bbcccg

so....using this ruling by the court, if I go for a drive in my car and I, for whatever reason, decide to not fasten my seatbelt, (you can see where I'm going with this), I get injured. I then should be able to sue the automobile company because they had not installed AUTOMATIC restraints. Do you actually think that I could possibly win this lawsuit? Since personal responsibility and my own lack of action did indeed cause my injury, that should have no bearing on my lawsuit against a major automobile manufacture. I'm already thinking of the benefits of the
Ryobi ruling!! We all could become rich due to our carelessness and lack of common sense.

Also, from what I have read and heard about the Sawstop, once this device is activated, the whole system must be replaced before using the saw again. This consists of a new blade and brake. You know the only place to get these will be at Sawstop, even if all manufacturers will be required to use this technology, I doubt Sawstop will allow them to sell the replacements.

Another point, if this machine has a defeat switch for cutting wet wood, then why is this machine any different from the others. The same liability issue will come into effect here. I want to saw wet wood, I switch off the device and get injured, I sue Sawstop and am awarded millions of dollars. My lawsuit is based on, (stay with me on this), the mere fact that they gave me the option to shut off their safety feature if I wanted too. Game over!!!! I am laughing so hard I can barely finish this.

My brain is turning to jelly with these kind of rulings.