Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the safety-is-no-accident dept.

In 2015, 4,700 people in the US lost a finger or other body part to table-saw incidents. Most of those injuries didn't have to happen, thanks to technology invented in 1999 by entrepreneur Stephen Gass. By giving his blade a slight electric charge, his saw is able to detect contact with a human hand and stop spinning in a few milliseconds. A widely circulated video[1] shows a test on a hot dog that leaves the wiener unscathed.

Now federal regulators are considering whether to make Gass' technology mandatory in the table-saw industry. The Consumer Product Safety Commission announced plans for a new rule in May, and the rules could take effect in the coming months.

But established makers of power tools vehemently object. They say the mandate could double the cost of entry-level table saws and destroy jobs in the power-tool industry. They also point out that Gass holds dozens of patents on the technology. If the CPSC makes the technology mandatory for table saws, that could give Gass a legal monopoly over the table-saw industry until at least 2021, when his oldest patents expire.

At the same time, table-saw related injuries cost society billions every year. The CPSC predicts switching to the safer saw design will save society $1,500 to $4,000 per saw sold by reducing medical bills and lost work.

"You commissioners have the power to take one of the most dangerous products ever available to consumers and make it vastly safer," Gass said at a CPSC public hearing on Wednesday.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/patent-disputes-stand-in-the-way-of-radically-safer-table-saws/

[1] SawStop Hot dog Video - Saw blade retracts within 5 milliseconds of accidental contact - YouTube.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:16AM (38 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:16AM (#552712) Journal
    I watched a guy saw his thumb off on his table saw when I was a kid. Left an impression. This tech sounds awesome.

    But unpaid mandates don't. If this is really so important it should be mandated (and I'm not sure I disagree) then the state should buy out the patent and grant it in general - royalty free.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=3, Interesting=1, Disagree=1, Total=5
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:26AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:26AM (#552714)

    Nope. Privatize the profits!

  • (Score: 2) by snufu on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:27AM (12 children)

    by snufu (5855) on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:27AM (#552715)

    Or their can be no mandate, and instead hold manufacturers liable for public injuries that could have been avoided by using existing proven technology.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:36AM (7 children)

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:36AM (#552725)

      That's a terrible precedent.

      What if you have a similar situation, where there's a dangerous power tool (perhaps a weedwacker), and there's "existing proven technology" that can prevent common accidents that happen with it. Problem is, the "proven technology" is patented, and the patent fee is $100 million per device. Or maybe it's just not even licensed at all, because the company with the patent wants to put everyone out of business.

      How is it in the interest of the state, or even not against anti-trust law, for the state to impose these onerous conditions on the other competitors in the field? The whole idea of the government forcing a bunch of companies out of business so that one can be left with a legally-forced monopoly is wrong on MANY levels.

      If it's so imperative to have this technology, then the state really should be seizing the patent and allowing these companies to use it at no cost.

      And if Gass really wants to stop people from sawing their fingers off, why isn't he offering the patented technology royalty-free?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:53AM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:53AM (#552735)

        I miss TMB's old sig line.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:27AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:27AM (#552798)

          What's a TMB?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:44AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:44AM (#553056)

            The Muslim Brotherhood or The Mighty Boosh [youtube.com]

      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:20PM (3 children)

        by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:20PM (#552838)

        Or maybe it's just not even licensed at all, because the company with the patent wants to put everyone out of business.

        Is lite beer patented? You can imagine teatotaller types putting all the beer companies out of business because their lite beer is safer yet unlicensed.

        Sounds ridiculous today but I'd expect someone to try it with legalized weed. "Lite-weed" which is mixed with non cancer causing grass clippings, perhaps.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by mcgrew on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:31PM (2 children)

          by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:31PM (#552854) Homepage Journal

          "Lite-weed" which is mixed with non cancer causing grass clippings, perhaps.

          Marijuana doesn't cause cancer. They did a study a decade or so ago studying long-term use of tobacco and marijuana. Those who smoked both cigarettes and pot had half the cancers of those who only smoked cigarettes, and there were fewer cancers among those who only smoked pot and those who didn't smoke anything, although the difference between nonsmokers and pot smokers was statistically insignificant.

          The results amazed the researchers, who thought that the result would be that those who smoked pot and tobacco would have twice the cancers of cigarette smokers.

          And the only way you could patent a strain of cannabis would be to genetically engineer it.

          --
          mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:29PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:29PM (#552934)

            http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/marijuana-and-lung-health.html [lung.org]

            Oops, better catch up with research. But the study that you and other pro-weed cite didn't control their numbers for the relative amounts smoked. Turns out those that smoke cigarettes smoke a LOT more. When you control for that, the numbers are not nearly as skewed.

            • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:52PM

              by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:52PM (#552937)

              Yeah, if you burn anything and inhale the vapors, plus the nasty combustion by-products, you're polluting your lungs and risking cancer. There are pot smokers who really like "vaporizers" which I guess separate the not-so-harmful vapors from the nastier particulate smoke. But one of the nice things about pot versus tobacco, in my observation as a total non-smoker of anything, is that pot smokers don't smoke *nearly* the volume of material that cigarette smokers do. The cigarette smokers are constantly lighting up, at least every couple hours, but the pot smokers might smoke once in the evening, or even once a week.

    • (Score: 2, Touché) by darkpixel on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:48AM

      by darkpixel (4281) on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:48AM (#552760)

      Great idea. Hold the creators accountable. Remember that the next time someone browses the wayback machine and finds your old 1995 geocities site complete with the blink tags and has a seizure.

    • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:38AM (1 child)

      by shortscreen (2252) on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:38AM (#552801) Journal

      You must be a lawyer.

      No, I take that back. If you were a lawyer you would know that there already was a lawsuit based on this exact concept (person sawed off part of their body and then sued the saw maker for not making their product idiot-proof).

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:23AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:23AM (#552817)
        This is what drives me crazy about the whole situation.

        Lawyers are heavily indoctrinated that they serve the greater good by doing their jobs. And that's not completely bullshit.

        But in a case like this, follow the dominoes. What are the outcomes?

        1) Sue-er wins, smaller amount, winnings are covered by increasing the cost to future purchasers of saw. Sue-er does get a pile of cash.

        2) Sue-er wins, larger amount, sue-ee is bankrupt, sue-er may or may not manage to get a pile of cash, future saw purchasers have one less option, increasing price and/or decreasing features (including safety features) included, possibly even shutting down last supplier. Particularly if a potentially expensive mandate like this one is won.

        3) Sue-er loses, no award, only lawyers fees need to be covered so price increase may be extremely modest.

        In what possible world is there a better option than 3? How are you making the world a better place when the best possible outcome with you is a modest price increase to consumers for the same good?

        Manufacturers are not averse to safety measures - quite the opposite, frankly, they tend to be enamored of them. But these measures are not free, and it doesn't always make sense to pay what they cost.
    • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:51AM

      by FakeBeldin (3360) on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:51AM (#552815) Journal

      Can the manufacturers then hold the suers liable for buying table saws without the existing proven technology, when table saws with the existing proven technology are available?

  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by captain normal on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:07AM (20 children)

    by captain normal (2205) on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:07AM (#552720)

    This is stupid. If some (apparently ~4700 per year numb skulls) idiot doesn't know how to use a push stick and side guides and stand away from the blade line, just hand out the Darwin Awards. New table saws already have a safety cover over the blade to prevent such accidents.

    --
    When life isn't going right, go left.
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:29AM (10 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:29AM (#552723)

      This is one of those things where the aphorism, "you only have to be unlucky once," really applies. You can be as vigilant and careful as possible, but one slip up is all it takes. An example that happened at my local butcher, was that one of his workers was cutting some meat with a meat band saw when a car ran into the store, which caused him to jump and side-shift the blade, which then snapped in two and went flying across the shop, punched through a plastic wall and cut someone on the other side. I would never have believed that story if it had been told to me by someone else, but the point stands in that many things can happen that cause otherwise normal situations to turn dangerous or deadly. Same with a table saw, you can take all the precautions in the world and still have accidents. And so I'm clear, we could mandate these special guards and I guarantee that people would still get hurt in saw accidents. We need to do a cost-benefit analysis, which I'm not sure comes out in this technology's favor given the costs.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:08AM (8 children)

        by bradley13 (3053) on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:08AM (#552803) Homepage Journal

        AC writes: "We need to do a cost-benefit analysis"

        Which is exactly right, and completely true, and applies to essentially every government regulation ever.

        And it never happens.

        Instead, we get (a) people wanting to make money, like the patent holder in this case, (b) politicians wanting to be seen "doing something", (d) ambulance chasing lawyers rejoicing over yet another reason to file lawsuits, (d) Darwin-award winners doing stupid stuff, and ... I'm sure I'm forgetting other factors...

        Part of the problem is also the societal expectation that complete safety is even possible. Another poster wrote about a bizarre accident in a butcher shop. Yep, shit happens, and there is literally nothing we can do to make life completely safe from the unexpected.

        An objective analysis of costs vs. benefits would probably eliminate 90% of government regulations, and make entire herds of bureaucrats unemployed. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen :-/

        --
        Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
        • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:35PM (6 children)

          by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:35PM (#552855) Homepage Journal

          It costs $65 to add this tech to a saw. How much is your hand worth? How much will the hospital bill be? I really don't think a study is needed to determine that fire is hot and water is wet.

          --
          mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:40PM (5 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:40PM (#553006) Journal
            mcgrew, cost is not price. It might cost $65 to put that tech on a saw, but what is the price that the monopoly provider will set that tech at?
            • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Sunday August 13 2017, @05:32PM (4 children)

              by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Sunday August 13 2017, @05:32PM (#553309) Homepage Journal

              The patent expires shortly. It will be expired, along with the monopoly, before congress can pass a law. Congress moves slowly.

              --
              mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @01:03AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @01:03AM (#553410)

                Now I know you are being disingenuous. First, Congress doesn't have to pass a law, the SawStop people are seeking an administrative rule, which, by law, takes a handful of months, unless Congress or the President take active steps to stop. Second, is just because the first patents expire around 2021 (based on a quick analysis of priority date), that doesn't mean that all patents expire then, and he and his company have a lot.

                Of course, you'd probably be OK with them requiring all books have special anti-papercut paper invented by Bob's Paper Co.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 14 2017, @03:52AM (2 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 14 2017, @03:52AM (#553469) Journal

                The patent expires shortly.

                A patent expires shortly, but he has more such.

                • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday August 14 2017, @02:12PM (1 child)

                  by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Monday August 14 2017, @02:12PM (#553671) Homepage Journal

                  The basic patent is set to expire. Afterwards, anybody can make one who has the tools, plans, and expertise.

                  --
                  mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday August 15 2017, @02:16AM

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 15 2017, @02:16AM (#554035) Journal

                    The basic patent is set to expire. Afterwards, anybody can make one who has the tools, plans, and expertise.

                    As long as they don't violate the other patents that this inventor has on the device. It sounds like he has plenty of blocking patents in place.

        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:35PM

          by Thexalon (636) on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:35PM (#552907)

          Instead, we get (a) people wanting to make money, like the patent holder in this case, (b) politicians wanting to be seen "doing something", (d) ambulance chasing lawyers rejoicing over yet another reason to file lawsuits, (d) Darwin-award winners doing stupid stuff, and ... I'm sure I'm forgetting other factors...

          Well, you seem to be carefully ignoring all the forces against regulation of products like this, including but not limited to:
          (e) The manufacturers who don't want to go through the time and expense of figuring out how to comply with the new regulations,
          (f) The medical device manufacturers and hospitals that profit when more injuries occur.
          (g) The retailers who want to keep prices down so they can move more product.
          (h) Politicians wanting to be seen as friendly to business.

          There is definitely such a thing as bad over-regulation. There's also definitely such a thing as bad under-regulation. The really hard part is finding the sweet spot between reasonable cost and not too much risk, and maintaining that as new technology changes what can be done at reasonable cost.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:47PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:47PM (#552843)

        This is one of those things where the aphorism, "you only have to be unlucky once," really applies.

        Indeed, I'm a 'numb skull' who lost the tip of one finger and damaged another on a circular saw, in my case I'd finished cutting, was removing the cut wood from the table in preparation for running another bit through, there was a massive glare/reflection in my glasses, one startle response later....fingers strayed too near the rear end of saw blade (crown guard fitted, but blade was high) saw go chomp chomp...or, more precisely slicey, dicey...

        This was my first accident after 30 years in workshops, and 40 years of using power tools of all types, was there some idiocy involved? maybe, but there was a lot more 'shit happens'. Workshops are full of inherently dangerous machinery, no matter how safety aware you are, familiarity breeds, in my case, complacency. The cutting job I'd carried out on the saw which mohel'd my finger I'd done over two-three years without incident despite it being technically the wrong saw for the job (the argument is that as we've a couple of smaller table saws which would have been more suitable, but as they were in use I should have waited, but, to paraphrase the Bard of Ayrshire, a saw's a saw for a' that...) that morning, however, thanks to clear skies, a strong sun and it's reflection off the side of a passing white van and two sets of open doors..shit indeed happened.

        Regarding the Sawstop, the blade dropping/retracting isn't the most impressive part of the system (and would be impractical/impossible to implement on the saw which bit me), the electrically released spring driven brake is the part of the beastie I'm more impressed with, and looking at the videos, this could be retrofitted to all the saws in my current workshop without too much hassle, and I see they have also have a Bandsaw prototype (I always assumed that it'd be one of the Bandsaws (especially the Band Resaw, never trusted the bugger) which would eventually get me..)

        As to all the whingeing about monopoly from the saw manufacturers, if it stops any other 'numb skull' losing fingers, then fuck them. Mr Gass has come up with a pretty good thing IMHO, he deserves to profit.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:39AM (4 children)

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:39AM (#552727)

      You can't use the safety cover when you're doing a non through-hole cut.

      And people don't do things perfectly even in the best circumstances.

      As for standing away from the blade line, if you're talking about kick-back, it doesn't help that American saw makers refuse to use riving knives instead of their shitty splitters. Riving knives pretty much eliminate kick-back, and are required on all European saws, but as usual the Americans are decades behind (I think the newer Powermatics have them though). And unlike the tech in this article, riving knives don't cost any more in materials than the shitty old-fashioned splitters.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:59AM

        by frojack (1554) on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:59AM (#552738) Journal

        The tech in this article doesn't cost much either. They charge a lot for it, but the cost of production of the sensor and blade brakes is easily lost in the price of a good saw. Maybe not so easy on your home Depot weekend hobby saw.

        My friend has this on his saw. He builds custom cabinets. His brother lost a thumb in the same trade.
        He showed me the sausage test in person. He also showed how a wet chunk of wood was unsawable, even if you wanted to saw it.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:33AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:33AM (#552757)

        As of 2009, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) requires that all new table saw designs include a riving knife.

      • (Score: 2) by el_oscuro on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:32PM (1 child)

        by el_oscuro (1711) on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:32PM (#552953)

        While I don't know the exact regulations, riving knifes became common here about 4-5 years ago. I was in the market for a new tablesaw and wanted one with a riving knife, so I waited for them. I was going to get the Bosch with the gravity stand, but Rigid made an equivalent model that $500 instead of $600, and more important, it was on the shop floor.

        The riving knife on my saw is quite nice, and I have never made a cut without it. Many saws have shitty knives, but I haven't seen one with a splitter in years. And all of those splitters were so shitty the first thing we did was remove it.

        A few years ago on Fine Woodworking, they had a slow motion video about kick back and why it is so dangerous. It's not the wood being thrown in your face. It is feeding the wood through, and having your fingers in front of the blade when the kickback happens. The kickback will draw your fingers back though the blade very violently.

        The simple expedient of always finishing cuts with your fingers still behind the blade will prevent the most dangerous kickback accidents, and wearing a face guard should help with the rest.
           

        --
        SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]
        • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:09PM

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:09PM (#552972)

          A few years ago on Fine Woodworking, they had a slow motion video about kick back and why it is so dangerous. It's not the wood being thrown in your face. It is feeding the wood through, and having your fingers in front of the blade when the kickback happens. The kickback will draw your fingers back though the blade very violently.

          No, it's both. Having wood shot at you is also very dangerous: it can hit your face, or your chest. I've heard of people getting killed by a piece of wood shooting back at them.

    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:31PM (3 children)

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 12 2017, @01:31PM (#552841)

      I have a saw and my understanding is almost all accidents sound like aviation fails, X led to Y led to Z led to losing a thumb or whatever.

      Aside from the operator was drunk/high of course, which is the vast majority.

      Something like there's sawdust on the floor due to inadequate dust collection leading to slip a little leading to stack of raw or sawed wood tips over leading to op trips over the fallen wood leads to flailing hands around trying to grab to prevent the fall leads to grabbing the blade.

      I take a system administrator type of outlook to using my table saw and have a plan before I start and back out plan at all times.

      Also kickback simply isn't that dangerous. Like getting hit with a baseball absolute worst case, but most situations can't be absolute worst case. A 4x8 of plywood isn't going to fly 100 mph there's not enough rotational inertia in the blade to do it. A little match stick sized piece from cutting a miter can't fly supersonic to damage flesh because the tip speed of the blade is only 100 mph or whatever it is and air resistance will do its thing. I can't cut a rabbet without featherboards to keep the work under perfect control, and the featherboards prevent any possible kickbacks as a side effect.

      The "do the best you can" attitude probably saves many lives. "It doesn't have to be very good, I'll just wing it by hand" results in hands getting cut off occasionally, but more perfectionist "this joint will be tighter than business card tight" means I must use featherboards and jigs and stuff and that means I can't get hurt. It's hard to think of other hobbies where the more perfectionist you are, the safer you are. Maybe home car mechanic work like doing a brake job, I guess. Just saying that in woodworking its interesting how producing quality work always seems to involve safe production techniques.

      • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:00PM (2 children)

        by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:00PM (#552939)

        "I have a saw."

        doesn't mean you know anything about it.
        You've never actually been in a machine/wood shop before have you?

        "Aside from the operator was drunk/high of course, which is the vast majority."

        Really? Cite a source for this misinformation.

        "Also kickback simply isn't that dangerous."

        Proof you've never touched a table saw.

        "A 4x8 of plywood isn't going to fly 100 mph there's not enough rotational inertia in the blade to do it. A little match stick sized piece from cutting a miter can't fly supersonic to damage flesh because the tip speed of the blade is only 100 mph or whatever it is and air resistance will do its thing."

        It doesn't have to go 100mph. More proof you've never even stepped foot into shop.

        You would be the guy whose fingers I have fished out of the sawdust. Yep, I've worked with your type before. Stay out of shops for all of our safety please.

        --
        Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
        • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday August 13 2017, @02:09PM (1 child)

          by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 13 2017, @02:09PM (#553259)

          Although your post is nearly perfectly content free, I was motivated to skim a CPSC report of table saw injuries from 2007-2008 and there is a minor interpretive issue.

          The TLDR is I made fun of kickbacks because competent operators can't be hurt by kickbacks, which is in fact true and proven in the CPSC study, but 90% to 95% of all table saw accidents come from incompetent operators not using any safety gear while doing dangerous rip cuts that kickback resulting in the vast majority of table saw accidents. So depending on if you look at saw ops as competent by default or incompetent by default colors how you look at the risks of kickback.

          IF the operator is totally incompetent and intentionally refuses to use safety gear like feather boards riving knifes guards jigs shooting boards and push sticks and then rips small pieces of wood very close to the blade, that accounts for 90% to 95% of all table saw injuries. If you exclude "stupid ripping tricks" then the danger of a table saw slips down to other tools and most of the injuries are like "strained back moving heavy saw across workshop" or "lacerated hand while opening blade storage package" type of ridiculous stuff.

          It seems if you're ripping small pieces almost touching the blade while holding the work with your hands with no safety or anti-kickback gear at all, its rather likely it'll kick back and the odds are very high the kickback will involve pushing hand into blade leading to accident. But only the dumbest idiots use a saw that way. I've never experienced a kickback while ripping because I've never been dumb enough to not use the plethora of cheap and easy gear.

          I have experienced plenty of kickbacks when crosscutting and thats where the "kickbacks never hurt nobody" commentary comes from. If you're cross cutting a 3/8 dowel and the end kicks back as you cut it off, it hurts about as much as having a pencil thrown at you, actually a bit less, I've never seen a small cross cut scrap kicked further than I can throw a pencil, its not a tungsten dart 20mm rifle round. So it bounces off my normal shop safety gear, ore more likely hits the floor 5 feet away, and does nothing. Likewise something big and heavy getting crosscut like the plywood back panel of a bookcase, first of all I'm behind the center of mass of the work which puts my body parts like a yard away from the dangerous spinning parts, secondly, there's not enough inertia in the blade to accelerate the cut off piece must faster than if it fell off the table. So I've also never been hurt crosscutting anything huge because I'm really far away from ground zero and big stuff can't move fast. I've taken the occasional cut off end of a 2x4 to the chest which feels not as bad as getting hit by a baseball but but it is kinda annoying. Not being an idiot I have a study leather apron in my safety gear so I imagine getting punched in the gut while wearing only a tee shirt or shirtless might leave a bit more serious of a mark, LOL. A few things have ping'd off my face shield but nothing gets thru to the safety glassed so no worries. Also not being an idiot its very rare for me to stand in line with the blade precisely because of kickback, so I haven't been hit many times while crosscutting.

          Actually I've had wood shatter in the lathe and that is WAY more exciting that a mere table saw kickback. Wood is organic, you can never really tell whats gonna happen.

          • (Score: 2) by Pslytely Psycho on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:12PM

            by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Tuesday August 15 2017, @01:12PM (#554243)

            It seemed you were making light of issues of kickback and saw safety as well. I got a tad worked up as you sounded exactly like the guy I described whose fingers I fished out of the sawdust.

            I have seen properly operated saws catch on an odd patch of wood and spun out sideways with enough force to put a worker in the hospital with three broken ribs. As I was a sawyer safety trainer with Allpak for years so I took it a bit personal. Apologies.

            Yeah, shattered wood in a lathe is an unforgettable experience.....almost as much fun as the idiot who knocked over the Oxygen tank breaking the valve off....Went through a brick wall and firmly lodged itself in the side of a semi truck trailer full of wooden panels. Rocket power for the win!

            Too much beer before posting. I hope I am not rambling too much.
            Peace.

            --
            Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
  • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:21PM (1 child)

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Saturday August 12 2017, @02:21PM (#552850) Homepage Journal

    Here's [youtube.com] a video of the saw in action. Its only drawback is, it will only save your hand once; the saw won't operate after saving a limb. But a new saw is a lot cheaper than having them sew your hand back on.

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by richtopia on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:42PM

      by richtopia (3160) on Saturday August 12 2017, @08:42PM (#552956) Homepage Journal

      I've run Saw Stop saws. If anyone has a Tech Shop near them, all of their makerspaces have the saws. Talking with one of the staff they have about 1 stop every month. It does cost the person with the accident about 60 bucks to replace the blade and brake, but is leaves a scratch on par with a bad splinter.

      You can disable the Saw Stop for some cuts. There are a lot of false positives if you aren't careful: the technology depends on conductivity, so if you cut anything with a staple or too wet it will trigger.

      There is a premium of Saw Stop over other brands without brakes. I cannot afford to own a Saw Stop saw, but I hope with this mandated the cost will come down.

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:01PM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Saturday August 12 2017, @04:01PM (#552879) Journal

    It has happened before. Just prior to WWI, when the need for airplanes became pressing, the Gov't basically forced the Wright Brothers to stand down on their aggressive patent lawsuits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers_patent_war#The_patent_pool_solution [wikipedia.org]