Table saw safety legislation

[Packard]

This may be old news, but I just read it today. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is trying to make Saw Stop technology optional only. They are opposing making it mandatory. I am still processing this information in my mind and I am undecided.

Here is the article I read. The claim is that the legislation would double the cost of the table saws and enrich one manufacturer. But, if I recall correctly, Saw Stop never wanted to produce table saws at all. They wanted to license the tech, but there were no takers. I think I would be OK with this legislation, if Saw Stop got out of the saw business and went back to the licensed-only business model.

FTC Says a Table Saw Safety Rule Must Be Scrapped. Here's Why

The regulator says a safety rule meant to prevent tens of thousands of finger amputations a year would hand one company too much power.

www.inc.com

 

[smorgasbord]

Covered in this earlier thread:

S

Thread 'SawStop/ Active Injury Mitigation technology to NOT be required'

Aug 25, 2025

CPSC reverses course.
EDIT: I guess the guy wants you to go to YouTube and watch it there.

• smorgasbord
• Replies: 13
• Forum: General Friendly Chat

 

[onocoffee]

This may be old news, but I just read it today. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is trying to make Saw Stop technology optional only. They are opposing making it mandatory. I am still processing this information in my mind and I am undecided.

Here is the article I read. The claim is that the legislation would double the cost of the table saws and enrich one manufacturer. But, if I recall correctly, Saw Stop never wanted to produce table saws at all. They wanted to license the tech, but there were no takers. I think I would be OK with this legislation, if Saw Stop got out of the saw business and went back to the licensed-only business model.

FTC Says a Table Saw Safety Rule Must Be Scrapped. Here's Why

The regulator says a safety rule meant to prevent tens of thousands of finger amputations a year would hand one company too much power.

www.inc.com

Maybe they should make some sort of safety tech mandatory. Not just SawStop but Bosch Reaxx and the systems that Felder and others use?

 

[luvmytoolz]

This may be old news, but I just read it today. The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is trying to make Saw Stop technology optional only. They are opposing making it mandatory. I am still processing this information in my mind and I am undecided.

Here is the article I read. The claim is that the legislation would double the cost of the table saws and enrich one manufacturer. But, if I recall correctly, Saw Stop never wanted to produce table saws at all. They wanted to license the tech, but there were no takers. I think I would be OK with this legislation, if Saw Stop got out of the saw business and went back to the licensed-only business model.

FTC Says a Table Saw Safety Rule Must Be Scrapped. Here's Why

The regulator says a safety rule meant to prevent tens of thousands of finger amputations a year would hand one company too much power.

www.inc.com

Sawstops owned by TTI now, I don't think there's any scenario in which they aren't making saws and leveraging the tech.

 

[Packard]

Back in the early 1980s, my stopped car (an Audi Quattro) was rear-ended by a SUV traveling at over 60 mph. The driver never applied his brakes, so I got the full force of the highway-speed SUV. The results: The seat back mechanism failed and my seat back collapsed into a full recline position. Then my head hit the seat back of the rear seat at full force. I ended up wearing a neck brace the entire summer and having the doctor call me “lucky”.

The reason I am telling this is because a few years earlier, Mercedes Benz applied for and recieved a patent for a seat back mechanism that would be able to resist the forces of a SUV traveling at 60 mph and hitting a stationery vehicle.

Mercedes decided that the positive publicity for sharing that technology was more valuable than having exclusive rights to use it, and they offered to license it for free to any car manufacturer who wanted to use it. The said it added about $4.00 per vehicle for the upgrade. There were no takers.

Based on my experience, I am doubtful that any saw manufacturer would have adopted the Saw Stop technology, even if it was offered for free.

About 25 years ago, I designed a very different type of life raft that offered greater safety to the occupants that would need the services of a life raft. I also offered the design for free to three different life raft manufacturers. They all declined. The all said that they believed it would be a safer life raft, but it would add cost and they were not interested.

So, unless the Saw Stop technology reduces the cost to manufacture the saws, I predict that none of the saw manufacturers will voluntarily adopt the tech. No proof to support that statement. Just history.

 

[onocoffee]

Packard - to your point, the SawStop legend is that the founder went to the saw manufacturers to offer the tech at the outset. They all declined citing cost factors and we are where we are today. Thanks capitalism as religion society.

But as luv says, I doubt that today TTI would be interested in licensing the tech for cheap or free. However, government regulation requiring some form of limb-saving technology on table saws would force innovation (or at least more creative means of skirting around it).

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I have nothing against the tech whatsoever, but I really don't think it's a government mandate issue.
I'm sure that sounds even sillier, from a guy with 1/2 a thumb, but it was not the saw's fault, nor the company who made it.
If there are people willing to spend the extra, for the tech, let them. If it gets mandated, the price will go up, not down, because there is no alternative. Bring on the "used" market. Prices will soar there too, less than the new ones of course, but more than they are worth.
If they can do that, the logical next step is the same as car seats for babies and lawn darts. They are not even legal to sell in your yard sale.
If this happens, what's next?
Guns don't shoot people
Pencils don't misspell words
Forks don't make people fat
I would say "cars don't run over people" too, but some of these autonomous ones do....
They can't ban everything, at some point, people have to take responsibility.
People take the guards off of angle grinders all the time.
Someone is always going to defeat a safety feature. The government can't regulate that, closest you get is insurance companies, but don't give them any ideas.
I don't see why they couldn't license it and produce them too. That is done all the time, but it won't bring the price down, with a mandate in place.

Back in the day, I had issues with Anti-lock brakes. Initially it was only on high end cars Mercedes Benz, etc.
So, you're driving down the road following one, at a reasonable distance, and something happens. It doesn't matter what. You both hit the brakes at the same time. It tops shorter than you possibly can. Now not only have you hit someone, it's an expensive car too.

 

[Packard]

I have nothing against the tech whatsoever, but I really don't think it's a government mandate issue.
I'm sure that sounds even sillier, from a guy with 1/2 a thumb, but it was not the saw's fault, nor the company who made it.
If there are people willing to spend the extra, for the tech, let them. If it gets mandated, the price will go up, not down, because there is no alternative. Bring on the "used" market. Prices will soar there too, less than the new ones of course, but more than they are worth.
If they can do that, the logical next step is the same as car seats for babies and lawn darts. They are not even legal to sell in your yard sale.
If this happens, what's next?
Guns don't shoot people
Pencils don't misspell words
Forks don't make people fat
I would say "cars don't run over people" too, but some of these autonomous ones do....
They can't ban everything, at some point, people have to take responsibility.
People take the guards off of angle grinders all the time.
Someone is always going to defeat a safety feature. The government can't regulate that, closest you get is insurance companies, but don't give them any ideas.
I don't see why they couldn't license it and produce them too. That is done all the time, but it won't bring the price down, with a mandate in place.

Back in the day, I had issues with Anti-lock brakes. Initially it was only on high end cars Mercedes Benz, etc.
So, you're driving down the road following one, at a reasonable distance, and something happens. It doesn't matter what. You both hit the brakes at the same time. It tops shorter than you possibly can. Now not only have you hit someone, it's an expensive car too.

Seat belts became mandatory in cars by the early 1970s—maybe a few years earlier. I will have to google that. My 1961 Saab had 3 point seat belts, so they were available even before that.

Wearing one became the law in New York State around 1970 and you could get ticketed for not wearing one. Prior to that, you could get ticketed for not wearing one if you were stopped for some other offense. But the cops could not pull you over simply for not wearing one.

My uncle steadfastly refused to wear one his entire life (he died in the early 1980s). He said the government had no right to dictate what risks he took with his own life.

I am no hearing that same argument over blade stopping tech. The objection does not even seem to be coming from the end users at all. It seems to be coming from the saw manufacturers.

Right now, the Saw Stop saws cost more than their equivalent non-equipped competitors. If all saws have to equipped with Saw Stop tech and pay a licensing fee for that tech, then either Saw Stop will become the bargain saw on the market, or it will become the profit leader in the market. In any case, all of Saw Stop’s competitors will oppose mandating the tech.

Save your older table saws. There will be a market for them from people like my Uncle who will eschew any tech in that regard.

My older Contrators’ II Delta saw came with a splitter that was so tedious to use that it got put aside after the first week. Someone will come up with a method to save fingers that is similarly cheap and tedious to use. This conversation will be over and no fingers will have been saved.

 

[rmhinden]

I own a SawStop table saw and wear seat belts when I drive.

While I am fine with people making decisions that might cause them to be injured or die, where I disagree is if they then use insurance to file a claim for medical benefits. That causes my (and everyone else's) insurance rates to go up. In that sense it is no longer an individual decision.

 

[ChuckS]

I love my SawStop for both its precision and safety features. Since 2007, I haven't touched a table saw that is not a SawStop. I'm pretty confident that when I quit my hobby, all my ten digit will stay intact -- as long as I adhere to safe shop practices, including not using any table saw that is not equipped with the finger-saving feature.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

@Packard The seatbelt thing was Federally mandated in 1966 (not going into effect until 68) for the manufacturers, but not for the end user. It had to be there, but you didn't have to use it. The individual states implemented it as they chose. I'm pretty sure that all states require them for the driver and front-seat passengers now.
I have been against them most of my life, with a few exceptions. I always wore one in my Jeep, but it was a '79, which was lap-belt only. They didn't have a shoulder harness back then. I started wearing one 6 years ago, because of my new commute route. It was a well-patrolled area, known for ticketing. I just got used to it, since the truck I drive now it's comfortable, my '14 Camero was horrible. It cut right across my clavicle. The car was great, the seatbelt sucked.
Here in Ohio, it started as a secondary offense, lasted a few years, before switching to primary. Back in the day, with lap belts only, they couldn't tell, until they walked up to your door.

My first experience with SawStop was in the fall of '08. They had one in the temporary facility, before the move. Once we had moved, we went back to the good ol' PowerMatic 66, with over-arm blade guards. The splitters were always removed, because they were a pian to deal with.
That was the thing I liked the most about SawStop, the quick-change guard or riving knife.
They did upgrade to SawStops, after a recommendation from the insurance company. IIRC, that was around '10?

 

[onocoffee]

I've got the SawStop CTS and I like it. I got it because I wanted that technology. I'm more afraid of losing my fingers than spending a few more dollars. And every time I look at comparable compact saws, the build quality of the SawStop is always superior - so it's not just the tech you're paying for.

But if people don't want to use that tech, that's up to them. Though on other forums it seems that whenever SawStop comes up there's always some guy (and it's always a guy) who drops the "I've been doing this for 122 years and I ain't never had an injury." I hear you, bro. And may the odds be ever in your favor.

 

[luvmytoolz]

I've got the SawStop CTS and I like it. I got it because I wanted that technology. I'm more afraid of losing my fingers than spending a few more dollars. And every time I look at comparable compact saws, the build quality of the SawStop is always superior - so it's not just the tech you're paying for.

But if people don't want to use that tech, that's up to them. Though on other forums it seems that whenever SawStop comes up there's always some guy (and it's always a guy) who drops the "I've been doing this for 122 years and I ain't never had an injury." I hear you, bro. And may the odds be ever in your favor.

As someone who's lost part of a finger in a nasty timber mill accident, there's no reason to not have the best safety possible.

Whenever I see really old saws for sale, you know, the type that look like they were home welded up, with no guards, a 14" blade, and clamps to hold a fence, I absolutely cringe. In the hands of an experienced user they're dangerous as hell, let alone someone new to wood working thinking they scored a bargain.

 

[Steve1]

There are other methods to increase safety besides Sawstop.

I have the Jessem stock guides, which greatly lessen the possibility of kickback.
Also, I made a vacuum shroud for over the blade. It's a pretty good chip collector and excellent at keeping my hands away from the blade. The vacuum shroud is easily adjustable in height, and is secured with a couple of magswitches so easily moved or removed.

Nothing is perfect.
For some cuts, I can't use the Jessem stock guides.
For some cuts, I need to remove the shroud.
Sawstop does not protect against kickback.

 

[Packard]

A while back, I made an overhead blade guard for my table saw. I attached an old, small photographers’ light stand to the floor rafters directly above my saw. I then attached the plastic blade guard to the threaded end on the light stand. I could easily raise or lower the blade guard, and best of all it allowed me to leave the guard in place while cutting dadoes.

But occasionally, I needed extra height and it required removing the light stand, a time consuming process. The solution would be a scissor lift from a photographers’ lighting unit. But too expensive. And I am not sure it would stay in position with sufficient resistance to movement. But a well-engineered overhead blade guard would do what a Saw Stop will do.

Conventional overhead blade guards are similarly too low and will get in the way of tall applications.

A photographer’s scissor system with sliding rails for positioning. For a blade guard, the sliding rails would be unnecessary.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

There are other methods to increase safety besides Sawstop.

I have the Jessem stock guides, which greatly lessen the possibility of kickback.
Also, I made a vacuum shroud for over the blade. It's a pretty good chip collector and excellent at keeping my hands away from the blade. The vacuum shroud is easily adjustable in height, and is secured with a couple of magswitches so easily moved or removed.

Nothing is perfect.
For some cuts, I can't use the Jessem stock guides.
For some cuts, I need to remove the shroud.
Sawstop does not protect against kickback.

Agreed. My absolute favorite thing about SawStop is the quick-change blade guard and riving knife.
My injury came because of an over-arm type guard, which was lifted "out of the way". With the splitter-style guard, it never would have happened.
The issue, with the old-fashioned saws (PM66) is that it was a pain to remove the guard, for non-through-cuts/ That was the reasoning behind the over-arm guard.
For me, the SawStop is safer, even without the electronics.
Riving knives and proper push devices make sawing safer too.
I really would like to see these manufacturers supply something better than those crappy plastic sticks.

 

[Mini Me]

I cringe every time I see someone on YT reach directly over a running saw to retrieve whatever they have just cut. I am astonished that most table saw users don't use an overhead guard for dust extraction purposes as it makes a huge difference in keeping fine dust out of the air.

 

[luvmytoolz]

I cringe every time I see someone on YT reach directly over a running saw to retrieve whatever they have just cut. I am astonished that most table saw users don't use an overhead guard for dust extraction purposes as it makes a huge difference in keeping fine dust out of the air.

I think YT is split between "content creators" and knowledgeable people sharing the benefit of their experience and expertise. So I wouldn't accuse many YT channels as being tool or safety wise.

And when the home DIY'er is buying his table saw from the Aldi catalogue specials, I suspect things like safety and dust extractors would be a remote or unknown consideration for many.

 

[Steve1]

I really would like to see these manufacturers supply something better than those crappy plastic sticks.

Absolutely. With downward force only at the front, it's an invitation for the workpiece to catch the rear of the blade.
A couple of times, I used mine (can't remember why, maybe the length) and I felt soooo uncomfortable.