Argh! So a guy is using a table saw to make a freehand cut, no guard on the saw. Cuts his left hand, and in a lawsuit asks for $250,000 and is awarded $1.5 million. The judgment is upheld in an appeal based on the idea that the saw didn't have (but could have had) flesh sensing technology. I am very appreciative of the safety provided by the flesh sensing technology found on SawStop machines. But I also think woodworkers need to be responsible for their own safety.
What do you think?
G
Hmmm-
Don't get me started!!! I just spent 20 minutes last night explaining to a friend why he should invest in a SawStop. He was thinking of getting some employees, and after using SawStop for 2 years in graduate school, I am a believer in the quality of the saw and efficacy of the technology. That having been said, I think this lawsuit is the stupidest development. He was using a cheap Ryobi saw that costs about $200.00. The guy probably wouldn't have even had a table saw if the cost of the technology were added to the portable saw he was using...it would have tripled the price to $600.00.
He was also doing the most dangerous thing possible on that saw. Regretfully, I feel like SawStop is trying to undermine personal responsibility by pushing this technology into every saw and the only people who win are laywers and SawStop. The people who lose are hobbyists and fledgling professionals who can't afford this type of technology. It's a shame.
I have done lots of stupid things in my life, including nicking my finger on a table saw, and I never once considered who I should sue for being stupid.
why take any resposibility when you can just sit back and allow a jury of iresponsible people to reward you with others money....oops i mean our money
Take responsibility for your actions.....IF YOU SCREW UP.....DON'T BLAME THE EQUIPMENT!!!!! JUST ANOTHER FLAKE WANTING FOR SOMEONE TO PAY HIS TO LIVE HIS MISERABLE LIFE
A jury of his peers (fellow craftsmen/woodworkers, etc.) would have given him a basic settlement because his injury was caused by his foolishness, not unsafe technology. My first ever tablesaw was a ryobi contractor style saw and I used it safely for seven years (well one small incident of kickback) with no injuries. Always used my guards where possible and never in my wildest dreams would I have attempted a free hand cut! There is a trend in our society that seems to be headed toward individuals no longer having to think for themselves. I teach at a small university and what I see these days in the incoming freashmen is disturbing. Give someone a scantron test and they can pass but give them a short essay or other type where they have to think for themselves and things break down. The jury in this case, 1.5 million is wrong on so many levels! Sawstop is great, but people can use any type of saw safely. Don't force us to all pay! Thanks, Eric
This is nuts! Personal responsibility in our court system has gone out the window.
Imagine the following scenario. You own a SawStop table saw and decide to turn off the flesh sensing electronics while cutting damp wood. You get one of your hands too close to the saw blade and cut off a finger. Whose fault is this? According to the Carlos Osorio court case decision the fault lies with the SawStop company. It does not matter that you removed and/or turned off the safety features on the SawStop table saw. This is nuts!
Bill Burns
George, it seems to me you are making a statement and asking for comment on the state of the American legal system and not on woodworking and the SawStop in particular. It may be that some readers are loath to engage a political discussion on this site as it may afflict it with unwanted baggage.
On the other hand, perhaps a lively discussion of the concept of personal responsibility would wake this place up. I tend to agree that a warning label on a set of steak knives saying, "Warning ! Sharp edges," or "Do not let children play with these items as they are not toys," should be unnecessary and opens the legal system to lawsuits and outrageous awards the likes of the McDonald's "Hot Coffee" debacle.
Wonderful! Everyone needs to take responsibilty for their actions! What was it Norm always said on THe New Yankee Workshop? "Please remember to read and understand....." Damn! We need more people that can read and less lawyers! Yes, SawStop is a marvelous piece of engineering, but , Please!, don't tell me I have to have one because some people are idiots! Whoops! Be politcally correct - IRRESPONSIBLE! I could rant on for hours, but I''m preaching to the choir!
Skip Nordstrom
This is a case of lawyers making someone who is not to blame be the fall guy for this incident because they can get more money from the manufacturer of the saw than from the flooring contractor who didn't see that the person using the saw did so safely. Everyone I know agrees that this is a stupid use of power tools, but the law insisted that the manufacturer be held responsible for misuse of the tool. The really ignorant part of the whole argument is that this incident happened in 2005 and that the flesh sensing technology for a saw of the style is still not available. The smallest sawstop type of saw is a contractors saw that costs about $1600. Not only does the law get you for things that are not your fault, it gets you for not using technology that hasn't been invented. Our legal system scares the !**#! out of me. The most frightening thing about this is the legal concept that you are held accountable if you can afford to pay, not if you are actually at fault!!
Nothing I could say would make this rediculous settlement make sense.
One of the posts was a comment that we are trending toward not thinking for ourselves.I would say we aren't trending; we are there.
But moreover we are creating or have created a society where we aren't responsible for our actions.
Sad!!!!
John Anderson
OKAY. So all of us reasonable people agree... A) StopSaw technology is great, and B) Buyers should have the choice to buy it or not. Now the courts and jurys are taking that choice away. What can we do about it?
I'm an architect. I'm currently being sued because a journeyman electrician was changing light fixtures in a building I designed several years ago, didn't kill the 270v circuits, and on the fifth fixture electrucuted himself. I can't buy an attorney to get me off until my insurance deductable ($20,000) is all spent!
We all know these horrible stories. What will change this for the better?
The problem is that the move is to require the kind of safety equipment that's standard on the SawStop on all table saws that are manufactured, adding a significant cost to each new saw. It's my understanding that there may be requirements that used table saws sold by an individual to another will need to have this kind of equipment or the sale cannot be made. As someone who tries very hard to be responsible and careful with what I know are potentially dangerous power tools, treating them with respect and thought each and every time I use them, I don't want or need to have mandatory expensive safeguards. I have seen the SawStop and am suitably impressed with the saw as a table saw as well as with the safety features. I simply do not want to be forced to pay for the extras. Further, as an owner of a Shopsmith Mark V (upgraded to PowerPro) I have a tool that almost certainly could not be retrofitted to accommodate the SawStop technology. I wouldn't trade my Shopsmith for the SawStop. Sorry!
Phil K.
This jury must have been the same one that was seated for the McDonald's hot coffee trial. I sure would like to talk to some of them and find out what the heck was going through their minds (assuming they even have minds) during deliberations.
I use power tools, including five or six types of power saws, extensively, and have been using them for many years. I still have all my fingers. Know why? Because I'm scared to death of them, which causes me to observe every safety precaution every single time I use them. Hmm...safety precautions, no injuries. Could there possibly be a correlation?
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing that Osorio is having a hard time finding another job and wondering why. And for those of you who say, "Why should he, after getting that settlement?" I'll tell you that the lawyers will get most of it, and whatever part is for lost wages will be taxed, and Osorio will end up with a lot less than you think. Then he will blow it on this and that, and will be broke again in a year or less, and without a job.
I'll leave it to these words: STUPID is & STUPID doe's. I have been woodworking for about 20 years and just recently parted my left hand middle fingers last joint to the tip of the finger, there is now a space between that joint. Yes there is no bone there and hopefully the bone will grow back or I'll have to have a Bone Graft ! SO the Moral of the story is that all that is needed here is my finger to grow back so I can have full usage again. MONEY DON'T BUY BRAIN'S that is up to us to respect what we do with it. If you don't respect your table saw BELIEVE ME it WILL BITE YOU. In my case I had my fingers too close to the blade when it grabbed the piece of oak and kicked it back and YOU KNOW THE REST OF THE STORY.
File Attachment
X_ray_02.jpg (63.6 KB, 0 downloads) 7 months old We live in a society where no one wants to be responsible for or pay the consequences for their own actions. This Osorio suit is a perfect example of our cultural inability to assign specific blame or responsibility. The man was a fool for working as he did; the court system is even worse. It's okay though, because all children now get trophies when they sign up to play. Don't need to be good, don't need to win or even play -- just need to have your mom shuttle you back & forth in that high tech van with dual dvd screens. Seriously, does this judgement actually surprise anyone?
I went on my table saw manufacture's website to see about an attachment a few days ago. Guess what, they stoped manufacturing all table saws. Wonder why?
Another example no self responsibility. I am just retiring after 30 yrs in the hardwood flooring business. I can't begin to count the times that I have had to free hand rip a pc of flooring. I always, always use a pusher. If the pc has to be ripped so small as to be dangerous using a table saw I clamp the pc and free hand it with the sabre saw. I like all my digits.
Now, I feel bad for this individual, but it is his mistake not the saw manufacturer. As far as I know all table saws come with safe guards. If this knumbskull removes it it becomes his responsibility. What is the manufacturer supposed to do, weld the guard on so we can't take it off?
Another example of the Government protecting us from ourselves because daddy & mommy didn't teach us self responsilbility.
The Sawstop saws are really nice. You know what I worry about? Becoming to complacent using this feature and then using some other saw without it and forgetting about that. Then what, sue Sawstop? Gimeabreak!
Bottom line, the error was the users, and the employer for no ensuring the users of the saw were knowledgable of the correct usage of the tool. Yet neither of the parties at fault were help liable......... So if using this idea if i kill someone by drunk driving its fords fault for not having a system in the car that can detect my blood level........
Personal responability is a lost art anymore, and it will cost us all with the new regulations that are currently being formulated by the product saftey commision regarding table saws.
We all need to write our leaders in washington DC and demand them to stop any new regulations outside of a riving knife.
With every safety removed you would have to assume that the flesh sensing device would have also been removed. I sanded my knuckle with my RO sander this weekend. Think I have a shot?? Look - This guys employer was at fault here not the manufacturer.
I had read about this suit elsewhere which listed the cost of adding the type of guard mentioned. The estimated cost would send us all fishing instead of woodworking. Another example of government knowing what's best. We all better wise up.
Tom s
Almost like the people who smoke, get a related cancer or other smoker problem and find a slick Lawyer to sue and win millions..Maybe we should shoot the LAWYERS and let GOD sort them out to see who gets in, then the rest of the people might have to accept responsibility for their poor judgements
I agree with the belief that the operator is liable, not the rest of the world. It is too bad that the jury doesn't understand the real world and was hood winked by the lawyers and goodie two shoes on the jury. The operator wasn't the only stupid one in this store.
But, this whole episode has really raised awareness for table saw safety. I wish I could mount the new guard and kick back on my old 1959 Sears contractors saw.
What is totally wrong is Mr Steve Gass wanting to government to endorse his design. Now I have nothing good to feel about that man. Sorry Steve, the old saying is still true "just follow the money".
Another case of the AYSO generation, everybody gets a trophy no matter what you do. There is simply no accountability for anything anymore. I have been using a table saw with out a safety guard since I was in Junior High in Shop Class, that was back in the 60's. I never injured myself. It is all about paying attention to what you are doing and staying focused on the task at hand. If I cut on injured myself on the saw, I am certainly not going to sue Sears over it or sue my grandfather who gave me the saw. It would have been my own stupidity and I have to be accountable for my mistakes plain and simple. I might make some people mad here but I bet you this guy is a liberal democrat, no accountability for what he does and society owes him.
Mr. Carlos Osorio you injured yourself, nobody forced you to use the saw, you used it on your accord and hurt yourself. Take accountability for your actions, be a man. If you get an infection from a paper cut you received from the money you was awarded. Who you going to sue, the US government or the lawyers that got you the money? Suck it up Dude be a man.
Just because the technology is available to help avoid serious injury it doesn't replace the brain. All of us who've worked w/our hands for very long know that the mindset should be "I'm going to get hurt @ some point in time. What do I need to do to be as safe as possible?" We are careless if we rely on technology to keep us safe
Not sure Carlos even knew a guard existed. From what I read he doesn't speak English. Probably had never seen a saw before. The person that hired him and furnished him this equipment was well aware that the saw was unsafe but exploited Carlos because of greed. Bet Carlos wasn't covered by workman's comp. Carlos should have gotten treatment for his hand and his employer should have been jailed. Other than that no money should have changed hands. I have a nice table saw and I also have a saw that is similar to the Ryobi. If used properly they are both safe. If misused they are not safe.
Wow! Not surprising that this struck a chord. Here's my message out of this. I really want all woodworkers to be careful, be safe, and enjoy woodworking. At a woodworking show I once heard someone say "Boy, they don't make tools like they used to." And a seasoned woodworker responded "No they don't, and that's a good thing." Tools have come a long way in safety, but we all need to be careful and take charge of our own safety. You know all the rules....a tidy shop, don't work when you're tired, a guard in place, push sticks and push pads, no loose clothing... If something doesn't feel right, it probably isn't.
Glad to hear that you're all taking this seriously. As the sergeant always said on Hill Street Blues, "Be careful out there."
G
Even with 1.5 million...you cant fix stupid!
This is just plain stupid. Disregard all the warnings (printed in several languages), remove the manufacture provided, and OSHA approved safety protection; operate the device in an unsafe manor, then blame the manufacturer for your injury/loss, due to complete carelessness.
And we wonder why the only one smiling ….is the plaintiff’s Attorney!
I tend to be pretty liberal. but this is just flat out WRONG !
This is, indeed, a strange story and a seemingly wrongful judgment. I agree it grates against what we think is right, feels like planing against the grain. When I first learned of this story, I was initially both outraged and discouraged at the same time. As with many such stories, I later learned I didn't have all of the facts. I expect the punitive damages were more against the saw's manufacturer, not so much to award Mr. Osorio. When it was learned in the trial, as I understand it, that that saw's manufacturer had earlier either developed or had been made available to them the same or similar technology that SawStop uses but had opted instead to ignore/shelve it due to cost considerations, the court's interpretation was that saw manufacturer had wrongly opted for economy over user safety. I expect their interpretation was that that was a morally wrong choice, to withhold technology that the public could benefit from. In other words, the saw manufacturer could have had a safer saw on the market for Mr. Osoria (and the rest of us) to use but had opted to ignore that technology, thereby leaving us all at somewhat greater risk. (This, to me, is not much different than U.S. automobile manufacturers of the 50s and 60s opting to not build safer cars that others abroad were, all in the name of economy of production.) When we consider that aspect, I believe this changes understanding of the outcomes somewhat; it, at least, tempered my outrage. I don't believe a court award was a problem here because actions like that saw manufacturer wrongfully withholding safer technology from us should be criticized, even punished. It's indeed unfortunate (and I agree it sends the wrong message) that Mr. Osorio was awarded. Instead, we all should be awarded the advantages of better and safer technology that is available. If other saw manufacturers are now nudged towards producing safer equipment (even if less expensively), then there might indeed be some good for us all in this.
mrproject, the thing is, the technology is available to us if we choose to avail ourselves of it. SawStop provides this safety feature.
That this manufacturer chose to market to a certain set of consumers, those who understand that they are increasing their risk of injury in exchange for saving money, should be the consumer's choice, as long as that manufacturer clearly informed the consumer of the risk.
We should all have the choice to take risks if we so choose. It's not the legislature's business nor is it the court's business to save us from ourselves, except to inform us of unsafe conditions where they exist. We are free individuals even though we do stupid things sometimes.
Now, whether the victim's employer is at fault is another matter, as safe working conditions are involved there. ..But it would be a shame if our future purchasing choices were limited because of this case, in the name of the government knowing what's best for us.
You must Log In to post.
