The saw was equipped with a safety device called SawStop that could distinguish between wood and flesh and then stop the blade fast enough to prevent a gruesome injury.
1B. The saw is equipped with a safety device that prevents injury.
1C. Factual Claim- Saw stop preventing injuries is a fact.
1D. The claim provides logic to persuade the reader that this device may change the world of woodworking. If this device prevents “gruesome injury” then people will want to buy it. No one likes gruesome injuries like losing fingers.
3A. Bosch Spokes person
“The new Bosch ReaXX saw will have a completely different blade brake tech that will allow for 2 braking events before the cartridge has to be replaced. It also won’t destroy your blade.”
3B. The tool company Bosch is stating how their product is will be way different than the SawStop, created by Steve Gass.
3C. Opinion Claim- Bosch is saying how their product will differ from Gass’s, but there is no factual evidence to prove this.
3D. This claim provides logic that their product is was different from the one created by jobs. If their product is slightly different, then they will not be sued. The claim is reasonable, the product can be different. However, the accuracy is poor due to Gass’s product being released before theirs. He spent his entire life on this product, and finally releases it, then after this Bosch suddenly has the same idea only slightly different.
6A. Personal Injury Lawyer
“10 amputations a day and thousands more injuries every year, is an unacceptable toll when a ready fix is affordable, available, and waiting.”
6B. This claim is stating that it is unacceptable that people are being injured when a safety tool is sitting around doing nothing.
6C. Opinion Claim- This claim is opinion because other might not think the SawStop is a reliable, affordable, available product.
6D. This claim uses logic to get its point across. Why are people being amputated every day when there is perfect tool to prevent this sitting on the bench? This claim is very accurate, 10 amputations a day can be stopped if the SawStop is implemented. It is affordable and ready.
9A. Steve Gass himself
“They contend that Bosch, and their new ReaXX table saw, which also features flesh-detection and blade brake technology, is infringing on SawStop’s patented inventions.”
9B. Steve Gass feels that Bosch completely ripped off the idea he has spent his whole life creating.
9C. Opinion Claim- This is a more opinioned claim because no one can actually know if Bosch stole his idea, there is no factual, hard evidence. If Bosch created a similar product then some can say it is a copy while others can say it is not a copy.
9D. This claim provides hard evidence like Bosch’s saw has the same flesh detection technology that Steve Gass’s Saw Stop has. The claim also says that the ReaXX saw is infringing on the SawStop’s patented inventions. This is reasonable considering that the ReaXX contains the same technology as the SawStop which has a patent.
“I lost a finger and half the use of my hand in a table saw accident the cost of a cartridge a new blade is well worth having that safety.”
11B. This claims states that people would rather buy a new saw than lose a finger.
11C. Factual Claim-Everyone would not want to trade a finger for 60 dollars.
11D. This claim provides a logical explanation, a finger is way more important than a $60 blade. No one would pick less than $100 over a finger or hand.
2 thoughts on “Safer Saws-Flyerfan1974”
Good work, Flyerfan. Let’s talk claim types for a moment. Most could be characterized as Opinion, except for the rare few that are undisputed facts. But beyond that blanket assessment, you have Cause-and-Effect claims here, right? You have Ethical claims that pass judgment on what should occur in a fair society? You have Evaluation claims that look at evidence and draw conclusions? You have, I believe, an Analogy argument that bases a conclusion on a comparison to another situation? Take another look and see if you can nuance your answers a bit.
Let me know if you make changes.
The first claim is only factual if they have support that the Saw Stop has actually prevented injuries. It could also be casual because if they people buy the Saw Stop that may cause injuries to not occur.