1. Manufacturers- Steve Gass stated, “The system can tell the difference between your finger and the wood.” This claim is a proposal claim. I find this very persuasive because it amazes me that technology has become so advanced that it can lessen your chance of getting injured from a saw.
2. Customers- Larry Okrend stated “I think mandating SawStop’s technology across the board is unnecessary and counterproductive.” This is an evaluation claim. I don’t think Okrend’s claim is persuasive because he does give solid proof as to why SawStop’s technology is “unnecessary and counterproductive.”
3.Industry Spokespeople- Power Tool Industry (PTI) says “The requirement would be too costly.” This is a consequential claim. I think PTI is not thinking about how the requirements could potentially save industry companies from being sued for not having the newest safety technology.
4. Consumer Safety Advocates- The National Consumers League claims “Table saw injuries cost the United States approximately $2 billion every year” This is a definitional claim. I believe the claim is weak by itself but a little evidence or proof it’d be good to help prove why StopSaw’s technology should be adopted into the tooling industry.
5. Injured Plaintiffs-Ryszard Wec claims “By agreeing not [to] employ such safer alternatives, defendant and its competitors attempted to assure that those alternatives would not become ‘state of the art,’ thereby attempting to insulate themselves from liability for placing a defective product on the market.” This is an evaluation claim. I believe this claim is true because saw companies should be held reliable for not taking advantage of the not so new safety technology.
6. Personal Injury Lawyers- The Schmidt Firm said “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.” This is a consequential claim. Manufacturers are being sued for not taking advantage of the technology.
7. Government Officials- Chairman Inez M. Tenenbaum U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissions said “…the injury statistics and disturbing natures of these life-altering, yet preventable injuries were unacceptable. They are even more unacceptable now” This is a evaluation claim. I believe government officials were so disturbed by the statistics because there is a solution to lower the statistics and the tooling industry aren’t taking that opportunity
8.News Reporters-NPR said “Let consumers decide.” This is a proposal claim. NPR’s proposal depending on concumers decision would help or not help regulate the safety technology. Assuming that the greater the demand the greater it becomes regulated.