Safer Saws- phillygirl

Steve Gass himself

9A. “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. This one sentence explains how Steve Gass was cheated out of his idea he worked so hard on, by Bosch.

9C. Opinion Claim- This quote appear to be opinionated because it’s not factual to tell if it was Steve Gass’ original idea. There’s no actual evidence that proves that it was Steve Gass’ idea.

9D. This claim does provide evidence that Busch has the same technology that Steve Gass does on the flesh detection saw stop has. This shows accuracy because both ideas are patent.

Consumer Safety Advocates

4A. Consumer Safety Advocates state, “Saws cut off 4,000 fingers a year. This gadget could fix that.”

4B. This one sentence basically just says what the machine can do that others cannot.

4C. Opinion Claim- Although this could be considered a factual claim because it has hard evidence to back it up. But this is more so opinionated because there are no evidence according to statistics that’ll verify that it’s a fact.

4D. This claim does provide evidence that it’s an opinion because it says exactly how other saws are in comparison to his gadget.

Manufacturers

1A. “At one time SawStop approached table saw manufacturers offering to license its patent portfolio technology, demanding an 8% royalty on the retail value of all table saws with the technology in addition to other terms that were onerous and not related to table saw safety.”

1B. This one sentence explains that SawStop approached manufacturers, demanding eight percent on retail,  to buy make and sell product.

1C. Evaluation Claim- This quote appears to be an evaluation claim because it’s an informed opinion.

1D. This claim does provide evidence that describes SawStop approaching manufacturers and what happened after this.

Amputee

11A. An amputee says, “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 one sentence explains how a person lost a limb due to an unsafe saw, and how it’ll be worth paying the difference for a safety blade.

11C. Proposal Claim- This quote appears to be a proposal claim because it defines a problem and suggests a solution.

11D. This claim does provide evidence because it lists the problem which is them losing a limb, then saying that sacrificing a few extra dollars would be worth the safety.

Personal Injury Lawyer

6A. “Table saws cause more than 40,000 injuries every year. Approximately 10% of those injuries, or 40,000 result in amputations every year.”

6B. This one sentence explains the amount of injuries table saws cause approximately every year and how some result in amputation.

6C. Factual Claim- This quote appears to be a factual claim because it lists an approximate number of injuries caused by a table saw. It’s factual because the number of injuries according to statistics.

6D. This claim does provide evidence because it lists the exact approximate numbers, and the exact cause.

 

4 thoughts on “Safer Saws- phillygirl”

  1. 9 could be an evaluation claim, they are evaluating if Bosch is infringing on Steve Gasss’ patent

    6 could also be a cause and effect claim. Because tables saws cause injuries, 40,000 result in amputations

    Like

  2. On the first claim, you have made it easy to understand and to see where you are coming from. I seem to agree to what you are saying. It is an opinion.

    Like

  3. Let’s just take a close look at your first claim analysis, PhillyGirl.

    Is this actually a Steve Gass quote or is it a quote about his patent? Who is the “they” in the quotation?

    —9A. “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. This one sentence explains how Steve Gass was cheated out of his idea he worked so hard on, by Bosch.
    —9C. Opinion Claim- This quote appear to be opinionated because it’s not factual to tell if it was Steve Gass’ original idea. There’s no actual evidence that proves that it was Steve Gass’ idea.
    —9D. This claim does provide evidence that Busch has the same technology that Steve Gass does on the flesh detection saw stop has. This shows accuracy because both ideas are patent.

    9A. If this IS Gass speaking, I think he would say, “Bosch is infringing on my company’s patented inventions.” Maybe the speakers are SawStop lawyers?
    9B. Does it? It makes a claim that Bosch infringed (still infringes) on SawStop’s patents, but it doesn’t explain how. It just claims that the patents were infringed (because the Bosch saws have flesh detection and blade brakes.
    9C. You have a point that Gass might have borrowed the idea for his saw from someone else, but that’s irrelevant to any argument about the protections his patent affords him. If he got the patent for a new idea, he gets the protection from others marketing his product.
    9D. The claim doesn’t provide any evidence at all. (It doesn’t need to, by the way, as we discussed in class. Not every claim needs to be proved. It’s more persuasive if it IS proved, but the Pledge of Allegiance doesn’t PROVE anything. It’s just a rhetorically persuasive proposal argument.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s