1. Manufacturer – “A low percentage of the 30,000 annual table saw injuries (in the U.S.) are due to contact with the blade”
This would be an evaluation claim. Bosch is saying that very few of the annual table saw injuries actually result from touching the blade. The majority end up resulting from kickback. This is a strong claim because it is saying that the SafeSaw will not prevent the majority of injuries
2. Customers – “Current table saw safety standards have proven ineffective in protecting consumers” — National Consumers League
This is an evaluation claim. They are saying that the current safety measures are not enough. on its own it is not a very persuasive claim, but with more support it becomes a very strong point.
3. Industry spokes people – “Every commercial job site and institutional shop should be equipped with this type of saw” — Larry Okrend
This is a proposal claim. He believes that every shop should have this technology. It is a strong claim, that makes sense. However, it is not convincing enough on its own.
4. Consumer Safety advocates – “The benefits of improving table saw safety clearly outweigh the costs” — National Consumer League
This would be a proposal claim. They are saying that the benefit outweighs the cost. This is not a strong claim because it is not necessarily true that the benefit will outweigh the costs.
5. Injured Plaintiffs – “Wec said his permanent and traumatic injury could have been prevented”
This would be a consequential claim because he is saying his injury is because of the fact he was not using a safe saw. This claim is not very strong on its own. He is not being very specific about why it could have been prevented. However, it would make a good argument with more support.
6. Personal Injury Lawyers – “The manufacturers have refused to adopt it”
This is a evaluation claim because he is trying to say that the SawStop is out there and the manufacturer refuses to use it. This is a weak claim because there is more behind it than the manufacturer saying no. There could be very good reasons why the manufacturer does not want it.
7. Government Officials – “Consumers suffered approximately 67,300 medically treated blade contact injuries annually in 2007 and 2008”
This would be a consequential claim because she is saying that 67,300 people had blade contact injuries because there was not SawStop in place. If there was SawStop in place many of these injuries would not have happened. This is a strong claim because it gives solid numbers and facts, and clearly portrays that SawStop would prevent many of these injuries.
8. News Reporters – “Gass’ saw uses an electrical sensor to detect when the blade touches flesh instead of wood. ”
This is a definitional claim. He is defining how the safe saw works. It is a strong claim that makes sense and provides a persuasive argument.