Category: x Archive Exercises

Safer Saws—PlethoraGaming

Manufacturers

1A: “I’ve tried to be fair, but the more I hear about SawStop and Stephen Gass, the more of a bully and a jerk they seem to be.”

1B: This says Bosch was trying to cooperate with Stephen Gass, but as Bosch looked into SawStop they seemed like bullies

1C: This is an opinionated claim

1D: Does not really have any evidence behind it, but they did say they tried to cooperate and create a ‘safe’ saw. And ended up making a safe saw of their own

http://toolguyd.com/sawstop-bosch-reaxx-table-saw-lawsuit/

Amputees

11A: “Tom Corbett was helping remodel a home in Manchester, Massachusetts, two years ago when a piece of wood he was trying to cut jammed in his table saw and his hand was thrown into the blade. Four of his fingers were severed in an instant.”

11B: This amputee is saying he accidentally got injured.

11C: Proposal, seems like he wants safety to be more accessible.

11D: This makes complete sense logically, why wouldn’t someone who lost their fingers want better safety technology for their tools.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/table-saw-sawstop-safety-finger-cut/

Industry Spokespeople

3A: “The agency has been wrestling with the issue, on and off, for 15 years. So far, its most definitive act has been to give SawStop an award for safety innovation. It will be at least next year before the agency adopts a regulation, if it ever does..”

3B: There are ways to avoid getting injured with system like SawStop, but we are not having this as a mandatory quite yet.

3C: Proposal, they are trying to get safety to be a higher priority as it 15 years have gone by trying to push this.

3D: This is persuasive to push saw safety, 15 years is a long time and we still have not come to a resolve. With technology like SawStop theres a question asked why have there been no improvement on regulation for safety yet.

http://fcir.org/2013/05/16/power-tool-industry-circles-the-wagons-as-disabling-saw-injuries-mount/

Personal Injury Lawyers

6A: “Now these manufacturers are facing dozens of lawsuits brought forth by people whose injuries could have been prevented had SawStop or similar safety mechanisms been in place. People who have lost fingers, hands, and arms to table saws have been devastated by their injuries, multiple surgeries, and medical bills they may never be able to pay so long as they are unable to work.”

6B: SawStop could have prevented injuries, and still help people continue their jobs

6C: Fact, there are several people being injured and lawsuit brought to the manufacturers.

6D: This seems accurate because people can not work if they lose fingers or arms, SawStop could have kept people their jobs

 

 

 

 

Safer Saws – rainbow987

http://www.popularmechanics.com/home/tools/a20673/bosch-reaxx-saw/

1A. A representative of Bosch estimated that the process to reassemble the saw blade after it is forced to stop “should take a minute.”

1B. In this claim, the representative is providing an average time on how long it should take a customer to reassemble the saw correctly after it being forced to stop by the finger-saving technology.

1C. This claim is opinion based. It is not a proven fact that it takes one minute to reassemble the saw blade. Rather, it is dependent on the person who is putting it back together.

1D. Although the accuracy of this claim may not be entirely correct on an individual basis, it is fair to believe that the claim is reasonable. The Bosch representative did his best to provide an estimate of how long the process would take for the benefit of the customer. Although it is unlikely that the process would take exactly a minute, it is likely that it would take around a minute for a person.

 

http://www.nclnet.org/10_amputations_a_day_the_need_for_a_safer_table_saw

4A. A representative from NCL stated to USA today the following: “If you have a pattern of injury, a safety technology that can address it, and it’s affordable, you should move toward a mandatory standard so that all parts of the industry comply.

4B. This representative is assuming the position that the SawStop technology should be required on all saws in order to prevent injury. He/she feels this way since the product is effective in preventing injury and it is affordable. Therefore, all manufacturers should be required to use it.

4C. This claim is opinion based. It is the NCL representatives opinion that the SawStop technology be regulated and required on all manufactured saws. Others may have differing opinions based on a variety of factors.

4D. The logic behind this claim is extremely compelling. It makes sense that the SawStop technology should be required on saws, since it prevents injury. Making it required would ensure that all manufacturers comply. This regulation would save many people from serious injury. However, the claim is opinion based. Therefore, other people may have different opinions, such as manufacturers. The manufacturers may not believe that the product should be required due to price concerns.

 

https://www.protoolreviews.com/news/bosch-tools-sawstop-lawsuit/3806/

2A. The author of the article stated “To our knowledge no manufacturer is anxious to pay SawStop an 8% license fee for this product any time soon, especially when the manufacturing for the technology alone will increase the average price of a table saw by anywhere from $150-$200 by the time it hits the shelves.

2B. The author is stating he does not believe that saw manufacturers are willing to pay for the SawStop technology when it will increase the overall price of the sale of the saw, which would potentially lower potential sales.

2C. This claim is entirely opinion based. Although it is likely that manufacturers would not want to pay more money for a product that will raise the cost of their product, it is not a guarantee.

2D. The concept behind this claim makes sense. Most manufacturers do not want to pay more money for a product that will raise the cost of their product, potentially lowering overall sales, Although morally it does not make sense that anyone would not want to take advantage of the injury-preventing product, it does make sense from a business perspective.

 

https://www.schmidtlaw.com/table-saw-injury-lawyer/

5A. The author of the article claimed the following: “In March 2017, about 46,000 Sears Craftsman 10” portable table saws were recalled because the stand can collapse and cause severe injuries.”

5B. “In March 2017, about 46,000 Sears Craftsman 10” portable table saws were recalled because the stand can collapse and cause severe injuries.

5C. This claim is evaluative. The speaker is claiming that the reasoning behind why the saws were recalled was due to a stand that could collapse and cause severe injuries. Therefore, it is evaluative, since it is judging or assessing a matter.

5D. The logic behind this claim is very reasonable. It makes sense that the product would be recalled if it was faulty and led to severe injuries. It would be extremely unsafe to keep the product on the market knowing that it could lead to injuries due to a defect in the product. Therefore, it makes sense that the product was recalled.

 

http://fcir.org/2013/05/16/power-tool-industry-circles-the-wagons-as-disabling-saw-injuries-mount/

7A. The author of the article stated the following: “Table saw accidents are painful, life-changing and expensive.”

7B. “Table saw accidents are painful, life-changing and expensive.”

7C. This claim is an opinion. Although most people would agree that table saw accidents are painful, life-changing and expensive, there is no guarantee that everyone feels this way. For example, some people might believe that table saw accidents are not expensive, or that an accident would not change their life very much.

7D. I find this claim to be reasonable. I think that it is fair to argue that most people would agree that table saw accidents are painful, life-changing and expensive. I do not think that many people would feel the need to counter this argument. Therefore, I believe that it is logical and reasonable, even though there is a possibility that not everyone share the belief.

Safer Saw – NewEditionLover

 

Amputees

11A. Frank Oslick received a injury from a power saw.

“If your device prevents even one person from going through what I have gone through it is a world class accomplishment.”

11B. Oslick believed that if the saw will prevent others from future injuries that will be a great accomplishment.

11C. Opinion based claim in my opinion

11D. The logic behind this is to give an direct account of someones true story and how this may help change someone else life.

Personal Injury Lawyers 

6A. “The Saw Stop and other table saw safety devices are actually very simple.”They run an electrical current through the saw blade that is attached to a current monitor.

6B. The author believes that the makings of the safety saw device is simple and easy.

6C. Opinion based claim.

6D. The logic behind this claim is to make it seem as if the machine is very simple to use and operate with machinery.

Power Tool Industry

10A. ”I have not lived a single day without regretting that accident,” he wrote. “If your device prevents even one person from going through what I have gone through, it is a world class accomplishment.”

10B. Tom Corbett  wants to prevent anyone else from going through what he went through.

10C. Opinion Claim

10D. The accuracy we have from this article is we have an anecdote of someones true life and his story about the incident that ruined his life temporarily. It does a good job by letting the readers know that the injury causes a disfiguring look.

 

Bosch Tools Saw Stop Lawsuit

2A.“By agreeing not [to] employ such safer alternatives, defendant and its competitors attempted to assure that those alternatives would not become ‘state of the art,’ thereby attempting to insulate themselves from liability for placing a defective product on the market.”

2B. products aren’t as safe as they think so they use precautions.

2C. Factual Claim

2D. The accuracy of this claim is to ensure that the products on the market aren’t as safe as they might look . Next the lawsuit states the traumatic injury could have been avoided if such technology allowed it to be so.

Consumer Safety Advocates

4A. National Consumer League

Ten people every day – according the CPSC’s own data  have their fingers amputated in power saw accidents10 a day!  I’ve wanted to push the CPSC for a mandatory standard ever since hearing a story on NPR in May of 2006.

4B. This shows me that many people get their fingers clipped from accidents due to power saws.

4C. Factual claim as it shows facts and shows proof.

4D. This claims provides the reader with knowledge to let people know whats going on before they are harmed  before they work with power saw tools.

Safer Saws—pdqlover

6. Personal Injury Lawyers 

A. Amputation Lawyer

“Table saws cause more than 40,000 injuries every year. Approximately 10% of those injuries, or 4,000, result in amputations every year. Fingers, hands, and arms are the most common parts of the body that are amputated. Only 20% of the injuries occur in people who are on the job, where injuries are usually covered by workplace accident insurance.”

B. The claim made is that there are more injuries to people who do not work by a saw then people who get injured at work.

C. Factual claims

D. The logic behind this claim is to put awareness to the injuries people have had due to the Saw Stop tool.

11. Power Tool Injuries

A. Tom Corbett a four finger amputee.

“He still struggles to remember all of the horrible details, but he’s haunted by the fact that four of his fingers were severed. “I just know within a second my fingers were on the ground,” he said.”

B. The claim made is describing the situation that Tom Corbett is currently in as a amputee from the saw tool accident.

C. Evalutation Claim

D. The logic behind this claim is to prevent saw accidents.

1. Manufacturers

A. The overall glance of the table saw and facts about it.

“The rising population in the 1980’s of the benchtop saw resulted in a decrease in accidents from circular saws being used improperly. If benchtop saws become drastically more expensive or manufacturers withdraw from the market, there could be a return to improper use of circular saws and unintended declines in safety.”

B. The claim made is that a safeir saw was created but was to expensive to aford.

C. Factual claim

D. The logic behind this claim is that the safier table saw should be more afforable to allow people to buy it and prevent injuries.

8. News Reporters

A. Overall the article is presenting a new gadget that can prevent the ongoing amount of body amputations yearly caused by saws.

“Each year, more than 67,000 workers and do-it-yourselfers are injured by table saws, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (PDF), resulting in more than 33,000 emergency room visits and 4,000 amputations.”

B. The claim is a large amount of workers are injured yearly by table saws, leading up to a significant amount of hospital visits and amputations.

C. Factual claim

D. The logic behind the article is that table saw is very dangerous especially if you arent aware.

4. Steve Gass himself

A. Overall, the article discusses how Steve Gass`s idea of the patent invention was taken away by Bosch and used as his own, just with a new name.

“They contend that Bosch, and thier new ReaXX table saw, which also features flesh- detection and blade brake technology, is infringing on SawStop`s patented inventions.”

B. The claim is that Steve Gass`s own invention was taken away from him without any acknowledging credibility.

C. Factual Claim

D. The logic behind the article is that Steve Gass has not been acknowledged for his table saw invention and was stripped away from him by another inventor who purposely used the invention as his own.

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.

 

Safer Saws-Jadden14

If table saws can be safer….

1A. News Reporter for NPR Chris Arnold said, “SawStop, Gass’ little upstart company, has sold tens of thousands of these safer table saws, and lately things have been heating up in Washington.”

1B. The author is claiming that the company made by Steve Gass is becoming big, and that these safer table saws are causing trouble for big companies.

1C. This is an evaluation claim made by Chris as he noticed safer saws and the issues in washington.

1D. This claim seems reasonable as Chris backs it up using the fact that Sawstop sold many products leading up to the safety concerns facing other large companies. Other companies could’nt afford to incorporate the safety measures, and are now being forced to. Chris’s logic implied behind this is that big companies are always going for the cheapest option and want to avoid costly additions to their products, even if the technology is out there.

Steve Gass’s Finger

2A. Steve Gass says, “Theres about 60,000 medically treated accidents on table saws every year. About 3,000 take there fingers off every year about 10 a day.”

2B. The creator is listing facts about the issues surrounding table saws and how the problem needs to be addressed.

2C. This is a factual claim, as it lists statistics about table saws.

2D. The creator of this safety design lists facts about table saw injuries each year to try to bring light to the issue. His reasoning would also be to bring light to his product and question why big saw manufacturers aren’t incorporating his effective design into their products.

Bosch Tools Sawstop Lawsuit

3A. Clint Deboer in a news article states, “The Power Tool Institute (made up of many of the major tool manufacturers) takes strong offense to the concept of making safety devices like this mandatory on products like table saws.”

3B. The author of this article states that the Power Tool Institute is against making safety devices mandatory on table saws.

3C. This is an opinion claim, as there is no reference for this claim and he is sort of speaking for the company.

3D. This claim however is still reasonable, as he provides previous information that can help back his opinion. His logic behind this is that the Power Tool Institute is against safety devices as they would inhibit cost and profit, regardless of ethical concerns.

Grab Bag of Fingers

4A. Myron Levin states “Since it started making table saws in in 2004, SawStop has recorded 2,000 “finger saves”—customer reports of accidents likely to have caused disfiguring injuries with conventional saws, but that resulted in minor cuts or a few stitches at most. (SawStop also has acknowledged two reports of amputations.)”

4B. The author provides effective feedback from the use of safer saws made by SawStop.

4C. This is a factual claim, as it is releasing a consumer safety report and provides results.

4D. The author uses this claim to back that the SawStop really is effective and should be implemented into all saws. The author also provides the seriousness of the issue by revealing what injuries occur with conventional saws. he uses this logic to back his claim and draw the reader’s interest/concern.

Industry Defends Table Saw Safety

5A. In the article, an injured table saw user Frank oslick states, “I have not lived a single day without regretting that accident,” he wrote. “If your device prevents even one person from going through what I have gone through it is a world class accomplishment.”

5B. The author of this article provides a real life example of what happens when safety saw features aren’t implemented. The feedback from the guy who got injured provides insight into what happens when safety is neglected by the companies.

5C. This is more a proposal claim from the guy who got injured using a table saw.

5D. The guy represents the injured and states that because of his injury he has made a difference. His logic is that if he didn’t get hurt someone else would have as no one would have brought light to his situation if it did not happen.

Safer Saws–todayistheday

Grab bag of Claims

4A) Consumer product safety Commission

4B) “Each year, more than 67,000 workers and do-it-yourselfers are injured by table saws, according to the consumer product safety commission, resulting in more than 33,000 emergency room visits and 4,000 amputations.”

4C) Factual claim because it offers statistics on how many individuals are injured by table saws .

4D) The accuracy seems intact because they take exact injury statistics. The quality is good because it is coming from a safety commission, which gives the facts an enhanced trust.  It’s hard to dispute the reasonableness of facts because only the truth is offered; although it could be twisted.  Logic is emplace when relaying facts. This claim does its job at being persuasive.  It makes the viewer consider the number of injuries and realize the number of those hurt is alarming.

4E) I agree with this claim because I don’t have any evidence to dispute it.  I have no reason not to trust the facts that they provide in their claim.

Table Saw Injury Lawyer

6A) The Schmidt Firm, personal injury lawyers.

6B) Manufactures should face lawsuits because thousands of people are injured because they refuse to install Sawsafe technology.

6C) Opinion claim, because they state manufactures are at fault for injuries.

6D) Since it is an opinion claim it is hard to look at for accuracy since it is more fueled on feeling.  The quality of this opinion is shady because it is coming from lawyers who will make money if injured persons believe manufactures are at fault. The persuasiveness is moderate, it does hook you in but it doesn’t exactly justify.  But original claims don’t have to explain or justify just yet.

6E) I agree with the claim although it is opinion. I don’t trust it as much because it is made by lawyers trying to convince people to sue, so in turn they can make money as well.

Power Tool Industry

8A) salon.com as a news reporting site

8B) “The SawStop story is about an industry’s ability to resist a major safety advance that could, by now, have prevented countless disfiguring injuries, but might have been bad for business.”

8C) categorical claim, this places SawStop as good for helping people but bad at helping business.  It categorizes Sawstop for two different reasons.

8D) The accuracy is based on which you analyze SawStop.  Sawstop is good for helping people but it doesn’t get the chance to do so.  Quality is based on the reaction of the viewer.  This claim makes us take a step back and realize how twisted it is; SawStop could help thousands, but it’s kicked to the curb because it won’t make the industry thousands.  The provoking  of this thought makes this claim a persuasive one, because it makes us consider which category SawStop should belong in.

8E) I agree with this claim. As awful as it might be to consider the money in SawStop, industries will lose money.  But we also categorize SawStop as good because of all the people it could help.

Power Tool Industry

11A) Tom Corbett, a four finger amputee.

11B) “He still struggles to remember all of the horrible details, but he’s haunted by the fact that four of his fingers were severed.  “I just know within a second my fingers were on the ground,” he said.”

11C) I’m not sure what claim this would be but I’m thinking evaluation.  I think this is an evaluation claim because it evaluates and describes the situation that resulted in him being an amputee. He evaluates the shock and horror of suddenly becoming an amputee.

11D) The only accuracy that we can rely on is to trust Mr.Corbett is telling the truth. We hope the author made sure he really was an amputee resulting in a table saw accident.  The logic behind this claim is to give insight into the pain that not preventing table saw accidents causes.  This in turn gives the claim good persuasive qualities.  It relies on the emotion behind an amputee’s account and what kind of emotions that would stir inside the reader.

11E) I agree with this claim, although there is no easy way to prove Mr. Corbett is a real table saw amputee. The claim does its job to persuade us that table saw accidents can devastate lives.

Defending Table Saw safety

3A) Table Saw Companies

3B) “They’ve argued that injury numbers have been inflated and that the government’s estimate of $2.36 billion in annual costs to society from table saw accidents—including medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering—is exaggerated. ”

3C) This is an opinion claim.  Table saw companies are arguing the legitimacy of facts due to the money making factor in them.

3D) The accuracy is not present, we don’t know why they would believe this.  The injury numbers and the money lose resulting from them, was totaled.  But the power tool industry companies doubt the truth behind these numbers.  The logic can somewhat be detected, it would make sense from the industries to try and smear the facts presented to make themselves look better. The persuasiveness is also represented, the goal of any claim is to make you question.  With this claim you consider what the industries are stating.

3E) I personally think the industries are just trying to save their own behinds.  They are making claims without any thought or reasonableness behind them.  Regardless, it does make you weigh both sides.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safer Saws — Splash305

1A: Manufacturers- The saw has a feature that allowes the blade to stop when the sensor attched to the blade picks up the detection of flesh. It stops fast enough to prevent any sort of injury.

1B: The saw has a feature that detects flesh and can prevent injury.

1C: Factual claim, it states the fact that the saw stops fast enough to prevent injury.

1D: This claim provides us with logic in wanting to change the ways of wood working to provide people with safer saws. It reassures us that with this technology people can avoid serious injury.

11A: Amputees- “My father put his hand through the table saw and it was terrible. It was an accident on an old saw that was caused by a lack of safety features (anti-kickback)”.

11B: If the saw had the safety feature attached then this person would still have their hand.

11C: Proposal claim, if he would have had the safety feature installed there would have been no injury.

11D: This claim provides us with logic, saying if we want to continue to have both hands it is worth spending the money for a safety feature.

2A: Customers- “I note the people opposed to sawstop don’t own one. I own 2. Jobsite and contractor. Used professionally, and I won’t let anyone on a jobsite use another saw.”

2B: People that don’t own sawstop say it isn’t worth it and saws can be safe if people pay attention but that is just because they don’t have one.

2C: Opinion claim, he thinks sawstop is the best and safest saw to have where as others find it unnessesary.

2D: This claim provides accuracey in the opinion being stated that safe saws may not be for everyone but when used they do what is told.

10A: Power Tool Product Reviewers- ” I care about the fact that there is a technology out there that can protect me and others who will not always be entirely 100% focused 100% of the time.”

10B: Not everyone is going to be fully focused all of the time, so we need the technology that is going to protect us when we are not.

10C: Evaluation claim, he is saying that the use of this technology will come in handy when peopl lose focus which is very common to do.

10D: This claim provides logic in letting us know that not everyone will be fully alert at all times of the day, and when they aren’t it is not to have advanced technology to bet there for our protection.

12A: Steve Gass Reviewers- “The more I see from Sawstop, and the more I hear about Gass, the more I hate them. The issues with Sawstop’s lack of quality control and their horrendous company in general is why I stay away from that brand at all costs.”

12B: His opinion of Steve Gass is the reason he dislikes the sawstop product and finds them to be a waste of time.

12C: Opinion claim, he lets his opinion of Steve Gass get in the way of seeing the reasoning behind this product and its safety.

12D: This claim provides persuasivness in trying to get people to think Steve Gass isn’t a good guy and therefore getting them to dislike his products.

Safer Saw–collegegirl

Consumer Safety Advocates

4A. National Consumer League

“Ten people every day – according the CPSC’s own data – have their fingers amputated in power saw accidents”

4B. Statistically shows that ten people get their fingers chopped off from power saw accidents.

4C. Factual claim because it is showing statistics.

4D. This claims provides the reader with the necessary statistic regarding people who work with power saws. This claim is reasonable because again, its statistics.

Amputees

11A. Frank Oslick (suffered from and injury caused by a power saw)

“If your device prevents even one person from going through what I have gone through it is a world class accomplishment.”

11B. Oslick believes that if the safer saw will prevent others from suffering from an injury in which he suffered from, then it will be a great accomplishment.

11C. Opinion based claim.

11D. The logic behind this claim is to tell a victims opinion regarding the safer saw. Oslick suffered from a huge cut in his arm which led to him having to get stitches.

Personal Injury Lawyers 

6A. Amputation Lawyer

“The SawStop and other table saw safety devices are actually very simple.”

6B. Claim made is that the author believes that the makings of the safety saw device is simple and easy.

6C. Opinion based claim.

6D. The logic behind this claim is to make it seem as if the machine is very simple to make. Which leads to the reason for why it should be offered to every machinery company.

Industry Spokesperson

3A. Clint Deboer

“No offense, but I don’t think this is a move by Bosch (or any other tool manufacturer for that matter) to prevent safety devices, but simply a move to prevent the unintended consequences of adding mandatory safety devices that would, in some instances, double the price of entry level power saws.”

3B. Debar makes this claim to show his opinion. He thinks that manufacturers did not create the safety machine to prevent safety devices but to prevent what could happen in the future when manufactures actually have to add mandatory safety devices to their products.

3C. Opinion based claim.

3D. Logic behind this claim is for the author to explain the price of mandatory safety devices would been more expensive compared to them not being mandatory.

Injured Plaintiff

5A. “If this safety mechanism had been included in the table saw, Osorio’s injuries would have been limited to a 1/8-inch cut on only one finger, instead of two unusable fingers and three fingers with no feeling, requiring five surgeries and $384,000 in medical expenses.”

5B. This claim is showing what could have happened is Osorio was using a safety saw. Then, it compares it to what actually did happen and the expenses and life-long injuries he suffered from because of the saw not protecting his fingers.

5C. Factual claim because it’s giving number to prove the cost of the procedure.

5D. The logic behind this claim is to show the readers what happened to someone when they were not using the safety saw.

Safer Saws- alaska

Table Saw Amputation Lawyer

6A: In April 2017, about 400 Black & Decker 10″ portable table saws were recalled because the metal fold-up stand can collapse unexpectedly and cause injuries.

6B:The 400 Black & Decker portable table saw was recalled because it caused injuries due to the fold-up feature.

6C: This is a factual claim because it gives evidence.

6D: The 400 Black & Decker definitely should have been recalled as it was for those reasons.

Power tool industry too powerful to regulate?

8A:  But this saw was equipped with a safety device called SawStop that allowed the blade to distinguish between wood and flesh, and to stop fast enough to prevent serious harm. Sure enough, the blade came to a dead stop in about three one-thousandths of a second, leaving the dog with only a minor nick

8B: Using a hot dog they demonstrated that the safety device will stop if it senses a finger or something like a finger.

8C: This is a factual claim because they tested the safety device to see if it worked and it did.

8D: The safety device called SawStop worked like Steve Glass made it to work.

Saws Cut Off 4,000 Fingers a Year. This Gadget Could Fix That.

8A: Each year, more than 67,000 workers and do-it-yourselfers are injured by table saws, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (PDF), resulting in more than 33,000 emergency room visits and 4,000 amputations.

8B: More than 67,000 workers and do-it-yourself are injured by the table saw.

8C: This is a factual claim because it gives evidence.

8D: The table saw is very dangerous especially if you arent aware of you hand or fingers.

10 amputations a day: the need for a safer table saw

4A: 10 amputations a day and thousands more injuries every year, is an unacceptable toll when a ready fix is affordable, available, and waiting.

4B: The Comsumer Product Safety Commission had to approve of the SawStop and it was taking long to do so.

4C:  This is an opinion. The women who wrote this believes that the SawStop is an affordable and available piece of equipment.

4D: I agree with her. I think this is an affordable and available piece of safety equipment.

Table Saw Facts at a Glance

3A: 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.

3B: The SawStop company went to manufactures to try and have them make and sell the safety equipment.

3C: This is a factual claim because it gives evidence that the SawStop company did this.

3D: The SawStop company demanded an 8% rolalty on the retail value of all table saws with this new technology.