DescentBB

I know we've got a mix of people here, so I'd be interested to see how this forum feels about these two objects.

You need to clarify what you mean by dangerous. Danger takes many forms from slight injury to death. You should also specify if the table saw is used recreationally. Some people use table saws for hobbies and others for their employment. If you are going to discriminate for guns then you should also make a distinction for saws. You should also specify what determines recreational gun use.


Also, INB4 2nd amendment.

Yeah this is kind of comparing apples to toasters at the moment. I mean you can say that someone can't exactly go postal with a table saw, but that's not saying much.

Having a lot of experience with both, I'd have to say for the individual the table saw would be more dangerous. If there were as many table saws in use as there are guns I think statistically the saw would win out. People view guns as inherently dangerous and thus are more careful around them. Table saws are viewed as a non threatening tool and tend not to view them as dangerous. Without training a table saw is a accident waiting to happen.

same can definitely be said of chain-saws, but the points others made about defining dangerous are valid. One is, for instance, highly unlikely to kill a handful of one's family or neighbors with a table-saw. Not so, with the gun.

Using a object to deliberately kill or maim people and judging it dangerous then a automobile is more dangerous than a gun by far.

I agree with you Woodchip, 100%. And the reason I posted this was that I noticed people, like callmeslick, only get their gun information from the news. This means they only see people misusing guns, since the news will never cover the tens of millions responsible gun owners. The news will never cover people that do nothing more with their gun except regularly clean the gun, practice with it, and practice safety at all times.

And speaking of table saws, I'm comparing accidents to accidents:
There's about 900 accidental shootings every year, at the most. 90,000 accidents with table saws that require emergency room treatment. Though the 900 accidental shootings result in death, there's much fewer of them than with table saws. Also note that we have around 300 million guns in the United States. 900 accidents is low.

ummm, Issac, I've owned firearms for 35 years, and do NOT get all my information from the news.Further, as the member of not one, but two Rod and Gun clubs, I am in a position to know a lot of recreational(target and hunting) users. Now, I appreciate your clarification of danger as being the risk of accidental harm. In that case, I would clearly go with the table saw, or a host of other common household power tools and appliances. Hell, a blender might be more prone to accidental harm, but I'm not about to waste the time looking up the stats on that one.

That's a tough one, IMO. I would probably say the gun, just because of the potential for lethal damage at a distance, whereas you must make your mistake right at the blade of the table saw.

EDIT: Of course, the potential for bleeding to death is probably a lot greater with the saw, so that might swing it the other way...

Sorry, callmeslick. Normally when people overact to guns I get certain assumptions about them. Personally, a gun is like any tool; it will hurt you if you don't use correctly.

Interesting fact: If you take all the gun deaths and compare them to table saw injuries, you might get the impression that table saws are three times more misused more than guns. However, I don't think a table saw ever killed anyone and I'd rather be injured than killed.

What are you going to do? Wait until someone comes within the circumference of the power cord to hurt them with a saw?

These debates need to stop. Few hundred million guns in this country, any idea of reasonable control is laughable. There are tradeoffs for the rights that we enjoy; for the right to bear arms we have to accept the occasional mass casualty event. There's nothing in a country of over three hundred million that can be done to stop this all from happening. Can't have police and armed guards on every corner...so just hope you and whoever you care about are lucky enough to not have to deal with being in one of those events.

Isaac wrote:...I don't think a table saw ever killed anyone...

An intriguing claim.

You think there have never been fatal table saw accidents? ...Or are you trying to say a table saw has never been used as a murder weapon?

(I'd venture to guess that although rare, both have probably happened.)

the worst and most affordable legal weapon for ordinary people - it's not circular Saw and not a gun. This alcohol. Under the influence of alcohol is any object can become a cause of death or the murder weapon.

They are both equally dangerous.

Both can kill. Both at rest are harmless. Both in the hands of a careless or malicious person can do a great deal of damage.

You can't put a number on human stupidity.

Table saws usually take off fingers or other parts of the hand. It's estimated that 31,400 injuries occur every year from table saws. But at least they're easier to see if the tool is OFF and UNPLUGGED. With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber. You have to be smart and check before assuming it's unloaded. But operating my miter saw gives me more heebie jeebies than handling my gun. My fingers get creeped out every time I use the saw.

Isaac wrote:Sorry, callmeslick. Normally when people overact to guns I get certain assumptions about them. Personally, a gun is like any tool; it will hurt you if you don't use correctly.

Interesting fact: If you take all the gun deaths and compare them to table saw injuries, you might get the impression that table saws are three times more misused more than guns. However, I don't think a table saw ever killed anyone and I'd rather be injured than killed.

If you think all gun wounds lead to death…you obviously don’t live in da hood.

I have listened to many a story of dudes who have been shot multiple times and survived, in fact most gangbangers have many gunshot wounds to “brag” about.

Saws are more dangerous, but less lethal, because more are used by more people in everyday activities and people also tend get complacent when using them. It probably won't kill a sloppy operator, but it will always maim that operator if they don't pay attention.

sigma wrote:the worst and most affordable legal weapon for ordinary people - it's not circular Saw and not a gun. This alcohol. Under the influence of alcohol is any object can become a cause of death or the murder weapon.

I agree with Sigma in this case. Alcohol has gotten too much of a pass. It IS a 'dangerous object' in that way.

I say that if you kill someone while deemed legally intoxicated with a 'recreational substance' like alcohol operating a vehicle- you deserve the death penalty. Pure and simple.

tunnelcat wrote:Table saws usually take off fingers or other parts of the hand. It's estimated that 31,400 injuries occur every year from table saws. But at least they're easier to see if the tool is OFF and UNPLUGGED. With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber. You have to be smart and check before assuming it's unloaded.

Perhaps, but in none of those instances did those objects jump up and attack some one. The human element is the real danger. Heck look at splitting mauls or any ax used to cut wood. How many people have died because of those tools?

tunnelcat wrote:But operating my miter saw gives me more heebie jeebies than handling my gun. My fingers get creeped out every time I use the saw.

Same here. Band saws give me the willies. I worked at a cabinet shop where a guy who had done that kinda work for something like 20 years, lost two fingers on a table saw. I also worked at a place building yacht where a guy wasn't paying attention, reached back to grab a piece of wood off the table saw he had just turned off and put his hand right down on top of the blade. The only reason he said he knew something was wrong was because of the sound of the blade going through his flesh. it didn't sound like wood. o_0

tunnelcat wrote:With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber.

Very true! So many gun accidents occur because of this. Even experienced gun users have problems with semi-autos hiding a round in the chamber.

This is actually one of the reasons revolvers are better than semi-auto pistols; you can generally see if it's loaded by looking at the back of the cylinder, where the rim stick out.
example: (look at the back of the cylinder)


If you open the cylinder, you can clearly see every filled chamber in the gun. If the cylinder is open while the gun is on a table, it tells everyone, even at a distance, that the gun is safe.



As far as this gun goes...

yeah, it might be loaded, since the trigger is forward, but it might not be... it's impossible to tell by this picture..

Both can be used to kill. One can be used to make things. A negligible number of people want to use guns to kill for absolutely no good reason. Both objects are dangerous in the wrong hands. I guess your point is that most people are too stupid to teach themselves how to handle guns? Idk but in any case I think anyone should be able to have any kind of gun they want. If you abuse the thing, you'll end up either hurting yourself or hurting someone else. That's the problem with average human intelligence level. But they are a tool that should be accessible to anyone.

edit: Yeah I didn't very thoroughly read this thread before replying. So anyway, I guess I'm totally with you, Isaac? I don't think I understand the point you're trying to get across. Human stupidity? Do you think there should be gun control because of this?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. That being said, it does happen to be one of their primary intended purposes.

There's a saw mill in my town. Several unexplained accidents have occurred there, including an incident where a man was cleaning a large circular saw blade - the power was shut off and the device was deactivated manually - and it started up somehow despite this, slicing into his sternum.

I'd rather take a bullet, personally. I hear it was quite painful and messy for them to extract the blade from his chest.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that they are both equally capable of inflicting damage, but saws - in my opinion at least - tend to be less clean and more incapacitating. It's like comparing getting nuked, to being set on fire. One is definitely more efficient, but the other tends to **** you up - often permanently, or in a disabling manner - regardless of whether you die from it or not.

tunnelcat wrote: With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber.

I have a CZ 97B semi auto pistol that when a bullet is in the chamber a little pin pops up on top of the receiver. So both a visual and tactile item to let you know whether firearm is in battery.

Woody is correct about his case, but the situation does vary widely from model to model. Frankly, though, some of the most tragic firearms accidents I am aware of in my experience was around folks not thinking a shotgun had a shell in the chamber.

Firearms 101…always assume it is loaded. (when handling for maintenance and such)

What this thread has left me with is trying to picture someone wielding a table saw in an attack on anther person. The picture I'm getting is...awkward.

The weapon version is called a circular saw…

Although range is limited at best.

Chainsaw. Portable and dangerous.

I've got a 14 inch meat carving knife with a kullenschliff edge. Just looking at the thing can almost cut you. I hate to even wash it because it's so sharp. One slip......

Top Gun wrote:What this thread has left me with is trying to picture someone wielding a table saw in an attack on anther person. The picture I'm getting is...awkward.

You bring the victim to the table saw, not the other way around. Or you could always just throw a table saw at someone, which would probably do plenty of damage even if it wasn't turned on. But I agree, trying to picture it is quite amusing.

Spidey wrote:The weapon version is called a circular saw…

Although range is limited at best.

You do know there are cordless circular saws right?

Krom wrote:You do know there are cordless circular saws right?

Would make for a hell of a weapon.

Duper wrote:You can't put a number on human stupidity.

I think I can. What's Earth's population again?

callmeslick wrote:Frankly, though, some of the most tragic firearms accidents I am aware of in my experience was around folks not thinking a shotgun had a shell in the chamber.

I agree. I like double barrel shotguns for this reason, weather they're horizontal or vertically stacked. Keep them broken open and unloaded until you're about to shoot.

MD-1118 wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again. Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. That being said, it does happen to be one of their primary intended purposes.

There's a saw mill in my town. Several unexplained accidents have occurred there, including an incident where a man was cleaning a large circular saw blade - the power was shut off and the device was deactivated manually - and it started up somehow despite this, slicing into his sternum.

I'd rather take a bullet, personally. I hear it was quite painful and messy for them to extract the blade from his chest.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that they are both equally capable of inflicting damage, but saws - in my opinion at least - tend to be less clean and more incapacitating. It's like comparing getting nuked, to being set on fire. One is definitely more efficient, but the other tends to **** you up - often permanently, or in a disabling manner - regardless of whether you die from it or not.

I'd rather get shot with a 9mm FMJ, which seems to be the most common 9mm type, than get sliced with a spinning blade. Not that I have been hit with either, but if I had to pick, that's how i'd go.

Top Gun wrote:What this thread has left me with is trying to picture someone wielding a table saw in an attack on anther person. The picture I'm getting is...awkward.

Well, the table saw injuries are all self-inflicted to the user, for the most part. The only time I've ever seen a saw used to deliberately harm someone is in the movies and tv (The Penguin and Joker tie Robin to a table that's slowly moving towards a large circular saw).

Spidey wrote:Firearms 101…always assume it is loaded. (when handling for maintenance and such)

this

DoTheGeek wrote:Both can be used to kill. One can be used to make things. A negligible number of people want to use guns to kill for absolutely no good reason. Both objects are dangerous in the wrong hands. I guess your point is that most people are too stupid to teach themselves how to handle guns? Idk but in any case I think anyone should be able to have any kind of gun they want. If you abuse the thing, you'll end up either hurting yourself or hurting someone else. That's the problem with average human intelligence level. But they are a tool that should be accessible to anyone.

edit: Yeah I didn't very thoroughly read this thread before replying. So anyway, I guess I'm totally with you, Isaac? I don't think I understand the point you're trying to get across. Human stupidity? Do you think there should be gun control because of this?

I think we're on the same page.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote: With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber.

I have a CZ 97B semi auto pistol that when a bullet is in the chamber a little pin pops up on top of the receiver. So both a visual and tactile item to let you know whether firearm is in battery.

Too many gizmos. Give me a revolver with no safety crap.

Duper wrote:You can't put a number on human stupidity.

I think I can. What's Earth's population again?

callmeslick wrote:Frankly, though, some of the most tragic firearms accidents I am aware of in my experience was around folks not thinking a shotgun had a shell in the chamber.

I agree. I like double barrel shotguns for this reason, weather they're horizontal or vertically stacked. Keep them broken open and unloaded until you're about to shoot.

MD-1118 wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again. Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. That being said, it does happen to be one of their primary intended purposes.

There's a saw mill in my town. Several unexplained accidents have occurred there, including an incident where a man was cleaning a large circular saw blade - the power was shut off and the device was deactivated manually - and it started up somehow despite this, slicing into his sternum.

I'd rather take a bullet, personally. I hear it was quite painful and messy for them to extract the blade from his chest.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that they are both equally capable of inflicting damage, but saws - in my opinion at least - tend to be less clean and more incapacitating. It's like comparing getting nuked, to being set on fire. One is definitely more efficient, but the other tends to **** you up - often permanently, or in a disabling manner - regardless of whether you die from it or not.

I'd rather get shot with a 9mm FMJ, which seems to be the most common 9mm type, than get sliced with a spinning blade. Not that I have been hit with either, but if I had to pick, that's how i'd go.

Top Gun wrote:What this thread has left me with is trying to picture someone wielding a table saw in an attack on anther person. The picture I'm getting is...awkward.

Well, the table saw injuries are all self-inflicted to the user, for the most part. The only time I've ever seen a saw used to deliberately harm someone is in the movies and tv (The Penguin and Joker tie Robin to a table that's slowly moving towards a large circular saw).

Spidey wrote:Firearms 101…always assume it is loaded. (when handling for maintenance and such)

this

DoTheGeek wrote:Both can be used to kill. One can be used to make things. A negligible number of people want to use guns to kill for absolutely no good reason. Both objects are dangerous in the wrong hands. I guess your point is that most people are too stupid to teach themselves how to handle guns? Idk but in any case I think anyone should be able to have any kind of gun they want. If you abuse the thing, you'll end up either hurting yourself or hurting someone else. That's the problem with average human intelligence level. But they are a tool that should be accessible to anyone.

edit: Yeah I didn't very thoroughly read this thread before replying. So anyway, I guess I'm totally with you, Isaac? I don't think I understand the point you're trying to get across. Human stupidity? Do you think there should be gun control because of this?

I think we're on the same page.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote: With a gun, you can't tell just by looking at it if it has a bullet in the chamber.

I have a CZ 97B semi auto pistol that when a bullet is in the chamber a little pin pops up on top of the receiver. So both a visual and tactile item to let you know whether firearm is in battery.

Too many gizmos. Give me a revolver with no safety crap.