Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who's at fault?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who's at fault?

    My feelings after reading this article...

    Man wins $1.5m in first of its kind saw case

    ...The fact is, not only does the $250 RYOBI not have electrical capacitance sensing technology built in, but the user does not seem to have lethal object within proximity sensing technology between his ears like most humans do.
    If I was the judge in the case, I would not have awarded this guy any money, I would simply confiscate that saw and give him this...

    It's too bad he has to endure all that pain and suffering, but if the saw is not defective, then I'm inclined to believe it was operator error. It wasn't mentioned, but I'm willing to bet that the safety measures built into the saw were not even in place when this incident occurred. Even the SawStop has a switch to defeat it's safety feature.

  • #2
    Re: Who's at fault?

    Sadly those injurys can happen in a flash. But more and more people don't want to take blame for putting there bodies in harms way.

    But wait, I know, It wasnt the saws fault it was the aftermarket blade that cut him. Maybe some lawers can have fun with that argument

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who's at fault?

      This ain't at all about saw safety, it's about the Almighty Dollar, and nothing else. Period, end of story.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who's at fault?

        Who's at fault? Just my opinion but I'd say the guy operating the TS. Next it would be the jury that awarded him that money.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who's at fault?

          Originally posted by NoTalentRookie View Post
          This ain't at all about saw safety, it's about the Almighty Dollar, and nothing else. Period, end of story.

          Yup, and it's probably SawStop that is behind it all. Remember when they were trying to push their technology on the manufacturers and get OSHA and the CPSC to force them to use their technology in their saws?

          Well, to me it sounds like they are still at it. They probably scan the headlines across the country looking for TS accidents and then rush their lawyers in to 'help' the poor 'victim' who most likely got injured through their own fault. Telling them that TS manufacturers have known about the SawStop technology and refuse to incorporate it in their saws because they are too cheap. But in my opinion they refuse to be held hostage and forced to use the SawStop blade brake system.

          I applaud SawStop for developing the technology and can appreciate the added safety of it, but I dislike the tactics they are reported to have used in the past and apparently are using now to make a market for themselves where one does not exist. If people are not interested in your product at the inflated price you want to ask then don't try to force it on us by saying all other saws are unsafe. Let your product prove itself and people will buy it at a reasonable price. I have seen the Saw Stop saws close up and they hold no other significant edge over any other tablesaw in my opinion.

          My next TS will be as I have said before the new Delta Unisaw made in the USA. And it will cost as much if not more than the SawStop so its not price that is the decision maker here. It's ME refusing to be bullied into paying SawStop for their product.

          ---------------
          Light is faster than sound. That's why some people seem really bright until you hear them speak.
          ---------------
          “If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber.” - Albert Einstein
          ---------
          "Its a table saw.... Do you know where your fingers are?"
          ---------
          sigpic http://www.helmetstohardhats.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who's at fault?

            This is an absolutely ridiculous case, IMHO! Who and why and how could this type of case even find it's way into court is beyond my comprehension, and I expect it will be overturned. Just another one of those examples that give the law profession and the whole litigation thing a bad name.

            Apparently there was no defense lawyer assigned to the case and no one on the jury or on the bench must have had any experience with power tools.

            Just my opinion of course, but if this case does NOT get overturned, it would set a precedence where by any one of us could press a law suit against any company manufacturing a product that might be declared defective because it didn't have technology that wasn't invented at the time or wasn't available because was a patent was held by someone in another company.

            You could apply that to any automotive case in whick someone had died or was injured because their car had drum brakes and yet disc brakes was a better technology. If anyone died in an air crash, the family could sue because the aircraft manufacturer did not employ ejection seats, because the technology exists and has been available for several decades. The list goes on and on.

            On a personal note, my father lost two fingers and mangled a third when I was just 14. That was 1958... he got his surgery and hospital stay paid for by the contractor's insurance company. Beyond that, he never received a dime and there was no follow-up operations, surgeries, or rehabilitations. This particular jerk sounds like a crybaby ***, IMO.

            The article did not make it clear as to whether this saw was his own, or whether he was using it at work. If it was his own, then he clearly had the opportunity to not buy the Ryobi and to by the "SawStop" instead. If he was using a saw at work, then he had every right to bring it to his employer's attention and refuse to use it. (That of course would have cost him his job, but hey... he could always just tell everyone he saved his fingers!) Surely, OSHA would not have been able to save him... and in that light, this should never have come to court, much less allowed him to win.

            Last and certainly not least... I love my fingers and certainly wouldn't want to loose any of them (hey, I used to draw and type for a living). But... they are no where near the $$$ that was awarded.

            Final conclusion is that this was totally HIS fault!

            CWS

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who's at fault?

              If the jury and the court determined that there should have been blade stop technology on the saw, maybe they should also have judged the sawstop patent illegal and placed it in the public domain.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who's at fault?

                I'm going to grab my Mag-Lite, hold it backward, and go for a walk tonight in the woods.

                When I trip over something or get lost and suffer emotional distress, I'll sue Mag-Lite because other brands have a light in the front and back.

                or better yet. I'll drive my GM (government motors) van 90mph and crash.
                Then sue GM because they have the technology to have the motor cut out at 65mph instead of 90mph.
                INSIGHT PIPE is now Maine Drain Serving most of ME with no charge for travel! 207-431-6232 is nolonger a working # our NEW # is 207-355-1476
                Sewer main snaking (roto rooting). Sink clogs. Sewer backup. Pipe inspection/locating. No Dig trenchless repair. Root clog removal.We are NOT to replace your local Plumber, as we do not do plumbing. WE ARE YOUR DRAIN CLEANING EXPERTS!!! www.sewermaine.com waterville winslow bangor augusta skowhegan fairfield pittsfield oakland

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who's at fault?

                  Hey Gene

                  Use a Toyota instead.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who's at fault?

                    Any similarity between the legal system and the justice system is purely coincidental.

                    You want a legal ruling, go to court. You want justice, pray to your god of choice.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who's at fault?

                      The attorney representing the person and more importantly....the jury.

                      J.C.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Who's at fault?

                        Originally posted by JCsPlumbing View Post
                        The attorney representing the person and more importantly....the jury.

                        J.C.
                        How?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Who's at fault?

                          First it was the moron who spilled coffee on herself and sued McDonalds for selling hot coffee (imagine that). Then there was a guy out west somewhere that sued a car manufacturer because he hit a horse that was STANDING IN THE ROAD. Then the list of lawsuits waiting to go to court against the firearms manufacturers becuase their guns evidently walk around shooting people all by themselves. Now some idiot almost cuts his own fingers off and blames Ryobi for not implementing the latest safety technology. Good Grief! This kind of thinking goes back to Washington and the leadership over the past 40 years and how without their help we can't take care of ourselves. Are we this pitiful?, are we this pathetic?, don't get me wrong I would love to have a windfall of money by hitting the lottery but to accuse a manufacturer of negligence like this takes absurdity to a new level.
                          Last edited by Dondi12; 03-14-2010, 09:39 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Who's at fault?

                            Originally posted by SpiffPeters View Post
                            How?
                            The attorney for being an ambulance chaser and for not having a conscience and the jury for awarding this idiot anything other than a swift kick in the head.
                            ---------------
                            Light is faster than sound. That's why some people seem really bright until you hear them speak.
                            ---------------
                            “If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber.” - Albert Einstein
                            ---------
                            "Its a table saw.... Do you know where your fingers are?"
                            ---------
                            sigpic http://www.helmetstohardhats.com/

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Who's at fault?

                              What I am asking is how did the legal system fail? How or where did the plaintiff, the jury, the court deviate from that which is legal?

                              Anyone that uses the McDonald's coffee case as exhibit A in criticism of the legal system clearly isn't familiar with the facts of the case.

                              As previously stated, any similarity between the legal system and the justice system is merely coincidental.

                              You want justice, pray to your god of choice. Otherwise all we have is a legal system for settling matters. It isn't perfect I'll agree, but you can't change the rules mid stream because you disagree with a ruling on a case you haven't studied. Or if you have studied it, disagree with the merits, findings or ruling.

                              I haven't read the ruling, I haven't read the evidence, I haven't read the transcripts or any other supporting documents. But I am certain that mistakes were made in the trial and the defense team is going to exploit these infractions on appeal, and likely get the case dismissed on a technicality.

                              I think the case is ridiculous. And I would not be surprised to find out that SawStop (which is a bunch of lawyers anyway) is involved in some way. I believe they have a pretty comprehensive strategy for getting their product to market.

                              Eventually saws will have either the SawStop technology or some other braking technology. It'll be less expensive than litigating case after case after case.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X