Manufacturers

A. A fact sheet on saw safety by the National Consumers League contains an argument by the Power Tool Industry, “If consumers want to pay extra for safety, they can buy the safe table saw that is now on the market.”

B. The Power Tool Industry (PTI) has been fighting off attacks on why they oppose the safety technology for table saws. This is one of their responses, basically stating that people should spend more of their own money buying the table saw that offers the safety feature, rather than having the major power tool manufacturers spending more money to change their saws.

C. Proposal Claim

D. This is an interesting claim by PTI, because it is implying very strongly that they won’t budge in this issue. It is very persuasive and reasonable in that it is telling consumers to go buy safe saws from other manufacturers if they want a safe saw, because PTI isn’t budging.

 Customers

A. A quote in a fact sheet on saw safety by the National Consumers League, “Society will save money if safer saws are required.”

B. Society will save money if safer saws are required.

C. Definitional Claim

D. Everyone will be benefitted financially if safer saws were created. Manufacturers would save money on lawsuits and insurance problems, customers would save money on medical bills and insurance, and the SawStop Company would earn money. It is a reasonable claim, and logical, since even though it may cost more to make the saws safer, it could save money in the long run on various things.

 Industry Spokespeople

A. An NPR story by Chris Arnold provides the quote, “SawStop is currently available in the marketplace to any consumer who chooses to purchase it,” by Susan Young, who represents Black & Decker, Bosch, Makita and other power tool companies.

B. Spokesperson Susan Young is stating that if people want safer saws, they can find them, so it is not necessary to demand the major power tool companies to make their own.

C. Proposal Claim

D. Susan makes a reasonable and logical claim here. People can buy SawStop saws if they really want them. There are on the market, and, while expensive, they are still able to be purchased by a consumer.

 Consumer Safety Advocates

A. A statement by Inez M. Tenenbaum, Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, contained the quote, “Very serious injuries, including fractures and avulsions, as well as amputations, have changed the lives of tens of thousands of consumers and impacted their families forever.”

B. Injuries from unsafe saws have ruined peoples’ lives, as well as their family’s lives, to the point where it cannot be fixed 100%.

C. Definitional Claim

D. Injuries as bad as amputations can definitely be a traumatic experience, and the residual effects of missing a limb can change someone’s life forever, so this claim is logical and reasonable. It is backed by evidence that can be found in other documents as well.

 Injured Plaintiffs

A. A Courthouse News Service article by Bridget Freeland contains, “A man who was cut by a miter saw says Robert Bosch Tool Corp. ‘colluded with its competitors’ and lobbied the Consumer Protection Safety Commission to keep ‘flesh detection and braking technology’ from being required on table saws.”

B. A man is claiming that Bosch Tool Corp., with a secret agreement with other power tool companies, tried to influence the Consumer Protection Safety Commission to eliminate or prevent the requirement of certain safety features on table saws.

C. Causal Claim

D. The injured man makes a bold claim that directly attacks Bosch Tool Corporation. Since Bosch and other major power tool companies don’t want the expensive safety features required on their saws, it is a reasonable and logical claim, and the evidence he provides, while substantial, could use something about how he knows Bosch Tool Corp. did such a thing. Since the man was injured, it is reasonable to think that he is claiming that Bosch and other tool companies had had safer saws, his injury would not have happened. It is a reasonable claim, but he could have purchased another saw that had the safe technology, since they are out there on the market.

Personal Injury Lawyers

A. Schmidt Law Firm has a section dedicated to table saw injuries. Their website page contains the statement, “Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.”
B. Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.”

C. Definitional Claim

D. While in the context there is no source to the data provided, it is more than likely a fact because it is being used by lawyers, and if false data was used they would lose clients. This claim is very effective, since when most people see numbers they automatically think fact.

Government Officials

A. Dr. John D. Graham, head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for George W. Bush, stated, “An average table saw equipped with an automatic safety system will deliver $753 in benefits due to reduced injuries.”

B. Spending money on safety will actually save money from reduced injuries in the long run.

C. Casual Claim

D. The claim by Graham is a logical and reasonable one, and even though there is no evidence in the text supporting it, it is more than likely true because of who Graham is. It is reasonable to think that spending money on safety would save money, especially after reading how many injuries and lawsuits there have been, which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars between the customers and the manufacturers.

News

A. In an opinion piece on ProTool Reviews, Clint DeBoer writes, “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.

B. DeBoer is stating that Bosch and other tool manufactures aren’t trying to prevent safety devices, or are against them. They just don’t want to make prices rise on their products, which would cause the customers to pay more leading to a drop in business or buyers going elsewhere for a saw.

C. Consequential Claims

D. This is a logical and reasonable claim. While it may seem Bosch and the other power tool companies are being difficult and unreasonable in not agreeing to make their saws safer, they may be thinking about it from a cost standpoint. Safety devices would make the saws more expensive, which in turn would make the customers pay more. It could hurt the buyers and the sellers in the long run. The writer of the article doesn’t provide any evidence though, so it could be just his opinion on the matter.