ElaineP

Flesh sensing technology should be mandatory, however, insurance companies and disability could simply stop giving payouts to people who are injured on unprotected saws. That way, the "Too Smart to Get Hurt" crowd can continue purchasing and using cheap saws, and society doesn't have to support them after they injure themselves.

SawStop's technology is radical, revolutionary, and should be required on all tablesaws. The next generation will scoff at those "Too Cool for School" who resisted adding "seatbelts" to tablesaws.

It would be great if the blade wasn't destroyed by the break cartridge, but no one complains about the cost of replacing an airbag after a car accident.

Patriotone, I do believe you are proving Lee's point. If poaching increased after a large sale of legal ivory, that demonstrates that using legal ivory increases demand for illegal ivory.

By using ivory in modern pieces and expounding on the benefits of using ivory you are increasing desire for the product.

"Ivory turns exceptionally well, and takes a polishes like nothing else. It's extremely uniform and has a very fine texture and quite beautiful grain."

I have to say, this quote (and the beautifully turned feet), made me want to work with ivory, since it sounds and looks so amazing. And then I recalled the giant herds of elephants slaughtered and left to rot with just their tusks torn out. That, my friends, is what we are encouraging by using "legal" artifacts from a less conscientious time.

The work done is simply amazing, there is no questioning that. I am stunned by the intricacies of Mr. Radelow's marquestry and attention to detail. However, the use of ivory in our work should be carefully considered.

The passion of posters to speak out against what they dislike, coupled with the ease with which one can give an opinion on the internet, makes posting off-the-cuff responses tremendously satisfying, however the ignorance displayed in many of these comments is inexcusable.

A quick glance at the linked OregonLive article reveals the true nature of the accident, as well as the lawsuit. Mr. Osorio was working at the time of the incident, and filed a worker's compensation claim, as any of you might. His insurance company, wanting to recoup their losses, had one of their lawyers sue Ryobi, on behalf of Mr. Osorio (would it have made more sense to sue the employer that bought the saw in the first place? Sure, but the whole point of worker's comp is to exclude that possibility). The insurance company originally sought $250 000 (less than the total amount of the man's medical bills), however the jury chose to award Mr. Osorio $1.5 million instead.

The key issue, and what many posters are up in arms over, is the erroneous idea that Mr. Osorio chose the cheaper Ryobi over the more expensive SawStop. I would hazard to guess that most employees don't have the luxury of demanding that their bosses purchase top of the line safety equipment... unless it's mandated by law.

Health and safety legislation seeks to protect the people who don't get to choose which machines they work on.
Certainly, I'd rather work for someone who, having the freedom to choose, chose safety first, however, my second choice would be working for someone who didn't have the freedom to be myopically greedy.

I can understand a home hobbyist, or one man shop wanting the freedom to gamble between spending a few grand extra up front on an awesome saw, or the possibility of spending over 100 times that in medical bills and lost wages in the future. Personally, I'm not a gambler, but, hey, it's your body you're betting.

But what if you're not the only person using the saw? If you were holding the pursestrings for your company, and had the safety of your employees to consider, would you change your bet? If you're a hobbyist, what if your spouse or children also used the saw? If your sons or daughters were training/looking for work, would you want their school/employer to take that bet on their bodies?

If this case doesn't bring about laws for 'flesh detection technology', my hope is that it will at least increase insurance premiums for companies who choose to gamble a thousand dollars against flesh & blood, forcing them to consider the safety of their employees first and foremost.

I really enjoyed this quiz! It cut a nice, broad swathe across the whole cabinetmaking field.

It's been a few years since I last looked up botanical names, but I'm happy to report 21/25 ;)