"I think the argument that, "you should know that this item is unsafe" is stupid, because just because something is unsafe doesn't mean a good, quality of life

"I think the argument that, "you should know that this item is unsafe" is stupid, because just because something is unsafe doesn't mean a good, quality of life saving feature should be excluded. You could make the same argument about having seatbelts or airbags in cars, because you know it's dangerous but you're taking the risk anyway. Accidents happen, taking measures to prevent them or mitigate the damages should be done, if possible." When you engage in an unsafe activity with a very dangerous tool (chainsaw, for instance) your brain works in a particular way and you have a high level of vigilance and care. When you engage in a totally safe, foolproof activity (crayons) your brain works in a totally different way. Both of these approaches are appropriate and economical. The problem is when you add enough safety features to a (still) dangerous activity that it causes people to take the wrong approach to the activity. That is a recipe for many, many more (and novel and interesting) accidents. I don't know where the sawstop-enabled-saw fits in this model. I guess it's conceivable that, along with anti-kickback, etc., etc., a sawstop-enabled saw really is totally safe like crayons are. If so, great. But if you think a table saw continues to be a dangerous, maiming tool even after adding the sawstop then I think it could be a net-negative with regard to safety.