight the raging blaze. So now we're going to enter the Twilight Zone. Due the secure nature of the building, and the fact it contains chemicals that water can NOT be used to extinguish, the building is on the city's "let burn" list. Meaning the fire dept. will simply watch it burn. Their sole purpose would be to prevent nearby building from burning down.

So thanks to a combination of overlapping and contradictory government and market based regulations (mixed in with a dose of good old fashioned penny pinching), an able bodied and trained person (me) is supposed to walk away from a fire and stand outside with the firemen to watch it burn.
:headshake:

-Ronin Z
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top