1. “Wec claims that “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.”
2. What Wec is trying to say is that the technology for safer and more user-friendly equipment has been available for sometime now and that if Bosch and it’s competitors had adopted these safety measures his permanent injury sustained in 2007 could have easily been prevented.
3.The Claim from this constituent is an evaluation claim.
4. The claim set forth by Wec seems fairly accurate to me. Wec sustained an injury using a Bosch miter saw that was not equipped with the latest breakthrough in saw safety even though it was offered to them several years before the accident. Therefore Bosch deserves to take some responsibility due to the fact that they turned down the potentially life saving modifications to their products, causing people like Wec to be severely injured when they could have easily prevented it.