Manufacturer of SawStop
“…our saws have saved thousands of fingers.” The manufacturer obviously claims good things about their saws, and they even have a testimonial page displaying some of the fingers that they have saved. They believe in the safety of their product and believe that their product will continue to save even more fingers than the thousands they already have.
“This is the Cadillac of contractor saws.” On top of the safety, many consumers also praise the quality of the saws. The saws are built in such a way that safety, quality, and looks are all built into one, much like- as the customer claims- a Cadillac. Their attention to detail and safety make the SawStop like a luxury saw.
Industry Spokespeople/ Opposing Manufacturers
“…they would face liability for accidents with conventional saws.” Manufacturers who do not currently use the SawStop technology could be sued by customers who face injuries. Their customers could make claims of safety negligence by the producers of saws, since the technology to have prevented their injury is out there and readily available.
Consumer Safety Advocates
“…imagine the new defenses they’ll have in injury litigation” With other manufacturers opposing the safety features of the SawStop, customers that face physical injuries could use this decline of safety to their advantage. They could more easily sue and more likely than not, they could win. The claim states that there is a whole arsenal now available to customers that do face physical injury.
“It sure is going to be nice having my finger.” The customer claims that without the SawStop technology and the attention to detail and safety, they would not have their finger and in turn it would not be very nice for them. The saw is what was able to save his finger from amputation, acting as a great display and example of real life people who are saved by this technology, and the impact that normalizing this could have.
Personal Injury Lawyers
“Table saws cause more injuries than any other woodworking tool.” Since table saws are the number one cause of injury, it just makes sense that it would be a focal point for increasing safety features. Coming from a lawyer, this claim has to duality of also claiming that with the availability of features that could increase safety, victims who choose to employ them could face an almost guaranteed win.