1. The constituent that I am quoting is a satisfied customer of the SawStop table saw. Larry Okrend of HANDY Magazine has confidence in the effectiveness of the SawStop. He says, “I believe every commercial job site and institutional shop should be equipped with this type of saw. The greatly reduced risk of injury (and the associated medical costs) more than justifies the saw’s higher price.”
2. Although the quote is fairly straight forward, Larry Okrend is proposing that all shops using table saws should invest in the SawStop table saw, because it is safe and ultimately saves appendages and money in the long run by eliminating medical bills.
3. The type of claim Okrend is making is a Proposal Claim.
4. Obviously the sound of a saw that WILL NOT cut off your fingers is a very enticing one. With that being said, this quote I found comes from a popular magazine for the every day handyman, and does not do an effective job explaining why everyone should buy this saw. Simply saying the saw is safe, while is an attention grabber, does not explain why. The author, Larry Okrend, should have explained how the safety mechanism works, as a way to show its ability. Furthermore, later in the article, I feel Okrend takes away from his claim when talking about a government mandate of the product. He says that government mandate should not occur, because too many other power tools create injury. I agree that a government mandate is unnecessary; however, I disagree with his reasoning. It appears as though he is meaning to say that the number of table saw injuries is negligible to injuries caused by other power tools. If he truly backed the product, it would make sense that he would want every table saw to have this safety device, even though other power tools are still dangerous. With these faults, the initial claim lacks the elements (accuracy, quality, reasonableness, and persuasiveness) needed to make people act.
5. I ultimately agree with the initial proposal claim that this saw should be purchased by those using table saws. Unfortunately, I disagree with how Okrend presents this claim. Explaining the saw’s safety capabilities, and not writing his opinion on a government mandate, would have made this a much better claim.