1. Manufacturers

“Within a few thousandths of a second, the blade slammed to a stop.” This quote demonstrates the manufacturer showing how long it took for the blade to come to a complete stop after coming in contact with the hot dog. Due to the claim being based off of definitive facts and measurements, this is a quantitative claim. This claim was to educate Chris Arnold on Weekend Edition Saturday on the safety of his invention, with aim to gather attention around the product to increase its popularity.

2. News Reporters

“That sounded like a good kind of saw to me”. This quote demonstrates a recommendation claim. This is because the author of the article is telling his audience that he believes the saw is a good option to have. This claim that was made makes it obvious that he is recommending the idea of a safer saw to his listeners.

3. Industry Spokespeople

A reporter in the industry reported that “between the 8% fee and the additional hardware costs, your typical $400 jobsite saw would potentially rise in cost to around $625.” This quote demonstrates the extremely high costs that is being charged by Steve Gass. This claim is a quantitative claim, as it is again based off of facts. This quote states that for a company to invest in the safer saws provided by Steve Gass, it would cost them about $225 per saw to do so.

4. Consumer Safety Advocates

The Schmidt Firm, a national law firm, stated that “Every year, there are over 40,000 table saw injuries, resulting in more than 4,000 amputations.” This is a causal claim, as it was described that due to the saws that do not have the safety precautions such as the flesh-sensitive technology that is readily available for over a decade, there are over 40,000 injuries annually from them, which result in over 4000 amputations.

5. Injured Plaintiffs

“The bringer of the suit is essentially claiming that his permanent and “traumatic injury” could have been prevented if Bosch and its competitors had not rejected and fought against the safety technology.” This quote is described how a man who was injured from a miter saw is explaining how his injury could have not occurred if Bosch and its competitors weren’t negligent and stubborn to welcoming the safety technology into their workplaces. Due to the nature of the claim, which blames the actions of the companies for the effect of the injury on the man, this claim can be classified as a causal claim.

6. Personal Injury Lawyers

Yet again, the Schmidt Firm, a national law firm, is currently accepting clients for lawsuits on table saw induced injury cases in the United States. One of the big bolded titles on the page is named “Man Awarded $1.5 Million in Table Saw Injury”. This is a factual claim, as that man in the paragraph below was actually rewarded $1.5 Million from the lawsuit. This bolded title will attract injured people to engage in a lawsuit with the Schmidt Firm because it makes them feel like they’d get the same or similar result.

7. Government Officials

Inez M. Tenenbaum, the chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, put out a statement that read that he wanted “to emphasize that the injuries resulting from the use of table saws are, in many cases, particularly gruesome”. This statement classifies as a categorical claim, as he describes the injures as gruesome. Putting this statement out will benefit him as it supports his stance on the issue and has potential to rally support behind him.

8. Customers

The Schmidt Firm, a national law firm, made it clear that “if you or somebody you know was injured, you should contact our lawyers immediately for a free case consultation.” This can be classified as a recommendation or proposal claim, as they used the key word “should” to persuade the audience to adopt a course of action if they fit the requirements. This claim would not only benefit the injured plaintiffs, but also the Schmidt Firm for more potential business clients.