I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before, but
I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge, an
inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw is
_still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging is
right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging within
INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact with
the camera while he talks!!! <G>
I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his hand!
I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
Consumption Junction.
Barry
In article <[email protected]>, JR
<[email protected]> wrote:
> George,
>
> You must be a trial lawyer, right?
>
> Only a contingency-fee grabbing ambulance chaser could come up with
> logic like that.
>
> And that's why our insurance premiums are through the roof.
While contingency-fee grabbing ambulance chasers are the reason why
insurance premiums are soaring, the concept ("there are no accidents,
only negligence") is hardly new, nor restricted to CFGAC lawyers.
It's a standard mantra in the shooting sports that there are no
accidental discharges, only negligent discharges. An accident is
something that could not be foreseen. A saw cutting something that
touches the blade is hardly unforeseeable; it's the intended purpose.
Something touching the blade that you didn't intend to cut (like your
fingers) might be unintentional, and is definitely undesirable, but it
isn't unforeseeable. Failing to safeguard against the undesirable but
foreseeable is tantamount to negligence.
Returning to insurance... if it was truly *accident* insurance, then it
would be no-fault, and your insurance would pay for your injuries.
Instead, blame is assigned to determine whose insurance pays. Thus,
insurance pays for negligence, not accidents. ;-)
Good thing I took Business Law 101 mumble-mumble years ago! <G>
Kevin
In article <[email protected]>, Jay Windley
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "Kevin Craig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:151220031111404322%[email protected]...
> |
> | Failing to safeguard against the undesirable but foreseeable
> | is tantamount to negligence.
>
> I can't disagree with this logic, but I disagree with the extent to which it
> is often carried. We have determined by long experience that it is simply
> not possible, even far less feasible, to foresee all combinations of
> circumstances or chains of events that lead to an unfortunate outcome in
> some case. We become adept at seeing them in hindsight, and reasonably
> adept at prevent that same arrangement of circumstances from having the same
> outcome in the future. But if you want to relate foresight and negligence
> in absolute terms, and thereby condemn as negligent by definition anyone who
> has an unfortunate experience, that's something I'm not prepared to accept.
You're exactly right, and stated it quite well.
I was presenting the argument; it's not one that I support absolutely.
Kevin
George M. Kazaka wrote:
> Basically I am against the goverment telling me as a person that I
> have to do something because "they"
> Think I will be safer for it.
There needs to be a common sense balance.
I witnessed a two-car accident. There were 5 high school students in one
car. No one was injured in either car. I chatted with the teen driver
while the police and tow trucks were working. I told him that had he been
driving a 1940's automobile there would have been serious injuries, maybe
fatalities.
- No seat belts, and getting all cut up by going through a windshield --
especially pre safety glass, is very nasty. My boss vividly remembers an
accident he saw when he was young. The person only made it part way through
the windshield and IIRC died before the emergency workers could get him out.
Tumbling out of the car and/or having it roll over the top of you can also
ruin an otherwise promising career.
- Non-collapsible steering columns that came back to your chest.
Sometime into your chest.
- Engines & transmissions that ended up in the passenger compartment with
you.
- No air bags.
Etc.
Government safety standards had a lot to do with making these proven safety
improvements ubiquitous.
Many of us have bled all over our tools & shop floors. A college roommate
had an 8-inch scar on his arm. A great uncle twice cut off parts of three
fingers.
I would like to see SawStop-like features become common. Between the
blood-sucking lawyers and bean counters, the government often *has* to
mandate things or they just don't happen. I wish it wasn't that way.
-- Mark
Mark Jerde writes:
>I would like to see SawStop-like features become common. Between the
>blood-sucking lawyers and bean counters, the government often *has* to
>mandate things or they just don't happen. I wish it wasn't that way.
I'd love to see good safety features, but Saw Stop's owners went about it the
wrong way after being slowed to a halt on their first try. The second try:
getting the Feds to force the gate.
Back in either '56 or '57, Ford brought out seat belts, even then a proven
safety device (in competition vehicles). The cost to the consumer was something
low, even for the day, maybe $7. Bombed big time because people would not pay
for seat belts as an option. The government forced seat belts into vehicles in,
IIRC, the middle or late 70s. They have saved many thousands of lives.
But for a manufacturer to try to get the government to use unproven technology
that adds appreciably to the cost of an item, especially when lower cost safety
options are available, is just plain wrong headed. Saw Stop may save fingers.
It will seldom save lives. And every time it fires, there's going to be a cost
that is a sizeable fraction of the cost of the entire tool. There is no
information on false firings that I've seen, nor is there reliable information
on possible damage to trunnions, motor mounts, blades and similar parts. If the
information is available, it should make it into more public arenas for
consideration, whether it is favorable or unfavorable. Then, maybe, Joe and
Jane Sixpack may be willing to spend $500 to $700 extra for the unit. Until
then, it does seem unlikely, as does government intervention.
We do have to remember, though, that back in the early or middle '70s a few
enlightened Congressional types called for seat belts on motorcycles, so who
knows what might happen.
Charlie Self
"Man is a reasoning rather than a reasonable animal."
Alexander Hamilton
http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html
On 16 Dec 2003 01:06:12 GMT, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mark Jerde writes:
>
>>I would like to see SawStop-like features become common. Between the
>>blood-sucking lawyers and bean counters, the government often *has* to
>>mandate things or they just don't happen. I wish it wasn't that way.
>
> I'd love to see good safety features, but Saw Stop's owners went about it the
> wrong way after being slowed to a halt on their first try. The second try:
> getting the Feds to force the gate.
>
> Back in either '56 or '57, Ford brought out seat belts, even then a
> proven safety device (in competition vehicles). The cost to the
> consumer was something low, even for the day, maybe $7. Bombed big
> time because people would not pay for seat belts as an option. The
> government forced seat belts into vehicles in, IIRC, the middle or
> late 70s. They have saved many thousands of lives.
>
There's an OpEd piece from the 1970's on Opinion Journal this week.
Seems that during that time, catalytic converters were one option to
reduce emissions. Stratified charge engines, which converted waste fuel
into actual MOTION, as opposed to the catalytic converter's waste heat,
were being explored by Honda among others.
GM bought up several years usage worth of platinum.
Then they agressively lobbied Congress to mandate catalytic converters,
which use platinum, which naturally caused the price of platinum to
climb significantly. This hurt all other car makers. It hurt Chrysler
enough that they needed a bail out.
But of COURSE GM had only the BEST of intentions. . .
Charles
(Mike, I've NO idea whether or not GM has ever made a blanket chest)
Jay Windley wrote:
> ..... I have had to diagnose
> failures in well-built systems operated by people with more-than-expert
> understanding, and often the failures come down to a completely unforeseen
> (and highly improbable) combination of events.
May I submit the system was not as well built as you believe and your
experts are lacking.
If a designer/ engineer/ expert fails to see a potential situation (the
highly improbable?) then the system failure is likely to be completely
unforeseen.
What a wicked little circle.
I've also seen clientitus, where a customer rep or consultant looses
sight of their function and loyalties. They begin to act as though the
contractors their employer, not the customer.
> Now there's a vast difference between something like a nuclear power plant
> and a simple table saw. So vague handwaving about the unpredictability of
> complex systems is only partially applicable to what happens in a woodshop.
Dominos always fall with the first one. This causes that which causes
something else and soon it's an unforeseen circumstance.
Nuclear power plants? Can you say Davis-Bessie? Chernobyl on the north
coast. A very complex system with a very simple fault, a simple leak.
D-B is reported to have many design faults but those aren't the ones
that damned near killed us.
Truth is for everything someone wants to call an accident you only need
to find the first domino and the events leading up to it's tipping and
virtually every time you'll find it could have been easily prevented.
--
Mark
N.E. Ohio
Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)
When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
Mark wrote:
> Truth is for everything someone wants to call an accident you only
> need
> to find the first domino and the events leading up to it's tipping and
> virtually every time you'll find it could have been easily prevented.
If you find the first domino was caused to fall by something previously
unknown then it is an unpreventable accident.
For example, (IIRC) Madame Curie got cancer in later life from her handling
of radioactive materials. No one knew the danger.
Much human knowledge came from people analyzing something that broke and all
too often had mangled body parts in it.
-- Mark
Silvan wrote:
> The problem is all in the anticipation. No way I could stick my finger into
> a spinning saw blade on purpose.
Aw hell, someday I'll show you the scar where I cut a stonefish spine
outta my arm with a dive knife in shark infested waters. too bad it
wasn't a sharp knife, woulda hurt less. And talk about anticipation,
those sharks looked intersted. The stonefish tasted good though.
Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]> wrote
in message news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:14:53 -0700, "George M. Kazaka"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
>
> He has a "how-to" TV show.
>
> >
> >Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
>
> Agreed. However, anytime you are instructing anyone, you owe it to
> them to demonstrate the safest possible method. What they do later is
> up to them.
>
> Anyone on TeeVee should demonstrate safe and correct methods.
>
This I fully agree with
> Barry
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:41:28 -0500, Silvan
<[email protected]> scribbled
>Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> I e-mailed SawStop and asked them if they had actually tested with a
>> finger. The company president wrote back and said that he had, himself,
>> stuck a finger in a blade. I told him he has bigger stones than I do.
>
>Bigger than mine too. When I was a kid, I had one of those toy microscopes.
>I wanted to see some blood, and I tried for an hour to prick my finger with
>a needle. Never could do it.
In my case, I had whacked a finger with a hammer, and a blood blister
had formed under the nail. Extreme throbbing pain, but easy to relieve
by removing the pressure. SOP is to heat the end of a paper clip red
hot and poke a hole in the nail. Instant total orgasmic pain relief as
the blood gushes out. I knew that, but I still couldn't bring myself
to do it, no matter how much liquid courage/pain reliever I drank. I
ended up going to the hospital where the doctor poked my nail and
offered me a pain reliever with codeine. I told her to forget the pain
reliever.
Luigi
Replace "no" with "yk" for real email address
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:14:53 -0700, "George M. Kazaka"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
He has a "how-to" TV show.
>
>Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
Agreed. However, anytime you are instructing anyone, you owe it to
them to demonstrate the safest possible method. What they do later is
up to them.
Anyone on TeeVee should demonstrate safe and correct methods.
Barry
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:33:47 -0700, "George M. Kazaka"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In most accidents I know what i could have done to prevent it, I have cut
>both my thumbs on the table saw and to this day I cannot figure out what i
>did,
You got them too close to the blade. Come on, that wasn't that hard,
was it?
Are you realy living in a Glass Bubble and have never had anything
considered an Accident happen to You.
Or don't you believe in Reality
That is the most absurd statement I have ever heard "There are no such
things as accidents"
Its the cause of the accident that can have many differances.
In most accidents I know what i could have done to prevent it, I have cut
both my thumbs on the table saw and to this day I cannot figure out what i
did,
At the time I was operating simple stuff and not pulling some shit that i
have been known to do.
That was over twelve years ago and to this day I cannot figure out what the
hell happened I still will re-enact what i was doing in both instances to
see what i could have done to cause the Mishap.
About 3 or 4 years ago i took a swan dive off a ten foot ladder and again I
do not know what the hell i did to cause the fall .
Again I was not doing anything stupid that i am capable of doing.
Any other time I was either rushing or doing something stupid or not
thinking.
I know they were my fault and because i call them an accident does not mean
i don't take the responsibility of my own actions.
> > Accidents will always happen that is why they are called accidents, they
> > will never be stopped,
>
>
>
> I have to disagree. There are no such things as accidents.
>
> An accident is something that can't be foreseen. I have yet to see a
> situation where the participants couldn't have seen the negative outcome.
>
> The concept of 'accident' allows people the illusion they couldn't have
> done something to prevent or stop an action, it allows people to escape
> responsibility. It allows them to remain clueless.
>
>
> --
>
> Mark
>
> N.E. Ohio
>
>
> Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
> A.K.A. Mark Twain)
>
> When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
> suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
>
That is awesome !! I would consider buying one of their saws when I'm ready
to move up from my Delta Contractor saw. Thanks for the Link.
"George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:N7%[email protected]...
> Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
>
> Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
> The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
> confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
> From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was doing, I
> sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running boards thru
> the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands are.
> I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do respect
the
> machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once with
the
> shaper,
> Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and count to
ten
> (Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
>
> I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what I say.
>
> Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been
around
> for several years that I know of,
> I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta and
> Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
>
> http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
>
> Enjoy
> George
>
>
> "B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]>
wrote
> in message news:[email protected]...
> > I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> > night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
> > I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before, but
> > I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
> >
> > I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
> >
> > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
> >
> >
> > Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
> > the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge, an
> > inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> > sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw is
> > _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging is
> > right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging within
> > INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact with
> > the camera while he talks!!! <G>
> >
> > I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his hand!
> >
> > I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
> > from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
> >
> > Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> > Consumption Junction.
> >
> > Barry
>
>
Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was doing, I
sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running boards thru
the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands are.
I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do respect the
machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once with the
shaper,
Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and count to ten
(Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what I say.
Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been around
for several years that I know of,
I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta and
Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
Enjoy
George
"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]> wrote
in message news:[email protected]...
> I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
> I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before, but
> I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
>
> I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
>
> First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
>
>
> Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
> the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge, an
> inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw is
> _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging is
> right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging within
> INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact with
> the camera while he talks!!! <G>
>
> I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his hand!
>
> I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
> from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
>
> Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> Consumption Junction.
>
> Barry
ROTFLMAO
But isn't that another thread ????
"Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> George M. Kazaka wrote:
>
> > Heres a thought How would you know that it is working other than using a
> > hotdog,
> > I wonder who has tryed to see if it actually works with a human finger
> > My hand twitches just thinking about it
>
> Go to the local prison and pick up a couple of child molesters. Less
cruel
> than using rats.
>
> --
> Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
> http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
>
Yes I Did miss that I have only been with the Rec for several months now.
And Yes Your right, about me opposing the Goverment to force this or
anything else upon me as a person or to any Company
I am not saying this as a Employer with a business,
That has nothing to do with,
I basically work by mysef and have a couple of helpers, they do not touch
the saw,
they are not qualified and I have no reason to train them to do so.
Basically I am against the goverment telling me as a person that I have to
do something because "they"
Think I will be safer for it.
I know that a lot of people think that all employers do not care about there
employee's, that is not so they are very concious of safety issues and do
not need people taking chances in dangerous situations.
Remember corporations are driven by the botom line, to have an employee hurt
and have to pay for his medical bills in one way or another plus the loss of
his/her productivity effecrs the bottom line.
As I said I think this Invention is awesome but come right down to it I do
believe that it will end up developing
Dis-respect for the tool it is incorporated with.
Accidents will always happen that is why they are called accidents, they
will never be stopped,
The majority are caused by, Rushing, Inexperience, arrogonce as in Hell i
watched so and so doing it , it looks easy i can do that.
Look at teen age car accidents and why, attitude, the felling of it can't
happen to me because I am skilled, lack of experience, no respect.
How many on this list that are 60 or 50 and remember how they drove like a
freakin nut when they firt got their licsence, now preaching safety to their
own children, Hmmmmm
No differance with woodworking tools,
I can't begin to tell you my attitude when i started working in my Uncles
shop when i was 12,
Hell i knew that I could use those machines it looked sooooo easy watching
the other guys doing it.
I was left in the shop alone a few times to clean up and told not to touch
the machines Ya right what an opportunity
first time to see a peice of wood go flying across the shop
Anyway sorry to make this so long
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> What you may have missed is the heated discussion on this forum in the
past
> couple of years or so whereby this company tried to make an end run around
> the saw manufacturer's reluctance to incorporate the device by having the
> government mandate the use of the device on all new saws sold in the US.
>
> I could be wrong, but judging from what I've read of your posts, you don't
> seem like the kind of guy who would want to be forced to use/buy the
device
> by government edict, whether you wanted to or not.
>
> --
> www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 9/21/03
>
> "George M. Kazaka" wrote in message
>
> > I really think that this is an awesome invention and may never see the
> > market in a big way.
> > This unit has been shown at all the industrial machinery shows and it
> draws
> > big crowds and still employers are not looking for it
> >
> > Time will surely tell
>
>
George M. Kazaka wrote:
> Are you realy living in a Glass Bubble and have never had anything
> considered an Accident happen to You.
> Or don't you believe in Reality
> That is the most absurd statement I have ever heard "There are no such
> things as accidents"
Keep making excuses.
--
Mark
N.E. Ohio
Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)
When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
I found this article.
http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/pages/h00117.asp
"RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Mu%Cb.387$cQ.300@okepread05...
> That is awesome !! I would consider buying one of their saws when I'm
ready
> to move up from my Delta Contractor saw. Thanks for the Link.
>
>
> "George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:N7%[email protected]...
> > Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
> >
> > Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
> > The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
> > confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
> > From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was doing,
I
> > sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running boards
thru
> > the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands
are.
> > I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do respect
> the
> > machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once with
> the
> > shaper,
> > Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and count to
> ten
> > (Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
> >
> > I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what I
say.
> >
> > Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been
> around
> > for several years that I know of,
> > I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta and
> > Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
> >
> > http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
> >
> > Enjoy
> > George
> >
> >
> > "B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]>
> wrote
> > in message news:[email protected]...
> > > I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> > > night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
> > > I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before, but
> > > I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
> > >
> > > I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
> > >
> > > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> > > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
> > >
> > >
> > > Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
> > > the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge, an
> > > inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> > > sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw is
> > > _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging is
> > > right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging within
> > > INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact with
> > > the camera while he talks!!! <G>
> > >
> > > I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his hand!
> > >
> > > I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
> > > from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
> > >
> > > Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> > > Consumption Junction.
> > >
> > > Barry
> >
> >
>
>
In article <dFoDb.14653$l%[email protected]>,
Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> JR wrote:
> > George,
> >
> > You must be a trial lawyer, right?
> >
> > Only a contingency-fee grabbing ambulance chaser could come up with
> > logic like that.
>
>
>
> And my TI, TSgt Bowels.
>
> No matter how much I disagreed with the concept at the time it was
> introduced, in the last twenty something years I have come to see it's
> true. Or 99.9% true.
>
>
> I won't take exception to your referring to me as a lawyer so I won't
> post how you must be a mamby pamby MaMas boy who believes everything
> that happens is someone else's fault thus releasing you of any personal
> responsibility so you can go on through this world fat, dumb and happy
> in your ignorance.
>
>
> Nope, won't post that at all.
>
Post away, Brother.
I take all responsibility for my fuckups and full credit for my
successes.
Any time the successes outweigh the fuckups, I'm a happy guy.
;-)
-JR
"Kevin Craig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:151220031111404322%[email protected]...
|
| Failing to safeguard against the undesirable but foreseeable
| is tantamount to negligence.
I can't disagree with this logic, but I disagree with the extent to which it
is often carried. We have determined by long experience that it is simply
not possible, even far less feasible, to foresee all combinations of
circumstances or chains of events that lead to an unfortunate outcome in
some case. We become adept at seeing them in hindsight, and reasonably
adept at prevent that same arrangement of circumstances from having the same
outcome in the future. But if you want to relate foresight and negligence
in absolute terms, and thereby condemn as negligent by definition anyone who
has an unfortunate experience, that's something I'm not prepared to accept.
Failing to take the precautions available is negligent. But believing that
every misfortunate has or had a viable precaution is naive.
--Jay
"Kevin Craig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:151220031954366412%[email protected]...
|
| I was presenting the argument; it's not one that I support absolutely.
Fair enough. It is not my aim to be argumentative for its own sake. My
engineering training included elements of failure and reliability analysis,
and that's a part of what I do professionally. I have had to diagnose
failures in well-built systems operated by people with more-than-expert
understanding, and often the failures come down to a completely unforeseen
(and highly improbable) combination of events. There are many physical and
psychological factors that affect failure prediction and analysis.
Now there's a vast difference between something like a nuclear power plant
and a simple table saw. So vague handwaving about the unpredictability of
complex systems is only partially applicable to what happens in a woodshop.
I own power tools, and it's my goal to die with all my fingers and toes
still attached. And so I operate my power tools with as much care as I can
muster. And we've heard several people confess that their injuries were
caused by their own carelessness or impatience. How many times, setting up
a rip on my RAS, have I thought, "Do I *really* need to deploy the kickback
guards? What are the chances this particular piece of stock will kick
back?" That, of course, is the beginning of many stories told in emergency
rooms.
--Jay
"Mark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
|
| May I submit the system was not as well built as you believe
| and your experts are lacking.
You may submit such, if you're willing to endure a very long lecture on the
mathematical nature of complex systems. I still maintain that it is not
possible to engineer a system that cannot fail. There are only two classes
of design: those that have failed, and those that have not yet failed.
Failure of a system is de facto proof of a deficiency of that system's
design or operation. That I grant you easily. The fallacy is in assuming
that such a failure should have been foreseen and that some degree of
negligence or incapacity must necessarily have played a part in the ensuing
failure.
Inability of an operator to correctly diagnose and alleviate a failure is de
facto proof of a deficiency in that operator's understanding. The question
is whether a comprehensive understanding of a complex system is possible,
and thus whether operator error is synonymous with culpability. Experts
always "lack". The question is whether they culpably "lack".
| If a designer/ engineer/ expert fails to see a potential situation
| (the highly improbable?) then the system failure is likely to be
| completely unforeseen.
That is substantially my point. The question lies in what is reasonably
foreseeable. As systems become very complex, the ability to predict all
possible behaviors drops off dramatically, as I shall explain.
| Dominos always fall with the first one. This causes that which
| causes something else and soon it's an unforeseen circumstance.
Yes, in simple linear failure modes. Most systems of any interest are not
linear.
You also have to consider the notion of coupling, which is analogous to how
closely spaced the dominos are. Move the dominos farther apart and they
fall more slowly, perhaps allowing you time to jump in and stop the cascade.
Move them sufficiently far apart and the fall of one domino does not affect
another. Loosely-coupled systems allow time for operators or automatons to
diagnose the problem and try a remedy.
A table saw is a tightly-coupled system in that, say, the misfeed of stock
may be separated in time from a ball of hamburger at the end of your wrist
by only a few milliseconds. This leaves very little time for the operator
to notice the problem and apply a remedy.
You also have to consider the notion of non-linearity, which is analogous to
"branching" the domino chain and starting two concurrent paths of failure,
and of mixed-mode failures and feedback systems that have absolutely no
analogue in the world of tumbling dominos but which affect our systems.
Pogo in rocket engines is a good example of a feedback system. An simple
example of a mixed mode failure would be a slippery floor in front of your
table saw: you reach to control the stock, slip, and fall into the blade.
Remove either the table saw or the floor contaminant and the accident might
have been preventable. But neither is necessarily foreseeable by the agent
controlling the other.
Non-linear systems are difficult to diagnose because cause and effect are
not always straightforwardly observed.
Take several thousand dominos and place them in a room. Arrange them in
criss-crossing patterns with several intersections, branches, and loops.
Now turn off the lights -- you don't get to observe at one glance the state
of the entire system. All you have is a flashlight and your ears. When you
hear the dominos start to fall it's your job to stop them all falling, using
only your flashlight and your memory of the domino layout. You have only
seconds, or at best, minutes.
Go.
| Truth is for everything someone wants to call an accident you only need
| to find the first domino and the events leading up to it's tipping and
| virtually every time you'll find it could have been easily prevented.
That's hindsight. We're talking about foresight.
You're also forgetting that most failures are mixed-mode failures: the
combination of several conditions to produce a failure. Oil on the floor is
itself a manageable risk. A table saw is itself a manageable risk. Oil on
the floor in front of your table saw is a *set* of circumstances that
*together* spell a significant danger. Remove either of those conditions
and the risk is substantially mitigated. But the trick is to recognize that
*combination* of circumstances as dangerous.
In systems that employ literally thousands of components, the ways in which
those components can interact is a number so large as to lose all meaning.
This is the mathematical nature of complex systems and the reason why you
can't predict their operation in foresight. To recognize in advance every
potentially dangerous *combination* of all those components and all their
respective operational states is simply impossible. It cannot be done.
When you design or operate a complex system you don't have the luxury of
knowing ahead of time which paths of operation will lead to failure. You
don't have the luxury of a single solitary path to reason through. You
don't have the luxury of concentrating your attention on one variable that
you know to be a root cause of some potential failure.
Imagine you're in a very large office building with which you are
unfamiliar. There is a bomb in the building, wired into the building's
electrical system. If you flip a certain combination of light switches
either on or off, it will disarm the bomb. You do not know where all the
light switches in the building are -- but you realize there are about a
thousand of them. You do not know how many of the switches are wired into
the bomb, and how many are still wired to the lights. You do not know
whether to turn any particular switch on or off in order to disarm the bomb.
The bomb is on a timer, so you don't have forever to experiment with the
light switches.
Go.
--Jay
Mark wrote:
> An accident is something that can't be foreseen. I have yet to see a
> situation where the participants couldn't have seen the negative outcome.
>
> The concept of 'accident' allows people the illusion they couldn't have
> done something to prevent or stop an action, it allows people to escape
> responsibility. It allows them to remain clueless.
If you're talking woodworking stuff, that's one thing. One man, one
machine, and the biggest unknown is what kind of tension might be locked up
in that piece of wood.
If you're talking traffic accidents, it's not possible to anticipate every
eventuality, and avoid every accident.
I've seen a lot of absolutely insane driving in seven years on the road, and
I don't mean the usual, predictable, avoidable stupid people tricks.
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
George,
You must be a trial lawyer, right?
Only a contingency-fee grabbing ambulance chaser could come up with
logic like that.
And that's why our insurance premiums are through the roof.
-JR
In article <nA2Db.12873$l%[email protected]>,
Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> George M. Kazaka wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Accidents will always happen that is why they are called accidents, they
> > will never be stopped,
>
>
>
> I have to disagree. There are no such things as accidents.
>
> An accident is something that can't be foreseen. I have yet to see a
> situation where the participants couldn't have seen the negative outcome.
>
> The concept of 'accident' allows people the illusion they couldn't have
> done something to prevent or stop an action, it allows people to escape
> responsibility. It allows them to remain clueless.
>
>
> --
>
> Mark
>
> N.E. Ohio
>
>
> Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
> A.K.A. Mark Twain)
>
> When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
> suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
>
JR wrote:
> George,
>
> You must be a trial lawyer, right?
>
> Only a contingency-fee grabbing ambulance chaser could come up with
> logic like that.
And my TI, TSgt Bowels.
No matter how much I disagreed with the concept at the time it was
introduced, in the last twenty something years I have come to see it's
true. Or 99.9% true.
I won't take exception to your referring to me as a lawyer so I won't
post how you must be a mamby pamby MaMas boy who believes everything
that happens is someone else's fault thus releasing you of any personal
responsibility so you can go on through this world fat, dumb and happy
in your ignorance.
Nope, won't post that at all.
--
Mark
N.E. Ohio
Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)
When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
George:
I guess you can say "damn if you do, damn if you don't" from a manufacturers
perspective.
> I am sure the lawyers are yelling don't touch it, what happens if say
delta
> puts out a model with this feature and it fails and some sucker loose's a
> finger because he was being an idiot thinking he could not get hurt.
> In our I'm not responsible for my own actions society just think of the
> ramifications.
> ANd think of some employer that puts one in there shop and an employee
gets
> hurt wow there will not be enough zeros on the settlement check
The class action lawyers could be already lining up because there was a
safety solution available to avoid the accidents and they could argue that
the manufacturers were looking to make the almighty buck at the expense of
some poor woodworking Joe-Bag-of-Doughnuts.
They already provide a cover and splitter for stock table saws that suck.
Everyone in the industry knows that zero clearance throat plates prevent
kickback in certain circumstances and what do they cost? But they are not
provided a stock with table saw purchases.It's all about the almighty buck.
If you look at the auto industry and without the government intervening on
seat belts,crash protection, and airbags we would be facing higher causality
rates on our roads. Nobody I know buys Volvo's because they are sportier
than a BMW.
I read recently that Health Insurers are looking at ways to minimize risk
with their policies by limiting coverage on their insured who have dangerous
hobbies. This is another attempt for them reduces claims and expenses. Can
you imagine them classifying woodworking as a hazardous hobby?
Where does it stop nobody knows. I hope that SAW STOP makes traction with
other manufacturers and their own product line.
Rich
"George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm aware that the company is manufacturing there own saws
> It is not what there original Intention was, they were forced into it
> because they have had no takers.
> Go through there entire site they list all the companies manufacturing
saws
> for the public to write to them
> for this feature.
> They are hoping that the all the folks purchasing saws will somehow have
an
> effect on there decsion to utilize this feature.
> I am sure the lawyers are yelling don't touch it, what happens if say
delta
> puts out a model with this feature and it fails and some sucker loose's a
> finger because he was being an idiot thinking he could not get hurt.
> In our I'm not responsible for my own actions society just think of the
> ramifications.
> ANd think of some employer that puts one in there shop and an emplyee gets
> hurt wow there will not be enough zeros on the settlement check
>
> I really think that this is an awesome invention and may never see the
> market in a big way.
> This unit has been shown at all the industrial machinery shows and it
draws
> big crowds and still employers are not looking for it
>
> Time will surely tell
>
>
> "RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:ZS%Cb.393$cQ.89@okepread05...
> > I found this article.
> > http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/pages/h00117.asp
> >
> > "RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:Mu%Cb.387$cQ.300@okepread05...
> > > That is awesome !! I would consider buying one of their saws when I'm
> > ready
> > > to move up from my Delta Contractor saw. Thanks for the Link.
> > >
> > >
> > > "George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:N7%[email protected]...
> > > > Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
> > > >
> > > > Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any
> machine
> > > > The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
> > > > confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
> > > > From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was
> doing,
> > I
> > > > sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running
boards
> > thru
> > > > the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands
> > are.
> > > > I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do
> respect
> > > the
> > > > machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once
> with
> > > the
> > > > shaper,
> > > > Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and
count
> to
> > > ten
> > > > (Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
> > > >
> > > > I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what
I
> > say.
> > > >
> > > > Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been
> > > around
> > > > for several years that I know of,
> > > > I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta
> and
> > > > Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
> > > >
> > > > Enjoy
> > > > George
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "B a r r y B u r k e J r ."
<[email protected]>
> > > wrote
> > > > in message news:[email protected]...
> > > > > I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> > > > > night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading
material.
> > > > > I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before,
> but
> > > > > I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
> > > > >
> > > > > I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
> > > > >
> > > > > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > > > > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about
the
> > > > > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back
through
> > > > > the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge,
> an
> > > > > inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> > > > > sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw
> is
> > > > > _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board,
swinging
> is
> > > > > right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging
> within
> > > > > INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact
> with
> > > > > the camera while he talks!!! <G>
> > > > >
> > > > > I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his
> hand!
> > > > >
> > > > > I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going
away
> > > > > from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
> > > > >
> > > > > Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> > > > > Consumption Junction.
> > > > >
> > > > > Barry
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:51:36 -0500, "Brent Beal" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]> wrote
>in message news:[email protected]...
>> Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
>Will probably never see this because they keep showing the same tired and
>worn out segments every month. Maybe there is another reason for not making
>any newer shows??????????????
>
Maybe he did cut off a limb. <G>
Barry
B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:
> First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
Hafta admit I do that a lot with my crosscut sled. If I'm cutting a board
into 12" chunks or whatever, I'll set a stop, push through, pull back, take
the piece off, move the work up, repeat. Taking the piece off on the far
side of the blade, where I'm reaching over it, strikes me as a lot more
dangerous. Even if I were patient enough to cut the machine off and wait
for the blade to stop between cuts, I don't like to do that. My blade runs
reasonably true at speed, but when it's spinning up or slowing down, it
flaps from side to side dramatically, and wallows out the kerf in the sled.
Even avoiding that as much as possible, the kerf is quite V shaped, and
useless as a reference for figuring out where the blade is going to cut.
(Yeah, my saw does suck. Indeed, indeed, indeed.)
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
George M. Kazaka wrote:
> Heres a thought How would you know that it is working other than using a
> hotdog,
> I wonder who has tryed to see if it actually works with a human finger
> My hand twitches just thinking about it
Go to the local prison and pick up a couple of child molesters. Less cruel
than using rats.
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
George M. Kazaka wrote:
>
>
> Accidents will always happen that is why they are called accidents, they
> will never be stopped,
I have to disagree. There are no such things as accidents.
An accident is something that can't be foreseen. I have yet to see a
situation where the participants couldn't have seen the negative outcome.
The concept of 'accident' allows people the illusion they couldn't have
done something to prevent or stop an action, it allows people to escape
responsibility. It allows them to remain clueless.
--
Mark
N.E. Ohio
Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)
When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)
Doug Miller wrote:
> I e-mailed SawStop and asked them if they had actually tested with a
> finger. The company president wrote back and said that he had, himself,
> stuck a finger in a blade. I told him he has bigger stones than I do.
Bigger than mine too. When I was a kid, I had one of those toy microscopes.
I wanted to see some blood, and I tried for an hour to prick my finger with
a needle. Never could do it.
I'm not a crybaby. Hell, I cut my finger to the bone with a *backsaw*,
threw a bandage on it, and finished what I was doing. Gouged myself good
with a chisel too; same outcome.
The problem is all in the anticipation. No way I could stick my finger into
a spinning saw blade on purpose.
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
Swingman wrote:
> Not so bad of an issue with a cross cut sled on 90d cuts if you're careful
> ... but, at least to me, a big NO NO with a miter gauge.
Agreed. Miter gauges are horrible, wretched things anyway. At least mine
is.
> On that same line, and if I am cutting absolutely precise miters, I do not
> takes for four cuts, allowing the blade to come to a complete stop has
> saved me more than a few hundred dollars worth of stock.
Not hundreds, but dozens for me. Yes, I'll agree with what you just said
there. Miters are different. If you lose a little 1/64" curvy whisper of
material, it won't look right.
Miters are quite difficult. I was really thrilled when I finally produced
something where a total of 16 mitered joints all came out without needing
any doctoring whatsoever. Wu HOO!!
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:35:06 -0700, "George M. Kazaka"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]> wrote
>in message news:[email protected]...
>> Anyone on TeeVee should demonstrate safe and correct methods.
>This I fully agree with
But of course, none of them ever do. It's always "guards removed for
clarity" and "let's do it quick before it costs us any more money."
George M. Kazaka wrote:
> I really think that this is an awesome invention and may never see the
> market in a big way.
> This unit has been shown at all the industrial machinery shows and it
> draws big crowds and still employers are not looking for it
>
> Time will surely tell
Oh no, not this again. Isn't this horse dead and turned into glue yet? :)
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
Heres a thought How would you know that it is working other than using a
hotdog,
I wonder who has tryed to see if it actually works with a human finger
My hand twitches just thinking about it
Yeeeeeks
"RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Mu%Cb.387$cQ.300@okepread05...
> That is awesome !! I would consider buying one of their saws when I'm
ready
> to move up from my Delta Contractor saw. Thanks for the Link.
>
>
> "George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:N7%[email protected]...
> > Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
> >
> > Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any machine
> > The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
> > confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
> > From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was doing,
I
> > sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running boards
thru
> > the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands
are.
> > I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do respect
> the
> > machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once with
> the
> > shaper,
> > Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and count to
> ten
> > (Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
> >
> > I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what I
say.
> >
> > Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been
> around
> > for several years that I know of,
> > I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta and
> > Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
> >
> > http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
> >
> > Enjoy
> > George
> >
> >
> > "B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]>
> wrote
> > in message news:[email protected]...
> > > I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> > > night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
> > > I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before, but
> > > I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
> > >
> > > I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
> > >
> > > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> > > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
> > >
> > >
> > > Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
> > > the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge, an
> > > inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> > > sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw is
> > > _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging is
> > > right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging within
> > > INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact with
> > > the camera while he talks!!! <G>
> > >
> > > I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his hand!
> > >
> > > I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
> > > from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
> > >
> > > Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> > > Consumption Junction.
> > >
> > > Barry
> >
> >
>
>
"B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]> wrote
in message news:[email protected]...
> Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
Will probably never see this because they keep showing the same tired and
worn out segments every month. Maybe there is another reason for not making
any newer shows??????????????
Not so bad of an issue with a cross cut sled on 90d cuts if you're careful
... but, at least to me, a big NO NO with a miter gauge.
On that same line, and if I am cutting absolutely precise miters, I do not
pull the sled back when cutting miters on my TS miter sled, but instead turn
the saw off and let the blade stop before removing the work piece.
I've ruined too many miters by just the slightest whisk of the blade hitting
the workpiece on the backstroke. For the 60 seconds, total, it takes for
four cuts, allowing the blade to come to a complete stop has saved me more
than a few hundred dollars worth of stock.
But, as they say, YMMV more than my .02.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03
"Silvan"wrote in message
> B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:
>
> > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
>
> Hafta admit I do that a lot with my crosscut sled. If I'm cutting a board
> into 12" chunks or whatever, I'll set a stop, push through, pull back,
take
> the piece off, move the work up, repeat. Taking the piece off on the far
> side of the blade, where I'm reaching over it, strikes me as a lot more
> dangerous. Even if I were patient enough to cut the machine off and wait
> for the blade to stop between cuts, I don't like to do that. My blade
runs
> reasonably true at speed, but when it's spinning up or slowing down, it
> flaps from side to side dramatically, and wallows out the kerf in the
sled.
> Even avoiding that as much as possible, the kerf is quite V shaped, and
> useless as a reference for figuring out where the blade is going to cut.
What you may have missed is the heated discussion on this forum in the past
couple of years or so whereby this company tried to make an end run around
the saw manufacturer's reluctance to incorporate the device by having the
government mandate the use of the device on all new saws sold in the US.
I could be wrong, but judging from what I've read of your posts, you don't
seem like the kind of guy who would want to be forced to use/buy the device
by government edict, whether you wanted to or not.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03
"George M. Kazaka" wrote in message
> I really think that this is an awesome invention and may never see the
> market in a big way.
> This unit has been shown at all the industrial machinery shows and it
draws
> big crowds and still employers are not looking for it
>
> Time will surely tell
In article <vT%[email protected]>, "George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Heres a thought How would you know that it is working other than using a
>hotdog,
>I wonder who has tryed to see if it actually works with a human finger
>My hand twitches just thinking about it
>Yeeeeeks
This was discussed at great length here twice during the last year or year and
a half. Search Google for all the gory details.
I e-mailed SawStop and asked them if they had actually tested with a finger.
The company president wrote back and said that he had, himself, stuck a finger
in a blade. I told him he has bigger stones than I do.
--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?
I'm aware that the company is manufacturing there own saws
It is not what there original Intention was, they were forced into it
because they have had no takers.
Go through there entire site they list all the companies manufacturing saws
for the public to write to them
for this feature.
They are hoping that the all the folks purchasing saws will somehow have an
effect on there decsion to utilize this feature.
I am sure the lawyers are yelling don't touch it, what happens if say delta
puts out a model with this feature and it fails and some sucker loose's a
finger because he was being an idiot thinking he could not get hurt.
In our I'm not responsible for my own actions society just think of the
ramifications.
ANd think of some employer that puts one in there shop and an emplyee gets
hurt wow there will not be enough zeros on the settlement check
I really think that this is an awesome invention and may never see the
market in a big way.
This unit has been shown at all the industrial machinery shows and it draws
big crowds and still employers are not looking for it
Time will surely tell
"RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ZS%Cb.393$cQ.89@okepread05...
> I found this article.
> http://www.taunton.com/finehomebuilding/pages/h00117.asp
>
> "RKON" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Mu%Cb.387$cQ.300@okepread05...
> > That is awesome !! I would consider buying one of their saws when I'm
> ready
> > to move up from my Delta Contractor saw. Thanks for the Link.
> >
> >
> > "George M. Kazaka" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:N7%[email protected]...
> > > Hey Barry who the hell is Bruce Johnson?
> > >
> > > Everyone has there own level of safety in the shop and using any
machine
> > > The more you work at it the more confidence you get, as long as that
> > > confidence does not let one loose their respect for the machine
> > > From what you explained I don't see anything wrong in what he was
doing,
> I
> > > sometimes watch what another in my shop is doing while running boards
> thru
> > > the machine I always have a sense of where the blade is and my hands
> are.
> > > I have never been known to be the safest person around but I do
respect
> > the
> > > machine and I have picked a few fights with the saw blade and once
with
> > the
> > > shaper,
> > > Yes I lost those fights but I can still go home every night and count
to
> > ten
> > > (Okay 9-7/8) without taking my shoes off.
> > >
> > > I have told many that worked for me to not do what I do but do what I
> say.
> > >
> > > Hear is a web site that will blow some of you away this saw has been
> > around
> > > for several years that I know of,
> > > I have heard that the developers have tried to sell it to both Delta
and
> > > Powermatic and neither company wants anything to do with it.
> > >
> > > http://www.sawstop.com/video.htm
> > >
> > > Enjoy
> > > George
> > >
> > >
> > > "B a r r y B u r k e J r ." <[email protected]>
> > wrote
> > > in message news:[email protected]...
> > > > I don't watch woodworking shows, as I don't watch much TV. Last
> > > > night, I was channel surfing in bed, as I'm out of reading material.
> > > > I've seen negative references to Bruce Johnson posted here before,
but
> > > > I had no idea what you folks were talking about.
> > > >
> > > > I really can't believe Bruce still has all his appendages!
> > > >
> > > > First I watched him crosscut on a table saw. Each time he cut a
> > > > board, he pulled it BACK through the blade. I don't know about the
> > > > rest of you, but after the board passes MY blade, it's cut. <G>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Now for the killer! After cutting a board, he pulls it back through
> > > > the blade and stops, leaving the board sitting in the miter gauge,
an
> > > > inch or so from the _still under power blade_. Leaving the work
> > > > sitting there he removes his hands to get a tape measure. The saw
is
> > > > _still_ running. Next, he measures the already cut board, swinging
is
> > > > right hand back and forth while he talks. His hand is swinging
within
> > > > INCHES of the spinning saw blade, because he's making eye contact
with
> > > > the camera while he talks!!! <G>
> > > >
> > > > I swear he trimmed some of the little hairs off the back of his
hand!
> > > >
> > > > I can understand not wanting to reset the camera shot by going away
> > > > from the saw to measure, but leaving it running? <G>
> > > >
> > > > Any day I fully expect to see video of him losing a body part on
> > > > Consumption Junction.
> > > >
> > > > Barry
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>