1. Manufacturers: “The SawStop Contractor Saw has over 170 unique setups” is a quantitative and numerical claim. This brings the attention to the customers interested in buying the saw. It persuades them by the many setups the saw has. You would expect a saw to have 5 or 6 setups, but not the SawStop Contractor Saw. It has OVER 170 setups. Not only are they plain setups, they are unique meaning it can be setup in ways you least expect, which is convincing.
2. Interested Customer: “If only this had come along sooner” is a causal claim. The guy who is talking says that if he had known about SawStop, then the prevention of his employees injuries would have been very likely. Since it has the word “if” it means it requires an essential condition before the situation occurs.
3. Industry Website: “our saws have saved thousands of fingers” is a comparative claim. It implies that saws from other companies haven’t saved that many fingers. It makes the consumer not to even think about buying any other saw but the SawStop one because this saw will prevent them from getting their finger chopped off, according to their website.
4. Consumer Safety Advocates: “Each year, more than 67,000 workers and do-it-yourselfers are injured by table saws” is a factual and numerical claim. The Consumer Product Safety Commission states this overwhelming fact about how many workers are injured due to table saws. It states factual information and provides a number to persuade its consumers of the many injuries other table saws have caused that don’t have the SawStop technology.
5. Injured Plaintiffs: “If this safety mechanism had…” is a causal claim. This is a causal claim because it includes the word “if” which means there should have been a precondition to prevent future injuries. It persuades consumers by showing that if SawStop was used instead of the other company’s saw, then their injury could have been prevented.
6. Personal Injury Lawyers: “you should contact our lawyers immediately” is a recommendation claim. These table saw injury lawyers are telling the people who have been injured by a table saw to get in touch with these lawyers so that they can file a lawsuit against the table saw’s company. This claim communicates with their clients in a way that makes them want to use their lawyers right away because injured people are always going to want “justice” for what made them injured in the first place.
7. Government Officials: “Feds might force table-saw makers to adopt radically safer technology” is an evaluative claim and maybe an ethical claim. It can be argued that the table-saw makers will not adopt the safer technology because of certain precautions and money issues. These companies don’t have to have these safer regulations, but they can be forced to have them if they want to still exist. It places a judgement on the other companies saying that their saw technology isn’t safe enough.
8. News Reporters: “Gass’ little upstart company, has sold tens of thousands” is a factual claim. There is no doubt that this company has started out really small. Steve Gass had many haters from the very start, but he proved to those who didn’t believe in him by selling many SawStop inventions. Gass was able to prove to them that his invention was needed in this world is what the reporter is trying to persuade his readers about SawStop.