Safer Saws-Frogs02

  1. Manufacturers: “You accidentally run your hand into the blade it’ll stop it so quickly that you just get a little nick instead of maybe taking some fingers off the blade has a sensor the detects electrical conductivity.” The manufacturer is explaining the feeling of the blade as a little nick and how the blade will stop so quickly. This is considered a casual claim because it is cause and effect. When the finger is put near the saw, the SawStop will stop the cutting of anything. It will stop cutting when in contact with the SawStop. 
  1. News reporters: “This demonstration of a man’s faith in technology is one of the coolest that was an unbelievable thing to do and you’ve proven your point.” This is something that would occur on the news and as a news report because it is “one of the coolest” things ever. This would be something that the whole world needs to know about. This would be an evaluative claim because it is given a judgment of the characteristics of an item or situation. They can evaluate the quality of an item. So whether or not this is considered the coolest thing ever or his faith in technology would be considered evaluative because it can be evaluated by others. 
  1. Industry spokespeople: The industry describes the SawStop and claims that “the various legal and patent issues surrounding the existence of a fairly new safety mechanism that promises (and in a large way follows through on) a system to provide unheard of safety with respect to the use of an electric saw.” This would be considered a factual and evaluative claim. It is factual because it PROMISES a system to provide unheard-of safety with respect to the use of an electric saw but it is also evaluative because it is based on the judgment of unsafe saws and what they can do to stop and fix that problem.
  1. Consumer safety advocates: The actual US consumer product safety commission states that  “the Commission voted unanimously (4-0) to approve publication of the draft notice in the Federal Register that will announce an extension of 60 days for the comment period for an advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to address table saw blade contact injuries (Docket No. CPSC-2011-0074).” This would be considered a factual claim because it is a claim that circumstances or conditions exist beyond doubt. There is no doubt that there is an extended period of 60 days for the comment period for advance notice of proposed rulemaking for performance requirements to address table saw blade contact injuries.
  1. Injured plaintiffs: “Yeah there’s about 60,000 medically treated accidents on table saws every year about 3,000 people take their fingers off about 10 a day.” This explains the injuries that the table saws cause every year and every day. This is a quantitive claim because medical treatment accidents of using table saws are being measured and compared to make SawStop more popular and to convince people to buy it. 
  1. Personal injury lawyers: “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.” This is explaining the difficulties of facing dozens of lawsuits however if they got SawStop, this would not be a problem. This is considered a recommendation claim because it is a recommendation to get SawStop because there would be no lawsuits if people used it.
  2. Government officials: This is the government officials outlook on saws is that “today’s unanimous vote by the Commission to approve an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on the table saw blade contact injuries should send a clear signal to consumers and the industry that the Consumer Product Safety Commission is determined to be part of the solution to reduce the serious number of preventable table saw injuries that occur each year.” This is considered an evaluative claim because it is a unanimous vote on the rulemaking on the table saw. It is a judgment on what to do, whether it is anonymous or not, it is still considered a judgment. 
  3. Customers: The law that was made by the government officials to approve a set of laws is going to affect the way the customers react towards the saw. If there are many laws, fewer would like to buy the product. “I called on the table saw industry to address this hazard through the voluntary standards process and work to prevent the needless injuries that occur each and every day. Despite my public urging for the power tool industry to make progress voluntarily on preventing these injuries, no meaningful revisions to the voluntary standard were made.” This is considered a casual claim because the cause of the saw turned into the voluntary act of trying to prevent injuries. It is a cause and effect.
This entry was posted in frogs, Safer Saws FA21. Bookmark the permalink.

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