Safer Saws-thesilentbutdeadlycineman

The Battle to Make Table Saws Safer

Manufacturers- Saw Stop

A.Our saws, besides being the highest quality and best featured saws in their market segments, feature the ability to detect contact with skin and stop the blade in less than 5 milliseconds.

B. The claim is explaining that SawStop’s saws are the best in their market segments, and that they contain a unique feature to protect the users.

C. The type of claim being made is factual. Everything that the company says about their saws is presented as facts.

D. Yes, SawStop’s saws do have the unique ability, but what evidence is there to show that those saws are also the highest quality and best featured in their market segments? The main focus of the manufacturer in the entire note that featured this claim was really about how the saws had a feature like no other. Outside of this claim, there is never a mention or proof that the saws are also the best all around.

Customers- Peter A. Surette; Middleton, MA about the Jobsite saw

A.First table saw I’ve ever purchased since all the others I’ve seen posed a significant risk to my livelihood.

B. The claim explains that the customer chose to buy the Jobsite saw as his first saw over all the other choices, as it won’t injure him as bad as the majority.

C. The type of claim being made is opinion. The customer is saying why he chose the saw he bought.

D. The claim is over exaggerating the danger that may come from other saws, which is exactly what the customer seemed intent on doing. He is trying to explain why he chose the Jobsite saw over the others in a humorous way. The customer is persuading new customers to consider the SawStop saw in a manner that seems very casual and friendlike.

 Industry Spokespeople-Susan Young, who represents Black & Decker, Bosch, Makita and other power tool companies

A.Young says many consumers won’t want to pay for the SawStop technology, which could add $100 to $300 in cost, depending on which side you talk to.

B. The claim is saying that many customers will not want to pay extra money for the SawStop technology to be included with the saws.

C. The type of claim being made is factual. Young is saying as a fact that due to the extra cost, people won’t want to buy the technology.

D. How do we know that the technology could add $100 to $300 in cost? What are the two sides that we may talk to? This industry spokesperson says that consumers will not want to pay for this technology, and yet, many of these consumers are the ones demanding for the addition of the safety technology, as they have gotten injured by normal table saws. So, I don’t think consumers will be opposed to paying some extra cash in order to work safer.

Customer Safety Advocates – National Consumer League

A.Approximately 40,000 Americans go to hospital emergency rooms every year with injuries sustained while operating table saws.  About 4,000 of those injuries – or more than 10 every day – are amputations.

B. The claim explains that about a tenth of the injuries suffered from table saws are amputations.

C. The type of claim being made is factual. It is giving the specific number of Americans injured by table saws, and the number of amputees from the same source.

D. Outside of the amputations, what are the other types of injuries coming from table saws? How were these statistics acquired (based off what)?

Injured Plaintiffs- A Man Injured by a Table Saw

A.The plaintiff is demanding more than $30,000 from Bosch for negligence, breach of warranty and product liability. 

B. The claim explains that a person injured by a table saw is suing Bosch for negligence, breach of warranty and product liability concerning the product.

C. The type of claim being made is factual. The plaintiff is saying frankly that his injury was because of negligence, breach of warranty, and product liability. It is also a fact that he has decided to sue the company more than $30000.

D. How does the man believe that the company was negligent in their table saws? How did the man injuring himself breach the warranty of the saw? What does product liability have to do with the matter? Basically, this claim does not explain why the plaintiff chose to sue in those specific categories. Also, how did he come up with $30,000 or more as the amount that he is suing?

Personal Injury Lawyers- The Schmidt Firm, PLLC

A.People who have lost fingers, hands, and arms to table saws have been devastated by their injuries.

B. The claim explains that people who have been injured by table saws are left in  bad situations due to their injuries.

C. The type of claim being made is factual. The argument is presented to the reader as straight up facts.

D. Why and how have people with table saw injuries become devastated? How many people out of a greater number have been devastated? While not necessarily needed, it would be nice to know what type of people most commonly acquire these injuries.

Government Officials- Chairman Inez M. Tenebaum of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

A.To these victims and to all of the other victims who have suffered life-altering injuries from table saws, I want you to know that your efforts to improve the safety of these tools have made a difference.

B. The claim is the Chairman letting the victims of saw-related injuries know that their efforts to improve the tools’ safety mechanisms are making a difference.

C. The type of claim being made is proposal. The Chairman is appealing to the victims by letting them know that their worries are and will be dealt with.

D. The Chairman says that the victims’ efforts have made a difference in improving the safety of the tools. However, this appears to be just an excuse to quiet the complaining. Based off other articles on the entire matter,no difference has really happened. In fact, as seen in one transcript,it appears as if the U.S. Consumer Product Commission is actually stalling on reaching a decision. The major companies have not adopted the SawStop technology (or something similar), and people are still very much getting injured.

News Reporters-Clint DeBoer of Protool Reviews

A.So Bosch apparently doesn’t want to be under a law that would double the price of many of their saws, require expensive safety devices on miter saws (which really don’t need them) and force them (and all other manufacturers) to pay royalties to a monopolistic single license holder of the SawStop technology… I wouldn’t either.

B. The claim is the reporter saying that he has the same mindset as Bosch, as both wouldn’t want to be a law that regulated the way business was being done.

C. The type of claim being made is opinion. The reporter can clearly be seen adding his own views to the argument.

D. So the law would supposedly rise the price of the Bosch saws, which the company does not want. However, these saws are rising in price because they will be including the SawStop, which will prevent more injuries from happening. And as previously mentioned, customers are willing to pay more in order to be safer. So in the end, Bosch would actually be making more money under the new law. The reporter says that the saws don’t really need the expensive safety devices that would become a requirement under the new law. And yet, there are so many customers who have been injured by these saws, that it is almost completely evident that these cutting tools need better safety mechanisms. The reporter also claims that the law will force these big companies to pay royalties to the single license holder of the SawStop technology. I am not sure a law will force the big companies to use one specific product. I believe the law will just require these manufacturers to include some type of safety mechanism similar to SawStop (or the brand version if they are willing to pay as much for it).  If the law, however, did require the big companies to pay royalties to SawStop, then okay. The little safety technology manufacturer deserves to make more money, and I don’t think that the royalties will make the big companies lose  that much money.