1. Manufacturers
A. In an NPR broadcast the claim, “”SawStop is currently available in the marketplace to any consumer who chooses to purchase it,” says Susan Young, who represents Black & Decker, Bosch, Makita and other power tool companies.”
B.The manufacturers of the saws thinks that the consumer will likely go with the cheaper cost, rather than the safer one, quite like they themselves have.
C. Definitional claim
D.Upon first glance, this seems like a reasonable approach, they think consumers should decide, and will let them know with profits. However, will they wait for accurate data; people are still out putting their lives on the lines while working with these saws. Injuries continue to occur as the manufacturers do nothing.
2. Consumers
A. A claim from the National Consumers League states, “Table saw injuries cost the United States approximately $2 billion every year.”
B. “Table saw injuries cost the United States approximately $2 billion every year.”
C. Evaluation
D. This is a well credited source and would likely not get very far if its information was invalid. It has likely checked the statistics, and made an educated estimate about the cost of such injuries.
3. Industry spokespeople
A. in the article “Bosch tools dragged into sawstop-centric lawsuit the claim, “Besides that, his injury would also have been prevented by properly following existing safety procedures that are well documented and clearly were violated in this instance. You can’t cut off your fingers if they don’t get near the blade.” Is made
B. Bosch is saying the if proper safety precautions had been taken, his injury would have also not occurred.
C. Consequential Claim
D. Though this is somewhat of an interesting point, it is important to note that the precaution rules are more of guidelines. Of course no one would willingly disobey safety precautions when in the presence of a high powered, fast moving, electrical blade. However, sometimes situation warrants that a rule is broken, and if you have expertise around the blade then it isn’t difficult to use the blade safely whilst also disobey safety guidelines. If the job must get done, and they have a steady paying job on the line, it is logical to do things in the most efficient way possible, despite some regulations. The saw stop technology is a sure way to prevent injury, which should be used.
4. Consumer Safety Advocates
A. Chairman Inez M. Tenenbaum of the consumer product safety commission made the claim “ Today we are taking a very positive step forward in committing ourselves to looking actively into the best method of preventing these kinds of injuries.”
B. The unanimous vote made by the commission which will hopefully decrease the annual amount of injuries caused by band saws. The specifics of the law are not in depth explored, however they say that the new rules will committing them to be proactive rather than reactive.
C. Evaluation Claim
D. Creating further legislation to ensure the safety of the workers is a step in the right direction. However the claim cannot be determined accurate until new statistics are seen showing an obvious decrease in injury.
5. Injured Plaintiffs
A. In the article “Injured Man Says Bosch Tool Lobbied Feds to Keep Safer Power Saws off the Market” the claim , “flesh detection and braking technology” and “user friendly blade guard(s)” have been available for years. The flesh detection technology stops a blade instantly when it is touched by human flesh. Wec says the technology could have prevented his 2007 injury from a Bosch miter saw.” is made
B. Ryszard Wec is attempting to convince people that this technology has been available for quite some time, and it is irresponsible of Robert Bosch Tool Corp. to not incorporate such technologies in their tools. If this software had been put into the tools, his traumatic injury would not have occurred.
C. Consequential Claim
D. It is true, he suffered the injury on the job and certainly deserves some type of compensation. If Bosch had put the blade stopping technology into the system, it would have been impossible for him to have been injured. This seems somewhat logical, however it is certain that Bosch will try at all costs to keep their money.
6. Personal injury lawyers
A. The web page, http://www.schmidtlaw.com/table-saw-injury-lawyer/makes the claim, “For more than a decade, flesh-sensing safety technology has been available that could prevent almost all table saw injuries. Unfortunately, the manufacturers have refused to adopt it. Now, many people who have been injured are bringing table saw injury lawsuits against table saw manufacturers for failing to include the safety devices that would protect their customers from losing fingers, hands, arms, and suffering unfathomable pain.”
B. The above claim states that sawstopping technology has been around for years, and that some manufacturers are refusing to accept it. These manufacturers are responsible for the pain and suffering inflicted upon individuals who attained injuries because of this.
C. Consequential
D. The claim is reasonable, but also leading. Lawyers are not necessarily giving all of the information necessary to make an unbiased intelligent decision; they simply want more clients and appeal to emotion to attract the attention of potential victims.
7. Government officials
A. “Although the Commission was urged by some to allow the voluntary standards process continue without initiating a rulemaking, the frequency and severity of the blade contact injuries associated with table saws demanded action via the ANPR”
B. The number of injuries, and extreme economic figures of sawblade injuries warranted federal legislation.
C. Consequential
D. The government’s number one priority is that safety and welfare of its people. It makes sense to legislate accordingly.
8. News Reporters
A. “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. Bosch purposefully held off safety regulations to compete better in the open market.
C. Consequential
D. The news reporter skews the beliefs of the public toward the man. Throughout the article, no attempt to defend the position of manufacturers has been present. They may not be colluding with other companies. It makes for a better story when a powerful company is intentionally doing a wrong to the people of the united states.