That close would have to be a tiny fraction of an inch, so close that you're almost touching it. In which case, I would not call that a false trip because there isn't any valid reason to be that close to the blade.
...
Well, unless you actually _did_ touch (and teeth, not just the smooth blade side), there wasn't an actual required need to trip as there was not any damage inflicted. That's the definition of a false positive.
--
That may be your definition, but it's not mine, nor do I think it's a reasonable one. Being 1mm away from a spinning blade tripping it works for me as a valid need to stop the saw. And from the video, even when tripped by actual contact, there was no damage inflicted.
Regardless of what you put on a swirling blade, whether on a table saw, RAS, mitre saw, etc. there is nothing that can be put on it to prevent accidents. There will always be some fool who tries to make an adjustment to the saw with the blade running or some other dumb thing. Will the SS prevent this person from being damaged when the glove he is wearing (suggested previously) snags in the saw and causes and accident? Would the accident then be blamed on the glove and someone initiate a campaign to use snag less gloves?
In one of these post some one suggested replacing a table saw with a Circular Saw. Has any body seen someone who is damaged with a circular saw? They are the most vicious things in existence.
I had my first table saw accident about two weeks ago, because I DID SOMETHING STUPID. It was not the fault of any design flaw in the saw, it was plan stupidity on my part. After it happened and I realized the extent of the damage, my next though was I don't have SS and have to repair the saw to finish the job. While what I did was stupid, the damage was minimal BECAUSE when I started, I set the saw up properly.
"Something stupid" is a variations on the hardest words to say in the any language I MADE A MISTAKE. No one is willing to take the responsibility for their own actions they always must be a victim of some one else s mistakes. Every one from obama who is still blaming President Bush for his failures to the man working in his garden.
This discussion reminds me of a safety manager I knew many years ago. In the lab we did a lot of work with 2 ml screw top bottles. These were used in a plastic bag to protect that sample in a Nitrogen atmosphere. We got a batch of bad bottles that crumbled when you put the top on to tight.
The safety manager required us to use HEAVY Rubber gloves for protection from cuts if the bottle broke. The safety equipment prevented us from doing our job as the gloves made it impossible to handle the tiny bottles. Is side the Nitrogen bag it was impossible.
====> On 12/5/2012 1:25 AM, Existential Angst wrote: You are responding to three different groups. Please edit out the cross
Easy to determine whom he replied to. It's the poster at the top of his message without any ">" in front of it.
And, it would greatly help your request to snip unwanted text if you did what you're asking Leon to do.
Don't believe you. I think you didn't snip any of the thread just to irritate him. :)
;!)
From all that I've seen so far, it would. Blade cuts through glove then touches finger just as it would with no glove. As soon as it goes through the glove, the saw stops. What do you have to suggest that it would not prevent an injury with a glove on?
Which is why if a similar feature could be put into a circular saw it would be a good thing, no?
Most accidents caused by doing something stupid, being careless, not having your full attention on the job at hand? That's why we call them accidents, not "on-purposes". What does that have to do with anything?
This has nothing to do with people not taking responsibility for their own actions. Let's go where you seem to want to go. Let's look at conservatives who believe in personal responsibility. Do you think none of them have accidents with a table saw because they are perfect, flawless? MAYBE they have a lower incidence of accidents than the general population. But suppose it's
25% less accidents, which I think is a reach. That still leaves a hell of a lot of cut off fingers, $20,000 hospital bills, etc. Now, if a new safety feature works, can prevent that at reasonable cost, I think it's a very good thing. I'd want it in a product I buy and I'm a conservative.Nothing I've seen so far suggests the SawStop prevents you from doing what you want to do with the saw.
It was Keith that dragged Obama blaming Bush and not accepting responsibility into this, not me. That is what seems a giant leap to me. And sorry, but his whole post is in fact based on ideology, which is simply a set of beliefs. Apparently he believes that accepting personal responsibility somehow negates the need for safety protection devices. That doesn't compute in my world and all I did was point it out.
As I replied to Keith, what does any of that have to do with the usefulness of SawStop on a table saw? It's not an issue of personal responsibility. It's an issue of safety and the fact that accidents happen to everyone.
It was Keith that dragged Obama blaming Bush and not accepting responsibility into this, not me. That is what seems a giant leap to me. And sorry, but his whole post is in fact based on ideology, which is simply a set of beliefs. Apparently he believes that accepting personal responsibility somehow negates the need for safety protection devices. That doesn't compute in my world and all I did was point it out.
As I replied to Keith, what does any of that have to do with the usefulness of SawStop on a table saw? It's not an issue of personal responsibility. It's an issue of safety and the fact that accidents happen to everyone. =========================================================
It's much more than that. Safety is fine. Having it shoved down our throats is not. If people want safe, let them buy a SS. End of story. But just the beginning of the MANDATED story, which is what that SS hustler Gass is all about.
Ditto seatbelts, helmet laws. There's no fukn safety safety concern for the public in seatbelt laws. The safety bullshit is all bullshit rhetoric, it's
*clearly* all about revenue raising.The others are correct -- personal responsibility -- and the education usually associated with PR -- could easily be MORE effective -- and as importantly, more overall PRODUCTIVE -- than a gadget that works by destruction. . Just how fukn hard is it to push a piece of wood thru a g-d saw, so's you don't get cut?? Answer: Not hard at all. Just become educated, such as thru the original vid in the OP -- which, amongst other things, showed that low-profile push-blocks mebbe aren't such a good idea, afterall.
Howzat crawling helmet going, btw??
On 12/5/2012 11:59 AM, Existential Angst wrote: ...
Well, that isn't so, in reality, no.
There's a very big societal cost in the higher injury/death rates owing to folks not being individually responsible-enough to use them. It's kinda' like the class staying after school because of one somebody threw a spitball...we all pay for the sins of the few.
--
What has this to do with personally responsibility? If you are stupid enough to put a cup of near boiling hot coffee between your legs, the company that made the coffee hot like you told them you want should not be held responsible for your stupidity.
I am as safe as any one. The stupid mistake I made with my table saw is the first I have made in the 50 years of using the saw. Should I have the right to sue the manufacture because I was stupid?
The nanny state can not continue to require some safety device for every stupid action that someone makes. If someone does something stupid and looses a finger, it will be (or not be)there to remind them to be safer in the future.
Regardless of how many safety devices are places on a saw or anything else you use, they will not make you safe unless you accept the responsibility for your own safety. If you do not know enough about the saw or whatever device you are using to KNOW what is an unsafe act, you should not be using it.
Maybe the next step is for our nanny state is to regulate the use of table saws, and only allow you to use it after you have passed a test and paid the government money for a license. Because government licenses we now have no auto death or injuries.
Well, then, technically, I remain correck: Gummint don't give a f*ck about an indivdual's safety, they're concerned about their own bottom line. :) :)
It's
A good analogy.... Altho I think kidnapping, extortion, and ransom are better analogies. :) And there's no SWAT team for our rescue....
...
Well, fundamentally they're the same...and should be concerned about "their" bottom line since again, fundamentally, that's us.
--
Haven't you heard? Trader4 is an economist, and knows everyfuknthing there is to know about everyfuknthing. Somehow, tho, he winds up jerking himself on ng's, instead of tryna learn a li'l sumpn sumpn -- which ultimately is the real purpose of ng's, imo.
And when you admit to learning sumpn, or being wrong, or whatever, then he calls you an idiot. Which speaks volumes about his character.
May I ask if you ever intend to talk about a wood working project or do you just have time on your hands and like to bitch?
Funny you should ask..... Ackshooly, I'm on vacation, have a TON of shit to do, and I'm procrastinating like mad.... Trader4 is sort of a sport....
BUT, I got a treeeeeeMENdous post in the offing, for RW, on paint spraying.... yer gonna love it....
Bear in mind that the override is a one-shot. You have to set it every time you power up the saw and it resets to the default mode when you turn off the switch.
The thing is we're all paying through the nose for airbags all over the place that were originally sold to Congress on the basis that they made seat belts unnecessary, and now the reason we have to wear seat belts is to protect us from the damned airbags.
That "logic" can be applied to any/all of our freedoms. You really do want government to own you rather than the other way 'round.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.