After more than 2 decades of research, discussions, and deliberations, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has withdrawn rulemaking tied to table saw blade-contact injuries and others.
In an announcement made last week, the CPSC said it was withdrawing several pending rulemakings where it does not intend to issue final ruling on several projects, including “Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws”.
What this means is that the CPSC will not be issuing safety standards or guidelines regarding table saw blade-contact injuries, which might have required fair licensing of SawStop active injury mitigation (AIM) and blade braking technologies.
Advertisement
What led up to this, after 22 years of research, discussion, and kicking the can down the road?
The Trump administration fired all democratic commissioners (Boyle, Hoehn-Saric, Trumka) in early 2025, and their removal was recently upheld by the US Supreme Court.
Just after the CPSC announced rulemaking withdrawals amid a fundamental shift under new leadership last week, Commissioner Dziak (republican, nominated by Biden) announced that they are stepping down from their position.
Dziak did not explain why they are leaving the CPSC, other than now being the time to move on from public service.
With no replacements for the 3 fired appointees and 1 departure, this leaves Feldman (republican, nominated by Trump) as the sole commissioner of the independent federal consumer product safety agency.
In recent announcements, Feldman demonstrated that the CPSC will act in a manner
Advertisement
consistent with President Trump’s agenda
With Feldman acting chair and sole commissioner of the CPSC, and that decisions were made to align with Trump’s agenda, the CPSC is no longer independent or bipartisan. Whether that is good or bad for consumers remains to be seen.
Feldman also said that the CPSC:
will not squander limited resources on symbolic rules that serve ideological ends, diminish consumer choice, or hand unfair market advantages to foreign competitors at the expense of American consumers and manufacturers
Feldman has already made their stance about table saw safety rulemaking known, and has accused SawStop of engaging in “rent-seeking behavior.” But, they also said that more work needs to be done. With the new action, it seems that no further work will be done.
After SawStop sued another company in 2024, Feldman said:
We support protecting intellectual property rights, but the evidence in the record raises serious concerns about SawStop’s monopolistic intentions and its exploitation of CPSC’s rulemaking process to further such aims.
Regardless of why the rulemaking was proposed 22 years ago, or how SawStop has been trying to protect their patents, independent product and consumer safety bodies have argued that additional safety standards are necessary to help reduce the frequency and severity of grievous injuries.
UL Solutions, an impactful safety science company, has previously voiced their support for the now-withdrawn proposal, saying:
We strongly support this proposal and believe that the use of active injury mitigation (AIM) technology will significantly reduce the incidents of devastating and life-long injuries caused by table saws.
They also said that modern safety accessories, such as riving knives and blade guards have not changed the rate of injury or injury severity. Because of this, they:
strongly support the Commission’s proposal to require covered table saws to meet a performance requirement to limit the depth of a cut to no more than 3.5 millimeters when a test probe approaches a spinning saw blade at a rate of 1 meter per second.
This development means that the CPSC – led by one commissioner instead of five – is no longer considering whether a new performance safety standard is needed to address an unreasonable risk of injury associated with table saws.
Basically, withdrawal of the rulemaking means there will be no decision on table saw safety. Feldman has wiped the agency’s hands clean of this, at least for the foreseeable future.
Discussion
I believe that final rulemaking would have been detrimental to both SawStop and tool brands that are members of the PTI industry lobbying group, and thus seems like is a win for SawStop and a win for other tool brands. But is it a win for consumers? UL Solutions and consumer protection groups that argued in favor of the proposed rulemaking would likely say “no.”
What happens now? Once SawStop’s remaining patents expire, will UL Solutions implement safety standards based on the work that went into the CPSC’s proposed rulemaking?
We reached out to SawStop’s Matt Howard, former Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr (a woodworker who fiercely supported the proposed rulemaking), and UL Solutions for statements, but have not yet heard back. I also have questions for Commissioner Peter Feldman, but the CPSC does not have a press contact at the moment.
Scott K
It’s a shame that this is being abandoned because of the political climate and belief that SawStop was pushing this to advance their own interests. I would have thought that the CPSC could have crafted rules that would have made the licensing process actually fair. There are plenty of regulations that faced lots of backlash that are obvious with hindsight (seatbelts, lead in products).
Stuart
I think that’s just an excuse.
SawStop has declined to license their tech, with public records of private conversations indicating this is because SawStop makes more money selling their own table saws.
SawStop wants to sell you a SawStop table saw, and not another brand’s table saw that implements patent-protected AIM tech under fair licensing.
Reading through the CPSC announcements, they’ve made decisions recently that are absolutely politically-motivated. Even if something was proposed with alleged roots in “climate ideology,” it’s still their role to investigate and determine whether there are actionable health and safety concerns.
If a child is doing something unsafe and another tattles to the teacher because they want to get the other in trouble, the teacher still has a responsibility to check on the situation to ensure everyone’s safety.
It’s unclear whether withdrawing the rulemaking is permanent, or if everything will be brought back into consideration with the next administration.
Bonnie
At this point it really doesn’t seem to be their job to investigate risk or concerns. As you said above the committee has been almost entirely dissolved and just left one yes-man for the president.
David Kardelis
I saw that Sawstop would waive the patent if the rules went into effect.
Stuart
Yes, one key patent that other brands claimed was a major obstacle. The lobbyists hired by the consortium of power tool brands then said this wouldn’t be enough.
MFC
It seems to me that you are of the opinion that more government oversight is a good thing?
I think this is the crux of the matter.
Some will look to the government to be the safeguard. Others will rely on themselves. These two ideologies are what are driving the market and what the two main political parties argue about a lot. It’s way more complicated than that, but this is what it is reduced to.
Not that it matters what I say, most have already made up their minds, but I think that each person should be aware of their own propensities for accidents. I take responsibility for myself and if I get hurt, then I was doing something incorrectly, or was not fully aware of the danger I was in. More knowledge is helpful, and that’s my job.
I rarely use my tablesaw, but when I do, I am taking every precaution that I am aware of. I think a Sawstop tablesaw is a good idea, and would probably buy one if I used mine more. However, I am willing to take the risk with my cheaper saw.
I do know that I don’t want the government to form another committee, or do another study on things like this. The government is a bloated organism that needs to be pared down.
On the other hand, I think corporation oversight is a good thing since they have way more power and potential to harm consumers/residents. They are like a country in their own rights and the government should be overseeing their actions.
But even that oversight can go too far, such as in this case. I wish industrialized farms using toxic chemicals to make their vegetables grow faster, or food manufacturers using chemicals to create synthetic dyes and foods should be on the forefront of oversight.
This however, should be individually determined, not by mandate.
Stuart
I think that in this case a decision should have been made, one way or the other. A decision for or against a blade contact performance standard would have provided closure.
The question about whether more could and should be done to protect workers’ fingers and hands has remained unanswered.
Government oversight is funny. You can buy a pumpkin spice latte with 185 grams of sugar, but red dye 40 and other artificial colors are now being banned.
Gas furnaces and water heaters are exhausted to the outside. The CPSC said they will no longer investigate emissions by gas stoves or ovens in living spaces because concerns are “rooted in climate ideology.”
I believe it’s important to gather data and gain information and insights.
Whether or not there should be regulations is a matter of politics.
Safety guidelines have already been updated for table saws and miter saws. I can point out several changes that have been implemented over the past few years. When I asked Dewalt, they said they were adhering to IEC regulatory changes.
People who complain about things like “government oversight” and “overreach” haven’t complained about any of the regulation-borne changes that have been implemented.
Can the same be true for enhanced table saw safety, where it’s an almost hidden feature that doesn’t significantly impact prices? We don’t have a “yes” or “no” to this.
Maybe an inexpensive solution would have been a peelable caution sticker placed across every new table saw surface, with best safety practices presented with simplistic IKEA-like graphics.
MFC
Most of the doings of the government, in regard to regulations, are not advertised to the public. Sure, people could spend their free time going through publicly available information, but most of us just want to be left alone to live and work. The government’s (auto-given) job is to figure out how to control and advance its own inner workings, how to make itself larger, expand its budget and grow. That is not to the benefit of the citizens. It needs to receive pushback. Look at the UK, Venezuela, China, etc. These places have given more and more control to the government and it’s not good. It never is.
Also, I know of a lot of people that have complained about government implemented safety. OSHA is universally hated in the trades. Most of us find out what the government did after the fact, and unless they fixed a road, it’s usually just costing us more time and money.
I’m not against safety and rules, but I want to make that decision. That’s the whole argument. I will determine if a tool is trustworthy, whether the safety features are what I want, etc. The market listens to consumers, hence SawStop’s existence.
And yes, there is nuance to this. Obviously a tool that is made out of plastic and shoelaces shouldn’t be allowed to be manufactured. Some oversight is appreciated, but not 22 years spent on one tool! Talk about job security…
CMNF
“Reducing injury among saw users is bad, actually” is a heck of a take.
MFC
Taking what was said and reducing it to your “quote” is the crazy take here. I’m all for reducing injuries. We have Sawstop saws. Anyone can buy one. The conversation is about government intervention and mandates. I’m very much opposed to their intervention in the minutiae. I want a free country, not a safe country. I want to be able to pick the saw I want, and the features of that saw based on cost and safety. Why not mandate a breathalyzer in every vehicle? Tons of people drink and drive, and we don’t know who’s going to do it next. Or a signal blocker for cellphones? Or, racing harnesses and neck stabilizers?
These things could save more than just fingers. And honestly, some of them might not be a bad idea, but I want to choose them, not the government for me.
Robert
So, do we know when “enough” of Sawstop’s patents expire for competitors to make equivalent systems? I’ve read comments in the past on Toolguyd that not all Sawstop’s patents will expire initially, and so competitors would be still boxed out. I don’t know how true that is. And even if I researched all the patents, I’m not sure if I could evaluate it correctly.
Stuart
A patent lawyer or someone with similar experience and familiarity will have to answer that. Or you’d have to ask the Power Tool Institute (PTI), which has refused to answer questions.
CMF
Do you have any other connection that would know?
I had never heard they had different patents falling at different times.
If you do find someone who knows about this stuff, what would be good to know is whatever patents need to end, ballpark idea of when the competitors could have product in the store. (as things currently stand now)
Stuart
No. If PTI’s official PR and media communications firm refuses to answer questions, that’s their prerogative.
Blair C.
I was a carpenter apprentice in the 80’s. My foreman/teacher was old school. No power tools for the first year. Everything by hand. When he began introducing me power tools, he was militant about safety and tool maintenance. This was reinforced by the occasional slap to the back of my head (I was/am a stubborn cuss). Because of this I developed a healthy respect for all things spinning- routers, shapers, table saws etc. When this all started, my knee jerk reaction was typical, it’s not the manufacturer’s problem/fault for your lack of awareness of the dangers these machines represent. I’d seen plenty of risky behavior and quite a few injuries on the job site in my 37 year career, almost all of it due to user error. However, pragmatism has won me over. The reasons are many but the two main ones are: proper training is non existent. The pressures of making money and bringing jobs in on abbreviated schedules not to mention the hubris of the young has crushed the type of hands on training I received as a larval carpenter and two; despite the best training accidents happen. One moment of a lack of concentration on the task at hand can lead to a life changing injury. If the technology exists to mitigate these types of injuries it should absolutely be forced on the manufacturers of these tools. The argument of increased cost to me is moot. How much are your fingers worth to you? $100? $1000? For me the answer is they’re priceless. This decision does not bode well for the safety today’s blue collar workers and especially for those in construction, as I fear these types of rollbacks only help those whose eyes are only on the bottom line and not on those who make their livelihood using said hands.
Bob
You can keep making the ‘how much is X worth ‘ argument for every little thing. Eventually you regulate something so safe it either does not do its intended function or it’s so expensive few can afford it. Accidents happen and we need to accept that reality. We need pragmatic standards, not overreaching ones. A balance is required.
Just look at all these ridiculous ‘0’ goals that get rolled out by politicians. They’re not practical nor achievable, but they sure do accomplish a never ending stream of funding because they never reach their goal, but the cost of implementing each new idea gets bigger and bigger.
Table saws are dangerous. People that use them need to understand that and take responsibility. Saw stops are available for those that want them. European style sliding saws are also an option that do a great job keeping fingers away from the blade.
Stuart
The problem is that people keep suffering life-changing injuries. How can table saw injuries and amputations be reduced? If not through more flesh detection and blade brake tech, then how else?
Tossing the entire issue into the trash isn’t a solution, it’s avoidance; Feldman is shirking his responsibility.
The consortium of power tool brands said multiple times over the years that they already developed more affordable flesh detection and blade brake tech that they’re willing to license to other table saw makers.
Tools gain safety updates on a regular basis. Have you noticed that compact jobsite table saws now have 8-1/4″ blades rather than 10″? Or how miter saws now have side rail extensions?
Things like anti-restart magnetic power switches, which disconnect in case of power outage and restoration, have been added to a lot of table saw models.
From what everyone has said, it should be affordable to add modern safety tech to table saws.
European style sliding saws aren’t as portable as the vast majority of jobsite and hobbyist table saws that are sold under the $1000 price point.
will
I learned similar respect for underground utility machines like a trencher, never stand uphill of a spinning trencher. Never stick your appendages near a spinning horizontal drill while spinning, never walk behind equipment while in use. Always make the user aware if you’re going to walk near them while operating an excavator, make eye contact. then signal if it’s ok to approach. you’d be surprised how many guys almost lose there hands or heads. I once told a rookie to get a guys attention and beware, but instead he walked up on the guys blindside while excavating and he got hit and thrown in the pit, because he was daydreaming, same guy was going to jump into a pit after a set of mains got hit, some reason the breaker never tripped and they were still arcing, he would’ve had 7.2k volts running through him if he wasn’t grabbed at the last second. I even had a day dreamer walk behind me while I was doing cleanup, good thing I always know where my crew us at as well as the builders, so I stopped in time. If he knew the blindspots in those things he would’ve walked in front of me, but he was about to walk within 5 feet of me when I hopped in, and I move at near full speed so he would’ve died. these close calls or near misses show how dumb this generation is. they rather be on their phones or thinking of the night ahead that they don’t realize that one misstep and your done for, the sad part is the person who hits them , though no fault od their own will have to live with it forever. never mind everything else that comes with a death on a job site. So stay safe and listen to the guy with experience, believe it or not they’ve seen it all and are a great learning tool, even if they can be cranky at times. I just chalk it up to them doing hard labor for 30+ years and in constant pain, and yet the 25 year olds never pic up a damn shovel and think they should be operating or fusing gas pipe without training. Hell you need training just to touch the pipe, and one company even uses their own guys to put in 120v to the home which means less work for the company who did their electric, though they’d have to wait for a guy to show up, wasting valuable time.
JoeM
And now I will be adding “Not Safe To Use” as another reason to boycott SawStop. Government has given up saving lives and fingers, why invest even a penny into the company they’re letting make safety unaffordable for those who use these tools to have careers?
22 years of fighting for safety, and the regulatory body responsible for safety in products gets gutted, leaving SawStop open to witholding licenses unless they pay them unreasonable rates to use their tech. So every saw will be safe, if you can afford the doubling in price of them.
I am very thankful, right now, that such a lack of regulation will not cross outside the borders of the USA. Safety and Trade standards will lock out that kind of price gouging, and likely kill SawStop permanently. Until their patents expire, and then they won’t be able to stop the massive overflow of orders. As long as the prices stay reasonable, it’ll finally be a good idea! But as long as the name “SawStop” is attached, it’s just a bad product.
Stuart
As far as I am aware, Canada hasn’t regulated table saw safety either. Thus your government is also responsible for a “lack of regulation” in this area. That said, there *are* safety guidelines, just no federally mandated performance standards regarding table saw blade contact.
I have my own feelings about SawStop, but it is objectively clear to me is that they make good products that are backed by excellent support.
JoeM
We do have a regulatory body that controls the legal sale of every tool that passes the tests. The reason you don’t see “Table Saws” designated specifically, is because there are overarching rules that cover both Saws, and Large Shop Equipment, that would eventually require SawStop to settle its litigation in its COO, or lose its license to be imported up here.
Now that the COO has pulled out of litigation, the amount that SawStop starts charging for “Licensing” their tech, will fall under our Fair Exchange clauses within the safety controls. If any technology makes safety unattainable, it gets heavy fines, and even gets full bans put on the company. This, again, isn’t limited to Table Saws. Every tool in Canada has to pass safety regulations to be legal to sell here. And I suspect SawStop didn’t have the guts to go up against those regulations in Canada, hence why they have been sticking to the US legal system, instead of going to any other country to ask for them to pass what they want passed. Because every other country around the world has their Safety Commissions, and their Trade Commissions, directly opposed to anything that would risk the Consumer, even if it lessens the gross profit of a company.
will
I’m sure sawstop filed patents just to block others from using the tech, even if ssawstop never planned on using it. To me Bosch’s system was different enough to keep selling in the USA, but I[m sure someone was paid off and no more Bosch, we’ll be lucky if they even bring them back to the USA, Bosch does pick and chose what they sell over here, and might be salty over losing the last fight. Sawsrop never cared about your fingers as long as it happened on another saw. yet they forced them to use there products and I’m sure they charged schools even higher rates since its government money anyways.
François Boutin
Does it mean that Bosch can now reintroduce the Reaxx (Active Response Technology) job site table saw back on the market?
Stuart
Bosch entered a licensing agreement with SawStop. Technically they *could* have reintroduced the Reaxx but decided not to. There’s a lot more info on that here: https://toolguyd.com/bosch-reaxx-table-saw-why-you-cant-buy-it/
JayS
The sad part about the Reaxx system was that it was an improvement over the Sawstop system that wouldn’t damage your blade and could be used twice before requiring replacement not that the saw itself was great which you noted yourself previously.
CoBlue
The retraction mechanism was an improvement, but as the link says, there seem to have been some issues with the detection mechanism / the electronics.
It’d be nice to have more options.
Steve
Did anyone else start confusing Feldman with Felder when reading this article?!
Dave Potts
In the early 1960s Volvo devised a webbed belt that fastened a driver and passenger to the car”s seat. In the event of an accident, the passenger and driver were safely restrained. Volvo received several patents for their new “seat belt” but openly invited all other car makers to either user the Volvo design at no cost or to improve upon it. Times have changed
BG100
I likely have a minority opinion here, but I support dropping the proposed rules. Not because I hate fingers on employees, but because I know that nothing will stop an employee from getting injured if they really want to. The best protection from injury with a table saw is good saw etiquette, bar none. Other devices can reduce the severity of injury, sure. But where we draw the line?
Should AIM tech be made mandatory? Why don’t I, as an employer, get to decide what equipment I use? I have employees, and no AIM technology. All of my guys can still count to ten, because I care about their safety, and train them on my equipment. My brother is an employer, and has Saw Stop stuff all over his shop. He doesn’t think I’m evil, and I don’t think he’s lazy. I ask, why not live and let live? Saw stop makes nice stuff, and I may buy some down the road, or I may not. What’s wrong with that?
Christopher
I agree with you completely. What I’ve learned over the years is that in cases like this, the knee-jerk reaction from many is to act like the lack of regulations is the equivalent of a ban on the safety features. Nobody against these regulations wants the AIM technology to be ruled illegal; we simply want to make the choice for ourselves based on our own needs/abilities.
I don’t have a shop. I do what woodworking I can out of my garage with a jobsite DeWalt that can’t even accept a dado stack. I’d like to upgrade, but in my current state, cost is a huge factor. I greatly prefer to have as many options as possible; both with AIM and without.
Lance
Agreed. As we make things safer, people become more complacent. You can’t make everything fool-proof.
moe
Murphy said “make something idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot”
CMF
I am more for no regulations.
Sort of an analogy, of which I am sure hundreds can be made.
Any fan of the NHL, helmets have been mandatory for years. Whenever I see old footage of before helmets being mandatory, the faces of the players when going into corners with someone on their back is something. Their head is postured back and they want to avoid hard direct impact to their head.. Now with a helmet, they often go headfirst, with little regard of their head into the boards or glass.
When you know you are not protected…on anything, not just saws, consciously, we are aware and take precautions. When special protection is in place that drastically reduces or eliminates the danger, we so easily overlook the danger.
Some safety items are good and worth the headaches to use (sometimes) and added expense.
Other, which I put the SawStop, the price and hassle are not worth it.
I am sure there are some rare exception, but just about all table saw accidents are fingers. Unfortunate, but far from the gravest accident.
Anyone who wants a SawStop. can and will buy one. The rest are free to buy what they want
Stuart
That’s an often parroted fallacy, that protection makes people careless and increases the frequency of other types of injuries.
BG100
Often parroted sure, but fallacy? In many fields, construction being the one I am most qualified to speak on, it is well understood that extra safety measures breed carelessness.
I wear gloves sometimes. When I’m not wearing gloves, I run my hand along a 2×4 and pick up a nasty sliver. Then I don’t do that again until I’ve been wearing gloves again.
It’s always hard to prove causal link, but I don’t think it’s a fallacy. Each trade has their examples of complacency that stem from a sense of security.
My woodshop teacher retired and said he wished he hadn’t spent a bunch of time on the School’s SawStop cabinet saw, since he doesn’t have one at home and he had picked up some bad habits on the Saw Stop. Sure it’s an anecdote, but a hundred anecdotes makes a statistic.
Stuart
It is absolutely a logical fallacy. That doesn’t mean it’s universally false.
Christopher
It may not be true for every scenario, but it’s a phenomenon known as ‘moral hazard.’
A well-documented example would be with cars. As more safety features (seatbelts, airbags, etc.) were added, the number of deaths and injuries was reduced…among drivers and passengers. But the increased safety did indeed lead to more carelessness among drivers and deaths/injuries among pedestrians increased.
I don’t remember who’s credited with saying this, but to paraphrase: ‘if you want to reduce driving fatalities, mount a spear through the steering wheel pointed at the driver’s heart.’ Obviously this is hyperbole, but the point is that nobody is driving fast enough to hurt anyone in that situation. Safety is important, but like anything, comes with unintended consequences.
None of this is to say that we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but I feel bans and restrictions are more likely to hurt the typical/poorer consumer. My preference would be that these committees and departments would issue guidance and recommendations, but that ultimately we would decide as consumers what products remain on store shelves.
CoBlue
Driver behavior may be a factor, but the increased pedestrian fatalities are more related to larger cars that are more deadly to pedestrians and higher road speeds that are vastly more deadly to pedestrians. It doesn’t help that the American safety standards don’t really consider pedestrian safety.
Paul
Completely agreed.
This has always struck me as a money grab by SawStop. Mandating this technology would hugely increase the price of table saws.
Some tools are intrinsically dangerous.
Collin
“All of my guys can still count to ten”
(so far)
Every person I know who has had a woodworking accident has been a careful woodworker with respect for their tools. Most of them have had decades of experience under their belt, with barely a scratch to their name when the accident happens.
Your choice on what sort of tools you stock your shop with for your employees, but don’t kid yourself that you’re smarter, more careful, or more skilled than any of those other woodworkers. You’re just lucky.
BG100
Your experience sounds different from mine. Each guy I know who has missing digits will freely admit it was a careless move that led to dismemberment, or say they had bad habits that were bound to catch up with them.
I agree, luck definitely plays a part. But so does good saw etiquette. If your fingers are never in the path of the blade, you can never push them into the blade.
I don’t assume I’m more careful than everyone else, but I do assume I haven’t made the one mistake my nine fingered classmate made.
Collin
“If your fingers are never in the path of the blade, you can never push them into the blade.”
Good thing that blades never twist or pull stock in different directions than intended, I guess.
“I haven’t made the one mistake my nine fingered classmate made.”
(yet)
Honestly, I’m not trying to be dickish about this, but nothing irks me more about woodworkers than this attitude when it comes to safety. All the prep in the world can’t prevent mistakes from happening. And no matter how careful you are, you’re bound to make mistakes. It’s human nature. Whether or not those mistakes result in injury ultimately comes down to luck. So I’ll keep the blade guards on my various saws. I’ll wear safety glasses. I’ll wear hearing and breathing protection. I’ll go out of my way to use a SawStop whenever possible. That little bit of pride just isn’t worth it.
Christopher
You both have valid points. I agree with BG100 that the people I know with injuries will admit they were complacent or had long-held bad habits. But you’re also right that luck plays a big role.
I’ve made plenty of stupid moves over the years, including fairly recently. I also like to say ‘I’ve done enough woodworking that I haven’t lost any fingers, but I haven’t done enough that I’ve lost fingers.’
That said, never once have I thought that my near-misses were the fault of the manufacturer. Miter saw, table saw, radial arm saw; I’ve had mishaps with them all, but I’ve always blamed myself for not taking precautions or cutting corners.
Fact of the matter is, a metal blade with sharp teeth spinning at thousands of RPM is inherently a dangerous thing. Knowledge is good, and recommendations you can trust are very important, but you can’t get rid of all the danger or pass the blame onto others if you aren’t willing to take the necessary measures to protect yourself.
Like I said in a comment above, I don’t want SawStop or similar technologies to be unavailable to anyone who wants them, but I don’t believe taking away a college student’s choice of getting a Black Friday special for $150 if that’s all he can afford.
OldDominionDIYer
Thank goodness this is over! This would have been a huge over-reach! I would never buy one of those anyway! Sawstop has good tech, and crushed (some might say unfairly) so I’m not sorry one bit.
BobH
I have a SawStop PCS, it is a very nice table saw and I appreciate the safety features. That includes the blade guard and riving knife.
I agree with what you said about SawStop ” clear to me is that they make good products that are backed by excellent support”.
I have mixed feelings about regulations, but do think that the kind of safety features that SawStop and Felder (on their high end saws) have are a good thing and wish they were more widely available. Fingers don’t grow back and the cost of hand accidents is very high.
Jack D
You’ve done a great job covering this story over the years that I’ve been a reader, Stuart, and probably the same over the preceding years, so thank you!
I’m glad it’s over, though. Will it return in the future? Potentially, but if it was brought to CPSC as a way of enforcing a profitable rule for SawStop in the first place, then it seems unlikely to return before their patents run out.
I fall into the “less regulations the better” category on this topic, and as a frequent table saw user–just cut down some oak last night for a furniture project–i know how dangerous they can be. Time and patience in setup and use are the biggest safety steps one can make. But I categorically don’t want the government telling me which table saws I’m allowed to buy or use. There has to be a limit to government reach in all facets of our lives. People fall down stairs at an alarming rate as well, so would it be a stretch to imagine the government someday wanting to outlawing stairs? In New York, they’ve already mandated that new construction after 2030 (I think) be “all electric” leaving gas heat and stoves in the “illegal” column. Give ’em an inch, and they’ll take a mile every time, regardless of what party they are.
I respect everyone else’s opinion on the matter, as they have very good reasons for their stance, as well. (Who would argue that safety is a bad thing?)
I don’t want to lose any fingers or eyes either, and wish the same for everyone, but I just don’t think we can regulate away accidents.
Anyway, thanks again, Stuart, for all you do for us here!
Stuart
Thank you, I appreciate it! This is a tough topic, and I’ve tried to tackle it objectively or at least fairly. I think this is the end of the road for table saw safety standards *for now*.
Brad
Next up: seat belts and catalytic converters.
OldDominionDIYer
Seat belts and helmets are great, Government mandates are the over-reach, these are some of the best ways to weed out the population, self-determination is a real thing and proven to be very effective over the past 100 years! Besides you can’t legislate out stupidity!
William
I’m glad this is over also. I think this is certainly over reach 100%. Maybe in a certain number of years, when saw stop loses all the patents, the market can sustain this on its own. but not as a forced thing.
G Greene
Full disclosure. I own a SawStop saw and like it a lot. I am n less careful with it, however, than I was with my General. Question: Didn’t SawStop originally try to sell/license their technology to saw makers and it wasn’t until they all said no that SawStop tuirned to making their own saws? Or is that urban legend?
Stuart
Yes. There’s a bunch of info and testimony in the years of CPSC documentation that have been made public record.
Henry
That was my understanding. Tho i was in talks with them , but nothing ever came of it .
Hdnry
Ryobi was in talks with SawStop.
Arif Wulf
So… The usa isn’t the only place selling table saws. I’m pretty sure other countries are already working on this kind of rule making.
Eventually the other companies will have to go along just because it won’t make sense to R&D aim type system and traditional equipment and then tool these things up for production on multiple types of devices. Eventually it won’t make economic sense.
If you want aim… Get sawstop. If you don’t… Get another brand. Simple.
I’d say get the old style why you can. Or… Buy a track saw and move on safely and more accurately in life 😆