pisdoff

Whatever your opinion on Sawstop, the lawsuit, Steve Gass etc. there is one pervasive argument that just doesn't make any sense.
If you replace Sawstop with seatbelts, let's see what we get.

The sob that invented seatbelts made money off it, he didn't care about saving peoples lives.
The results of that invention speak for themselves.

If you take the profit motive out of inventing, then you will basically kill off inventions.
The guy has a good idea and he's trying to make a buck off it. Can you get any more American than that?
I don't believe the Osorio verdict was correct, but I wasn't on the jury either. If and when I see the complete transcript of the trial, then I'll make a definitive verdict of my own.
I also don't believe the saw manufacturers (or any manufacturer for that matter, including Steve Gass) have our best interests at heart. They are running a business and that requires bottom line decisions.
You are the one who votes for your best interests by voting with your money. The market follows the money, not the other way around.

First, you guys are a little late to the party, no? This has been talked to death on at least half dozen websites already in the past 2 weeks.

Is the guy a moron for suing? Yes. Is he a moron for injuring himself? Maybe, it depends on what he did and how he did it. There is a reason they call them 'accidents'. Don't ever think ' this couldn't happen to me', because it can.
Is he a lot richer than the rest of us? Unfortunately, also yes.

While virtually everyone is bashing the jury, I have yet to see a transcript of the trial published anywhere.
While it may seem absurd that he won on the face of it, there are a million reasons that could have happened without faulting the jury.
Everything from a crappy defense, a misconstrued instruction from a judge (while these are supposed to be crystal clear, I have seen jury interviews post trial where the jurors did not understand the legal concepts involved with the task they were given to perform)etc.
What would your take on this be if the jury was shown a memo from the ceo that stated 'screw woodworkers, nobody is going to sue us' or 'Sure we could add sawstop to our product, but that would be inconvenient'.
My point is, we simply don't have enough information to fault the jury.
Hey, it costs about 8 cents a page, why don't you guys invest a few bucks and make it public? (If that's allowed??)
I, for one, would love to read it.

I loved Norm, would be privileged to buy him a beer, but I think this comment made earlier is so important I'm going to make it again.
: I hope he will do some episodes on fixing (and making) mistakes in woodworking projects. Norm never made a mistake or at least we never saw one on screen. We all make mistakes; even the masters. Show how to fix them!

Maybe a 2 minute segment entitled "I screwed it when I should have glued it' We've all been there, and we've all done that.

Secondly,I don't think anyone is doing Tommy any favors by comparing him to Norm. Sad to say, but Norm is gone, get over it. You had Red Skelton, now you have Mash; no comparison, but both great shows.
This will be the new and different guy, not to be compared with the old guy, It's not being fair to him.

One of my pet peeves is Youtube and the like. There are dozens of unsafe practices with a table saw demonstrated on there (including one of a moron cutting open a coconut, hand held, who swears this is perfectly safe!). If you don't know how to do something (therefore the fact that you are inexperienced is a given)you turn to youtube or similar to see if anyone can help. So you have the combination of inexperienced and the wrong solution married together. That's a marriage made in hell!
IMHO, any website, video or other 'educational/how to' venue on the web should be vetted somehow, to ensure that they are showing only reasonably safe practices. I think they have a responsibility to do this.
I certainly don't want the government vetting things like this, preferably it would be done by the purveyors themselves. If they don't do it, then whatever means necessary becomes the imperative.
In fact, I 'reported' the coconut video as unsafe and Youtube just ignored it, it is still playing a year later. I can only hope that someone some day sues Youtube and wins, then maybe they'll sit up and pay attention.

Fred west: How can you consider it undercutting?
It is simply supplying an alternative for those who cannot afford a L N.

Not everyone can afford a Cadillac, that's why
makes Chevys.

Woodshaver, nobody is arguing that point. The argument is what do you do if you can't afford them?

$300 or so buys an awful lot of food, and mostly anything else.

Yankeewoodworker states 'I've made a practice of giving gifts of ln hand planes'. I only have one question:

What do I have to do to become your best friend:-)

Krenovian writes 'don't give me that rationale about ln planes being unaffordable'.

That's not a rationale, that's reality. If you can afford the best, by all means buy it. I don't think there are many who would deny that LN is the best either.
The fact of the matter is, they are expensive! If you couldn't afford a Cadillac (maybe a poor comparison at the moment, but I'm sure you get the historical implication), should you go without a car until you have saved up enough to get one? Or does it make sense to go buy a Chevy or a Hundai or whatever to fulfill your basic needs?

I don't think anyone believes they are getting a LN on the cheap when they buy a wood river or whatever, but if it is an affordable substitute......

Am I missing something? I thought this was supposed to be about safety with a router. It looks more like a description of what a router does, not how to do it safely. Not even a mention of the most basic router safety tip, router direction.
Add to that the 3 TINY pictures which I can hardly make out, and you've pretty much got nothing here. Very dissapointing.