1A. Injured Plantiff: Ryszard Wec, a man who was injured by a  miter saw (non-saw stop saw) says, “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,” Ryszard Wec claims in Cook County Court.

A2

• The smart stop saws are safe:
• Potential lawsuits prevent Miter Saw and competitors from using the saw stop technology

1C

• The first claim is categorical.
• The second claim is consequential.

1D

• The first claim is stated to reinforce that saw stops are a safe alternative. it is a logical and accurate claim, considering it is far more difficult for saw stops to cause injury
• The second claim is not directly stated, but it is accurate and reasonable. many times in interviews, non saw stop spokespeople listed impending lawsuits as one of the main reasons as to why they are reluctant to employ. This claim shows that the enemy cannot refute the saw stop safety, and also insinuates that these companies care more about their business success then costumer safety.

2A. Government officials: U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission’s chairman, Inez Tenenbaum notes, “Based on the injury data obtained in the 2007 and 2008 CPSC special study, our staff’s injury cost model projected that consumers suffered approximately 67,300 medically treated blade contact injuries annually in 2007 and 2008—with an associated injury cost of $2.36 billion dollars in each of those two years.

2C. Non smart stop saws cause injury and financial loss.

2D. The claim is consequential.

2E.  The claim is strong, accurate, and logical. Instead of just saying that saw stops cause injury and financial loss, Inez supports his claim with data, strengthening his claims. Considering the goal of Inez which is to mandate saw stops in electric table saws, showing how dangerous and costly non stop saws are is a good move.

3A. Manufacturer: As stated by Jayne O’donnell of USA Today, Stephen Gass, saw stop inventor acknowledges his saws with the technology are at the upper end of the price range, but says the price is nothing compared with the cost and lifelong pain of hand injuries.

3B. The expense of a saw stop is irrelevant compared to the injuries they produce

3C. This claim is an evaluative claim.

3D: It is not a completely strong and accurate claim but has it’s points, one of those being that non saw stops cause billions of dollars worth of medical expenses due to injuries a year. However, cost is a very important aspect to keep in mind, considering that implementing saw stops in all saws would be a costly process, and will also raise the prices saws in general. These expenses will fall on the shoulders of customers.

4A. Lawyer: A table saw lawyer of the Schmidt Firm claims “Table saws cause more injuries than any other woodworking tool.”

4B. Table saws when compared to all other power tools, cause the most injury

4C. This type of claim is an evaluative claim.

4D. It is a strong argument logical argument. After some research it became evident that table saws may very well cause the most frequent accidents out of all power tools. With an average of 150 injuries a day, or 60,000 recorded injuries a year, 3000 of which are amputations, the table saw’s danger strongly supports this claim.

5A. Spokesperson: Scott Box, former director of product development at delta machinery now vice president of WMH tool group agrees that the saw stop is great new product idea and truly innovative. However he states one of the reasons why he and other table saw manufactures did not accept Gass’ offer to mass produce the safety feature. ‘”The biggest problem however is unproven technology.”

5B. The saw stop technology is unproven.

5C. This claim is a definition claim.

5D. This is not an accurate claim. It would seem logical, if the saw stop technology had not been around for so long and did not have amazing reviews on many power tool websites that commend it’s safety feature. The technology behind the saw stop safety system works, and works well. So well that it’s been featured on the Discovery Channel and even the Colbert Report.

6A. Consumer Safety Advocates: The National Consumers League claims “It is time for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to act quickly to enact a performance standard that would require table saws to mitigate injuries when blade contact occurs or is about to occur.”

6B.

• The consumer product safety commission should act quickly to enact a performance standard
• Enacting this performance standard would mitigate injuries.

6C.

• The first claim is a proposal claim.
• The second claim is a consequential.

it has already been proven that Saw Stop technology works, and implementing them in saws around the country would decrease table saw related injuries exponentially. This fact supports the consequential and supporting arguments very well. The National Consumers League, unlike saw stop competitors is thinking mostly about consumer safety instead of possible lawsuits that could affect their income. This makes the NCL a reliable source, strengthening the trust they have with consumers

7A. Customer: Chris Baylor, a saw stop customer and woodworker claims “Now, that safety feature has been added to a world-class contractor saw, one loaded with features that rivals any other contractor saw that I’ve ever used. ”

7B.

• The saw stop is a world class saw
• The features rival those used before categorical

7C

• The first claim is a definition claim
• The second claim is an evaluation claim

7D. The saw stops safety method is not a gimmick making it different to the rest. Apparently it is just an added bonus. The saw stop saw does not lack in any way on table saw standards according to many internet reviews. The customer states that it is build well and durable compared to other table saws he used. Considering that this is a fact of opinion, as long as it is an honest review it is a strong claim.

What makes the saw world class is not only that it is incredibly safe, but it does well beyond “standing up to its competitors. Chris Baylor, an experienced woodworker who has operated and owned many table saws claims that the saw stop rivals some of the others that he has used. This strengthens his positive review of the saw stop.

8A. News: Chris Arnold from the NPR broadcast website  states “SawStop, Gass’ little upstart company, has sold tens of thousands of these safer table saws, and lately things have been heating up in Washington.”

8B.

• Saw stop is successful, having sold tens of thousands of units
• Tension over the saw issue is rising among officials.

8C.

• The first is categorical
• The second doesn’t seem to have a specific format other than being an observational claim.

8D.

• The first claim is a strong claim when you consider that Gass never intended to manufacture these machines at first. His machines, although being expensive are actually selling surprisingly well and seem to only be increasing in demand.
• This increase in demand is bringing saw stops attention, and in turn attention to the safety issue of table saws which reveals the importance of the second claim. The second claim seems to be a tool of foreshadowing, insinuating that with saw stop’s rising popularity, eventually either the government or saw stop competitors will have to make a move.