resyakk

All the arguments against government a mandate applied equally to cars a few years ago. Manufacturers fought with utmost vigor first seat belts, then air bags, adequate bumpers, etc, etc.. If this device can be added to any saw for $50.00, who would not want it? And, does the inventor deserve 3% of that, $1.50 per saw? I think he does. Furthermore, economy of scale will drive the price down. Any deal with the Federal government will require that the inventor license the patent at a set price per device and sell replacement cartridges for a set price.

I doubt that there is anyone alive who has used a table saw extensively who has not ever cut a finger. To me ANY cut to my fingers is worth more than $50.00.

I see a lot of criticism of the "courts" here. It was not the courts, but the jury, who concluded that the manufacturer made and sold an unreasonably dangerous product and that the product could have been made in such a way as to prevent the injury. The role of the appellate court is to review the original trial and rule on any errors of the trial judge. An appellate court can only overturn a verdict because the trial judge erred in some significant way.

Furthermore, jury verdicts in my state, Wisconsin, require that 10 of 12 jurors agree on the verdict.

Body "injuries" are not the biggest hazard of the table saw; lung cancer is. Losing fingers is a serious injury, but losing your lungs is considerably worse. The saw blade can cause serious, but rarely disabling injuries. Wood dust can cause the ultimate disability, death.

I like this verdict for one reason, it pushes us all closer to the day when we can retrofit our saws for a reasonable price. I have used table saws for over 60 years and never drawn blood. Yet, the only reason I did not buy the saw stop was that it would not fit in my shop. The minute I see a kit to retrofit my saw I will buy it.