"Absolute wealth of techniques in this video for any project."

[Doug Hepler]

Mark Hennebury wrote:"You cannot explain how someone acting in such a "Recklessly Dangerous" manner can survive a day in the workshop without a serious accident, let alone decades it is just not feasible, it defies logic and the laws of nature....unless you are wrong.
So i don't expect you to answer the question."

Mark,

I am happy to exceed your expectation that nobody will answer directly. Here is a direct answer. I take safety very seriously, having injured myself twice because of my cowboy attitude -- . Simon MacGowan referred to Russian Roulette, Roulette and games of chance are actually a decent metaphor. We all have a chance of injury every time we use a tool, drive a car, etc. The objective is to control the odds in our favor (1) by arranging our shops in a safe manner, e.g., good lighting, no slippery trippery things on the floor, etc (strategy) and (2) by using properly equipped tools in a safe manner (tactics). Of course you can do dangerous things without being injured, but why not work safely to reduce the odds that your number will come up?

Your argument that you and lots of other cowboy woodworkers violate the rules without injury demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of statistics and probability. You might have heard that flipping a "head" on a coin flip -- or even flipping three or five or ten heads in a row tells you NOTHING about the next coin flip. Furthermore, changes in safety strategy changes the odds tremendously.

[I am reminded] of the story about the thanksgiving turkey. He was having a chat with the other turkeys in the flock. He was saying that humans are great. They must love turkeys because they feed them, water them, house them, keep them safe from coyotes. What a great deal. He and his turkey friends had many days of experience to prove their point. Then, one day in late October, the strategic environment changed and his predictions turned out to be tragically false. He was using the past to predict the future without really understanding the environment he was working in.

Doug.

[Simon MacGowen]

I'm not an attorney, and maybe a tort lawyer among us could answer this hypothetical question. What if someone put up YouTube videos that showcased something dangerous without any disclaimers or warnings. Then let's say a viewer goes out to imitate what they've seen on the video and hurts themselves which they would not have done but for the video that prompted them. Could a lawsuit come out of the incident that attaches any liability to the person who made and uploaded the video? Or maybe liability for YouTube itself because it was the medium?

I'm thinking it may because otherwise why would stunt oriented TV shows be riddled with disclaimers and warnings if they don't need to? I'm not trying to argue one side or another but I think it's an interesting question. I tried googling the question and all I can find is information about copyright and fair use issues. I'd love to hear from someone who would know.

Either way, if you're a viewer, buyer beware and make your own decision about whether what you see is something you should try, and if you're a video maker I would think having a lead-in disclaimer like Norm did on his TV show is a good move. I don't think anyone is going to start policing the internet and it will continue to be consume at your own risk. By the way Mark H., that's some beautiful joinery!

Edwin

I asked a similar question in an old, related thread, but no one seemed to have offered a legal opinion to it.

Simon

[Mark Hennebury]

Hi Doug,

I too take my safety very seriously.
Russian Roulette does not apply to this at all; Russian roulette is a game of chance, your knowledge or planning or how you play has absolutely no bearing on the outcome.
I don't play games.
My work is not about chance. It is based on knowledge and planning.
I work very safely.

The turkey in your story is much like the guy playing Russian roulette in Simons story; has no control over the outcome.

And if i teach someone to work like me they too will do nice work, and learn to understand their machines, and will learn to work on them with respect not fear, and at the end of the day they will still be able count to ten.

There was once a foreman in a shop that i once worked, criticized the way that i used the jointer, he could count to all the way up to nine and a half.

[Lee Schierer]

Guys, keep it civil or this thread will end or disappear...

[Pat Barry]

The ONLY thing I saw that made me cringe was the vertical cuts on the table saw but even there he had the piece well supported although I would definitely look for another way to do that. The miter saw cutting was well supported and I think people are making that out to be much worse than it really was - take another look. Drilling the holes was NOT that big a deal. I see lots of overreaction in these responses.

[andy bessette]

...I too take my safety very seriously...

I really like this simple statement. It is why I will never relinquish my safety to the designer or manufacturer of safety gismos and gadgets (or to their proponents). I personally take responsibility for my own safety. And I highly recommend it to others.

[John Kee]

Great video I enjoyed watching his build and techniques and completely agree with Marks comments. I saw nothing that was unsafe and his board control showed he knew what was happening and how to control it. He was using an anti kickback blade. Board pinching is a common occurrence in woodworking and understanding how counteract it is a valuable lesson. If you don't feel safe with a tool you are using you should be using it, don't criticize because of your own incompetence. The comments about drilling with a forstner and not clamping just show an ignorance of how sharp tools cut. Most of the criticisms are quite humorous to those make a living do this. I've watched a lot of videos of true wack and hacks and this guy isn't one of them. Good comments Brian on police, we are policed and controlled enough in our LOL free society.

[Martin Wasner]

Take a deep breath. Unclench your glutes. Watch how experienced professionals do it.

I wasn't able to watch the whole thing, but that pretty much sums it up for me.

[Glen Gunderson]

You cannot explain how someone acting in such a "Recklessly Dangerous" manner can survive a day in the workshop without a serious accident, let alone decades it is just not feasible, it defies logic and the laws of nature....unless you are wrong.
So i don't expect you to answer the question.

Of course you can. I think we can all agree that driving drunk is reckless and dangerous, but based on the statistics only about 1 in 550 instances of intoxicated driving results in an incident that causes injury. So someone could drive drunk once a month for 40 years, and statistically they'd be less than 50% likely to ever have an incident that injures themselves or someone else. Does someone driving drunk for decades and not hurting anyone mean that it being considered dangerous "defies logic and the laws of nature"? Of course not, it's in line with the statistics. It doesn't mean it's not risky behavior though.

So the question is what constitutes unsafe practices in woodworking. That's up for everyone to decide for themselves. But the fact that a person does something for years or decades and doesn't get hurt from it doesn't mean it's necessarily safe. I have a lifetime of driving where I've never been in a situation where I needed my seatbelt to prevent injury, but does that mean if I'd never worn one that I wouldn't be taking an unneeded risk? Not at all.

[Mark Hennebury]

Of course you can. I think we can all agree that driving drunk is reckless and dangerous, but based on the statistics only about 1 in 550 instances of intoxicated driving results in an incident that causes injury. So someone could drive drunk once a month for 40 years, and statistically they'd be less than 50% likely to ever have an incident that injures themselves or someone else. Does someone driving drunk for decades and not hurting anyone mean that it being considered dangerous "defies logic and the laws of nature"? Of course not, it's in line with the statistics. It doesn't mean it's not risky behavior though.

So the question is what constitutes unsafe practices in woodworking. That's up for everyone to decide for themselves. But the fact that a person does something for years or decades and doesn't get hurt from it doesn't mean it's necessarily safe. I have a lifetime of driving where I've never been in a situation where I needed my seatbelt to prevent injury, but does that mean if I'd never worn one that I wouldn't be taking an unneeded risk? Not at all.

Okay so more non relevant metaphors just like the Russian Roulette and talking turkeys, now we have driving drunk and not wearing seatbelts.

Can you not stick with the topic of discussion.

Driving drunk, is operating with diminished control, awareness and reaction. That is Not how i work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not in any way shape or form!


There may be no advantage not to wear a seatbelt, but there are reasons to remove guards. There is the difference.
I wear safety glasses, because they don't impede my work, and not wearing them would be taking an unnecessary risk. I don't take unnecessary risks.

I work without guards on certain machines and certain operations, because they are an impediment to safe operation, in my opinion.
It appears from the admissions of many of the posters here that they are afraid of their machines, and lack confidence in their ability to work safely with them, which to me is dangerous.

I take calculated risks and have developed safe operating procedures based on the risks.
The process that i follow has allowed me to work safely for many decades.
I am not immune to making mistakes, so far my mistakes have resulted in only minor injuries.
My mistakes have been the result of deviating from procedure. That is a weakness of character not process.



My point of joining this discussion was in response to the abusive attack launched against the man in the video, because I and many others work in similar ways to him, and by attacking him you are attacking all of us that work like him.
I will work as i see fit.
I will make and post videos of how i work if i wish.
I will not be silent when i see people attacking others.
I will defend my right to decide how i choose to work.
I will make an attempt to educate people who make rude ignorant and bias comments, by offering an alternate point of view and endeavor to back it up with facts, even though i doubt anyone will let the facts sway them.

You are welcome to work whatever way you wish.
You are welcome to believe me to be dangerous and reckless if you wish.
You are not welcome to be rude and abusive or publicly disparage me or anyone else for the way that we work.

[Glen Gunderson]

Okay so more non relevant metaphors just like the Russian Roulette and talking turkeys, now we have driving drunk and not wearing seatbelts.

Can you not stick with the topic of discussion.

Driving drunk, is operating with diminished control, awareness and reaction. That is Not how i work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not in any way shape or form!

Well obviously I wasn't conflating driving while intoxicated with woodworking. I was merely pointing out that even with something that is universally considered as risky behavior, one's chance of causing injury is still fairly small on an individual level and a person could have a lifetime of doing such activity and never have suffered for it.

In the post I quoted, you suggested that someone going a period of time without hurting themselves necessarily means that what they're doing is safe. You said it "defies logic and the laws of nature" that someone could work in an unsafe manner and not suffer serious injury, therefore they're not being unsafe. That is simply not true though.

There may be no advantage not to wear a seatbelt, but there are reasons to remove guards. There is the difference.
I wear safety glasses, because they don't impede my work, and not wearing them would be taking an unnecessary risk. I don't take unnecessary risks.

And yet it took until the 1990s before even half of people bothered to wear seatbelts. They had all kind of excuses about why they didn't use them. People used to complain that they were uncomfortable, they wrinkled their clothes, or that they were an impediment to getting out of the vehicle in a dangerous situation. They were safe drivers who'd driven for decades without getting injured, so they were being safe.

I work without guards on certain machines and certain operations, because they are an impediment to safe operation, in my opinion.
It appears from the admissions of many of the posters here that they are afraid of their machines, and lack confidence in their ability to work safely with them, which to me is dangerous.

I take calculated risks and have developed safe operating procedures based on the risks.
The process that i follow has allowed me to work safely for many decades.
I am not immune to making mistakes, so far my mistakes have resulted in only minor injuries.
My mistakes have been the result of deviating from procedure. That is a weakness of character not process.



My point of joining this discussion was in response to the abusive attack launched against the man in the video, because I and many others work in similar ways to him, and by attacking him you are attacking all of us that work like him.
I will work as i see fit.
I will make and post videos of how i work if i wish.
I will not be silent when i see people attacking others.
I will defend my right to decide how i choose to work.
I will make an attempt to educate people who make rude ignorant and bias comments, by offering an alternate point of view and endeavor to back it up with facts, even though i doubt anyone will let the facts sway them.

You are welcome to work whatever way you wish.
You are welcome to believe me to be dangerous and reckless if you wish.
You are not welcome to be rude and abusive or publicly disparage me or anyone else for the way that we work.

Everyone is responsible for their own safety and everyone has different standards and that's fine. But don't complain about criticism of someone's technique (or an "abusive attack" as you say) while simultaneously belittling people who make safety a big priority by saying they are "afraid of their machines" or "lack confidence in their abilities". That's no more true than suggesting that someone who wears a seatbelt lacks confidence in their driving.

[Mark Hennebury]

Well obviously I wasn't conflating driving while intoxicated with woodworking. I was merely pointing out that even with something that is universally considered as risky behavior, one's chance of causing injury is still fairly small on an individual level and a person could have a lifetime of doing such activity and never have suffered for it.

In the post I quoted, you suggested that someone going a period of time without hurting themselves necessarily means that what they're doing is safe. You said it "defies logic and the laws of nature" that someone could work in an unsafe manner and not suffer serious injury, therefore they're not being unsafe. That is simply not true though.




And yet it took until the 1990s before even half of people bothered to wear seatbelts. They had all kind of excuses about why they didn't use them. People used to complain that they were uncomfortable, they wrinkled their clothes, or that they were an impediment to getting out of the vehicle in a dangerous situation. They were safe drivers who'd driven for decades without getting injured, so they were being safe.




Everyone is responsible for their own safety and everyone has different standards and that's fine. But don't complain about criticism of someone's technique (or an "abusive attack" as you say) while simultaneously belittling people who make safety a big priority by saying they are "afraid of their machines" or "lack confidence in their abilities". That's no more true than suggesting that someone who wears a seatbelt lacks confidence in their driving.

The initial posts in this thread are an abusive attack.

I did not in any way belittle anyone, I just made an observation; several of the posters expressed fear watching the guy in the video performing operations. So if you wish to discuss what i said that's fine with me, but don't make up stuff.

I make safety a big priority, as does the guy in the video, our idea of safety differs from some others that's all.

There we go; back to the metaphors again. Seatbelt??????????

I will gladly discuss the topic if you stay on topic.

[mreza Salav]

Well obviously I wasn't conflating driving while intoxicated with woodworking. I was merely pointing out that even with something that is universally considered as risky behavior, one's chance of causing injury is still fairly small on an individual level and a person could have a lifetime of doing such activity and never have suffered for it.

In the post I quoted, you suggested that someone going a period of time without hurting themselves necessarily means that what they're doing is safe. You said it "defies logic and the laws of nature" that someone could work in an unsafe manner and not suffer serious injury, therefore they're not being unsafe. That is simply not true though.




And yet it took until the 1990s before even half of people bothered to wear seatbelts. They had all kind of excuses about why they didn't use them. People used to complain that they were uncomfortable, they wrinkled their clothes, or that they were an impediment to getting out of the vehicle in a dangerous situation. They were safe drivers who'd driven for decades without getting injured, so they were being safe.




Everyone is responsible for their own safety and everyone has different standards and that's fine. But don't complain about criticism of someone's technique (or an "abusive attack" as you say) while simultaneously belittling people who make safety a big priority by saying they are "afraid of their machines" or "lack confidence in their abilities". That's no more true than suggesting that someone who wears a seatbelt lacks confidence in their driving.

very well said.

[David Kumm]

Those of use in the hobby world also need to remember that the pros here ( or in any vocation ) do things the rest of us shouldn't even think about. They have a much higher skill set and need to make money in an often thin margin business. I can take my car to a test track but I won't make 2/3 the time or speed a pro driver will. He is likely more safe at 150 mph than I am at 100. He also knows the limitations of his machine which is often lacking by the hobby crowd. Some of the stuff in the video is scary but obvious. I see posts and threads where people use cheap light duty machines in ways that might look safe, but way exceed the capability of the design. The pro guys here add immeasurable value to the forum to help those of us who could never pay the bills given our speed and efficiency- even if we do nice work. I've seen enough of Mark's work, both wood and metal to know he is about 100 levels above me. Even if some of the video makes me cringe, I appreciate the perspective of Mark, Martin, and others in the business. Dave

[James Pallas]

I see many concerns involving all levels of woodworkers. What someone may be able to do safely others should not try. There is a video out of one of the best woodworkers around cutting twin tenons on a table saw verticle with a back up block. I saw no criticism of that one. I have been in shops with the radio or even a tv turned up so loud you could not have heard the table saw when it started to bind. You hear the old saying of guard removed for clarity when it was never installed to begin with. Do you put on eye protection when chopping mortises with your steel Japanese chisel hitting the edge of a steel ring on your chisel? And just for fun if your a great driver and never had an accident does that qualify you to drive Indy cars? Yet you can go to the big box store and buy a table saw read the directions, or maybe not, and you are good to go. If you cut off your fingers you can always sue. All this talk makes little sense to me.
Jim