sawdustinmyshoes
 OfflineMember Since: Jan 2008
Posts: 50
|
 |
« on: March 17, 2010, 12:44 PM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 10, 2013, 11:22 AM by sawdustinmyshoes »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CharlesWilson
Offline
Location: Newington, CT Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 416
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2010, 01:48 PM » |
|
I smell an appeal in the making.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Charles Wilson
|
|
|
justinmcf
Offline
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia Member Since: Nov 2008
Posts: 711
Queensland Builder
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2010, 05:17 PM » |
|
very interesting. this could be the straw that breaks the camels back.
i can only hope that the sawstop invention becomes mandatory in every new table that is manufactured.
i think it will be a few years before we see this happen.
but this is a positive move forward.
regards, justin.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
EcoFurniture
Offline
Location: Victoria, BC Member Since: Sep 2008
Posts: 604
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2010, 05:24 PM » |
|
there goes my dream of getting a cms....
But if this will become mandatory, will a business have to replace their saws to be further covered by the insurance companies? Scary thought! That could kill many businesses...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
JimRay
Offline
Location: UNITED STATES (US) Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2010, 05:32 PM » |
|
Wonderful, another setback for personal responsibility.
I bet that there isn't a chance in the world that the injured party would have selected anything but a saw with "flesh-detecting technology" built-in, no matter what the cost, had it been available. Of course, the fact that he was injured while using a Ryobi saw isn't really an indication that he was shopping price rather than features. Nope. That guy was surely looking for only the best.
Jim Ray
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jim Ray
|
|
|
Inner10
Offline
Location: CANADA (CA) Member Since: Oct 2009
Posts: 175
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2010, 05:56 PM » |
|
This is ridiculous, maby we should have a licence system that only allows people who arn't complete morons to buy saws.
<< Edited by Forrest Anderson to delete offensive language 22:08hrs GMT, 17 Mar 2010 >>
Sorry I didnt realize that was offensive, I have washed me mouth out with soap will clean it up a bit.
To reiterate I sarcastically made fun of this by saying soon helmets will be necessary for pleasuring yourself due to the risk of of your closed fist comming in contact with your forehead.
This reminds me of the lawsuit between Mcdonalds and the woman who burnt herself by spilling coffee on her lap.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 06:17 PM by Inner10 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RL
Offline
Location: Canada Member Since: Feb 2010
Posts: 2114
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2010, 06:02 PM » |
|
If this lawsuit is not thrown out, table saws are going to cost an arm and a leg!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I like green.
|
|
|
bruegf
Offline
Location: Michigan Member Since: Mar 2007
Posts: 729
Michigan
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2010, 06:07 PM » |
|
This should have been thrown out to start with, but I sure hope it is reversed on appeal. That said, I just bought a sawstop. Figured the cost of the saw was cheap compared to one trip to the ER.
But it should be my choice whether I want to pay for that technology.
Too bad I can't use the darn thing yet - I don't have enough power in my basement shop to run the thing and the vac at the same time :-(
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Fred
|
|
|
jeffinsgf
Retailer
Offline
Location: Springfield, MO Member Since: Oct 2009
Posts: 121
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2010, 06:18 PM » |
|
I wonder who the "expert" on flesh sensing technology was.....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AdamM
Offline
Location: Rochester, MN, USA Member Since: Mar 2010
Posts: 120
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2010, 07:04 PM » |
|
This reminds me of the lawsuit between Mcdonalds and the woman who burnt herself by spilling coffee on her lap.
There was a time when made fun of this lawsuit as well. Then I learned the real story...McDonalds was setting their coffee pot temperature at 180-190 degrees F, which was so hot that it would cause 3rd degree burns in 12-15 seconds. Coffee really only needs to be around 140 degrees F. McDonalds argument was that customers wanted to take it back to the office, however that contradicted McDonalds own research indicating customers intended to drink it while driving. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Kapex, Domino, TS55, CT22, MFK700, MFT 1080
|
|
|
PeterK
Offline
Location: Wet muggy humid South Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 811
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2010, 07:42 PM » |
|
I urge all of you to read the wikipedia link that AdamM posted. This was an elderly lady who was very seriously injured and only asked for medical bill payment of $20,000. The pictures of the damage done to her upper legs was astounding. Very poorly handled by McDonalds at the time. So many make fun of the McDonald's coffee incident but know nothing about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex
Offline
Location: The Netherlands Member Since: Nov 2008
Posts: 2796
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2010, 07:44 PM » |
|
This is crazy. Next time I cut myself on a piece of glass I'm gonna sue the glass manufacturer for not having flesh sensory technology. I could do with a cool mil and a half too. Oh wait ........ I live in Europe. A suit like this would be laughed out of court. Bugger. No mil and a half.  But at least they respect me as somebody with brains enough to be responsible all by myself.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
waynew
Offline
Location: CANADA (CA) Member Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 65
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2010, 08:26 PM » |
|
Not necessarily referring to this current case but i just can't for the life of me grasp the mentality of individuals who resolve themselves of all responsibility, prefering to sue a tablesaw manufacturer for something they did to themselves.
I guess they suffer from a severe case of the nanny state flu, whereby they claim no responsibility for their own actions preferring to shift that on to others. What a pathetic situation, where does it all stop.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Festools - the tools that make you feel like working!
|
|
|
JimRay
Offline
Location: UNITED STATES (US) Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2010, 08:29 PM » |
|
I urge all of you to read the wikipedia link that AdamM posted. This was an elderly lady who was very seriously injured and only asked for medical bill payment of $20,000. The pictures of the damage done to her upper legs was astounding. Very poorly handled by McDonalds at the time. So many make fun of the McDonald's coffee incident but know nothing about it.
The fact that the woman placed the coffee cup between her legs had absolutely nothing to do with the injury she sustained, I presume. Once again, personal responsibility is trumped in the courtroom! Jim Ray |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jim Ray
|
|
|
justinmcf
Offline
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia Member Since: Nov 2008
Posts: 711
Queensland Builder
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2010, 08:33 PM » |
|
wow!
i am amazed at how many people are standing up for the company here.
i am for the little man 100 percent!
ryobi had their chance to embrace this technology, but they and others turned their backs on it because of profit margins.
i agree that the inventor went about it the wrong way. i believe he tried to push this technology down other manufacturers throats.
but, i want this technology in every saw now, not in ten or 20 years time.
maybe i'm just crazy.........
regards, justin.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
JimRay
Offline
Location: UNITED STATES (US) Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2010, 08:51 PM » |
|
but, i want this technology in every saw now, not in ten or 20 years time.
maybe i'm just crazy.........
regards, justin.
I just want people to have the opportunity to purchase the technology. And of course, a free market economy has now made that possible, and I hope that SawStop will be incredibly sucessful. But I don't agree with their attempt to force manufacturers and the woodworking public to embrace the technology. Forcing people to buy something doesn't make sense to me. Of course, I understand that we probably still wouldn't have seat belts if Congress hadn't mandated them back in the 60's. For the life of me, I can not understand why large companies don't see the value in making a safer product on their own, without getting the government involved. SawStop definitely has the right idea - build a better product, and let the marketplace decide. I wonder what their product liability insurance cost must be on each saw they sell? Bet it's more that it would be if their's was just a standard table saw. Jim Ray |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jim Ray
|
|
|
Alex
Offline
Location: The Netherlands Member Since: Nov 2008
Posts: 2796
|
|
« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2010, 09:10 PM » |
|
i am amazed at how many people are standing up for the company here.
i am for the little man 100 percent!
This is not about the big company vs the little man Justin. It is a mistake to look at it like that. This is about a general principle where people are responsible for their own actions, and not somebody else. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Steve Rowe
Offline
Location: Russellville, AR Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 325
|
|
« Reply #17 on: March 17, 2010, 09:58 PM » |
|
wow!
i am amazed at how many people are standing up for the company here.
i am for the little man 100 percent!
ryobi had their chance to embrace this technology, but they and others turned their backs on it because of profit margins.
i agree that the inventor went about it the wrong way. i believe he tried to push this technology down other manufacturers throats.
but, i want this technology in every saw now, not in ten or 20 years time.
maybe i'm just crazy.........
regards, justin.
I think it is great technology as well and would like to see it (or some other technology) on saws as well. With respect to your surprise, I suggest the following considerations. The little man had a choice of which saw and technology to purchase. The little man had a choice to use or not to use the guard and splitter. The little man chose to purchase a saw which was most likely based on a little price. The little man got injured because of his own actions and choices. Perhaps that is why many are falling on the side of the company in lieu of the "little man". |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
VictorL
Offline
Location: South-Central CT Member Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 536
|
|
« Reply #18 on: March 17, 2010, 10:59 PM » |
|
This is a precedent. In this case lawyers can claim compensation for ANY injuries with ANY power tool included, but not limited:
Miter saws
Chain saws
Jig saws
band saws
routers
planers
shapers
sanders
drills
nail guns
grinders
lathes
shears
etc.
Could you imagine adding "flesh sensing" modules to the tools listed above?
Leave alone price tag. But where is common sense?
Nobody is trying to sue ski resorts; you are at your own risk. Why ladders don't have body catching devices?
I injured my left hand with chisel, should I sue Stanley?
Stay safe.
VictorL
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Corwin
Offline
Location: Washington State, USA Member Since: Jan 2007
Posts: 1991
|
|
« Reply #19 on: March 17, 2010, 11:37 PM » |
|
... But where is common sense? ...
We are talking about our legal system here, aren't we? And a case decided by a pool of jurors? The defendant didn't stand a chance... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Shirt Size: L
|
|
|
AdamM
Offline
Location: Rochester, MN, USA Member Since: Mar 2010
Posts: 120
|
|
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2010, 11:51 PM » |
|
Of course, I understand that we probably still wouldn't have seat belts if Congress hadn't mandated them back in the 60's. For the life of me, I can not understand why large companies don't see the value in making a safer product on their own, without getting the government involved.
The story of getting seat belts into cars is almost comical. Car makers were against seat belts because it meant admitting their product was unsafe to use and were afraid customers wouldn't but a product that wasn't safe. Fast forward half a century or so and now safety is a major selling point in cars. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Kapex, Domino, TS55, CT22, MFK700, MFT 1080
|
|
|
southern_guy
Offline
Location: NEW ZEALAND (NZ) Member Since: Jul 2007
Posts: 66
|
|
« Reply #21 on: March 18, 2010, 02:04 AM » |
|
as someone NRINA (not resident in ....) I can honestly say that your legal system is screwed. As has been pointed out, on the one hand we have a saw manufacturer that was offered a technology, and chose not to purchase it. On the other we have a consumer who had the choice of buying a saw with that technology, but chose not to take up that choice. Not only that, but the consumer had the choice whether or not to adopt safe practice when using the saw he bought, but chose unsafe practice instead. The responsibility for the injury lies fairly and squarely with the user of the saw.
The latest S series Mercedes have technology that prevent the vehicle tailgating the car in front. If the above case is any precedent, any other car manufacturer that doesn't include such technology is now screwed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny round boy
Offline
Location: West Yorkshire, UK Member Since: Jul 2007
Posts: 2090
|
|
« Reply #22 on: March 18, 2010, 05:04 AM » |
|
As another member NRINA, I must say that I think this is a bad omen, and I sincerely hope that Ryobi does appeal, and wins. If a precedent like this is set, then it's bad news for everyone (unless you're either a lawyer, or someone so stupid they shouldn't be using power tools). I urge all of you to read the wikipedia link that AdamM posted. This was an elderly lady who was very seriously injured and only asked for medical bill payment of $20,000. The pictures of the damage done to her upper legs was astounding. Very poorly handled by McDonalds at the time. So many make fun of the McDonald's coffee incident but know nothing about it.
Peter, I did read that link. And several other related links. Yes, McDonalds could have handled it better, but they chose not to settle beforehand because they felt they had no case to answer. And I for one agree with them. Someone tried the same here in the UK afterwards, and quite rightly the judge threw it out. She may indeed have been an elderly lady, but the fact that she was of advancing years should have worked in her favour - since she had lived for 79 years up to that point, she had 79 years to learn that coffee is hot. The fact that she failed to do that wasn't really McDonalds fault.
This reminds me of the lawsuit between Mcdonalds and the woman who burnt herself by spilling coffee on her lap.
There was a time when made fun of this lawsuit as well. Then I learned the real story... McDonalds was setting their coffee pot temperature at 180-190 degrees F, which was so hot that it would cause 3rd degree burns in 12-15 seconds. Coffee really only needs to be around 140 degrees F. McDonalds argument was that customers wanted to take it back to the office, however that contradicted McDonalds own research indicating customers intended to drink it while driving. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_RestaurantsThe section of the above highlighted in bold is completely contradicted by statements in the link you provided - namely "The National Coffee Association of the U.S.A. instructs that coffee should be brewed "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit [91?96 ?C] for optimal extraction" and consumed "immediately". If not consumed immediately, the coffee is to be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit"." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Festoolian since February 2006
TS55R EBQ saw - CTL26 - CTL Mini - OF1400EBQ router - KS120 Kapex SCMS - ETS150/3 sander - RO90 sander - DF500 Domino - T12 drill
Wish list (in no particular order!): Anything not listed above....
|
|
|
henry1224
Offline
Location: UNITED STATES (US) Member Since: May 2007
Posts: 24
|
|
« Reply #23 on: March 18, 2010, 06:31 AM » |
|
I wonder who the "expert" on flesh sensing technology was.....
Jeff,
I was wondering the same thing.
The expert could be a lawyer who happened to shop at a Woodcraft store and tried out a sawstop
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Inner10
Offline
Location: CANADA (CA) Member Since: Oct 2009
Posts: 175
|
|
« Reply #24 on: March 18, 2010, 08:00 AM » |
|
I urge all of you to read the wikipedia link that AdamM posted. This was an elderly lady who was very seriously injured and only asked for medical bill payment of $20,000. The pictures of the damage done to her upper legs was astounding. Very poorly handled by McDonalds at the time. So many make fun of the McDonald's coffee incident but know nothing about it. I remember it well, in fact I even drank that terrible McDonald's coffee at the time, and I drank it black. I feel for the woman and all the skin graphs and time she spend in the hospital but that doesn't change the fact that she should have used common sense! I guess you guys are not coffee drinkers because the water should be 200 degrees when it hits the grounds and served HOT. Seriously, common sense is not so common and the all-American way is if you are a fool and hurt yourself you should sue someone else because it was their fault. Give me a break! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Toolman
Offline
Location: UNITED STATES (US) Member Since: May 2007
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #25 on: March 18, 2010, 08:34 AM » |
|
Ambulance chasing lawyers ARE the downfall of the USA!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bobbobbob
Offline
Location: Pac NW Member Since: Feb 2008
Posts: 150
|
|
« Reply #26 on: March 18, 2010, 09:05 AM » |
|
I would think $1.5 million is still no even trade of losing functioning phalanges! Did anyone see this article: http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2010/03/sawstop_saw_brake_safety_devic.htmlNot than I am a lawyer, but the root of the problem IMHO is the lack of personal responsibility in the US. There wouldn't be so many lawyers here if they didn't have something to do... then again ask anyone born in Italy who has had to deal with estate issues (or other legal issues) in Italy about how drawn out that process is in Italy versus in the US... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
waynew
Offline
Location: CANADA (CA) Member Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 65
|
|
« Reply #27 on: March 18, 2010, 09:29 AM » |
|
Dont get me wrong, I'm totally against the mandating of this commercial technology, especially for hobbyist and one man shops but I think the difference with the Sawstop and the other tools you mention is that the laywers could claim that the technology is available for the tablesaw, its not yet available for those other equipment. I can see a future case coming for the bandsaw but the others would probably need a different design. This is a precedent. In this case lawyers can claim compensation for ANY injuries with ANY power tool included, but not limited:
Miter saws
Chain saws
Jig saws
band saws
routers
planers
shapers
sanders
drills
nail guns
grinders
lathes
shears
etc.
Could you imagine adding "flesh sensing" modules to the tools listed above?
Leave alone price tag. But where is common sense?
Nobody is trying to sue ski resorts; you are at your own risk. Why ladders don't have body catching devices?
I injured my left hand with chisel, should I sue Stanley?
Stay safe.
VictorL
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Festools - the tools that make you feel like working!
|
|
|
Jonhilgen
Offline
Location: Charleston, SC (USA) Member Since: Dec 2009
Posts: 854
|
|
« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2010, 09:40 AM » |
|
Who cares if I cut my fingers off anyway. It's not like I have to pay to have them fixed anymore, the Government will pick up the check once they pass health care reform (and by "Government", I mean all of us poor shmucks that actually work for a living and pay taxes). Hmmm, can I sue the government for not warning me enough about the dangers of leaving my house every morning to go to work...
Honestly, the minute this guy got hurt, he was looking for a payday. Talk about the American dream!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 05:51 PM by Jonhilgen »
|
Logged
|
The more Festools I buy, the more money I earn. The more money I earn, the more Festools I buy. The more...
TS 55, TS 75, Domino, CT22, OF 2000, C12, CXS, RAS, Trion, Fogtainers!
|
|
|
RL
Offline
Location: Canada Member Since: Feb 2010
Posts: 2114
|
|
« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2010, 09:54 AM » |
|
Against the overwhelming opinion on this forum, I am glad he won. Yes, it was an accident, and yes, the payoff is a lot, (not so much after you consider $400,000 in medical bills) but the point of his case is that it may force manufacturers to adopt the technology which is surely a good thing.
It is akin to air bags in cars. There was tremendous resistance to putting them in initially because of the cost, but now it is mandatory and fatalities on the roads are at the lowest since the early 1950s in the US- amazing when you consider the faster speed of today's cars on highways and the greater volume of vehicles on the road. Can you honestly tell me that you notice the cost of an airbag when you buy a car?
So table saws will all cost $200 or more for a while? Big deal. That's two systainers and a heck of a lot of fingers. Oh and by the way, the cost of replacing the cartridge and blade would be a nice bonus to the manufacturer and would offset the technology cost.
Richard.
P.S. Justice is blind, so the plaintiff's immigration status is an irrelevance.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 18, 2010, 09:56 AM by RichardLeon »
|
Logged
|
I like green.
|
|
|
|
