safer saws- summergirl1999

4. Consumer Safety Advocates

4A. “The inventors of a saw that senses an electrical current in a finger, as opposed to a piece of wood, and stops before serious harm is done, named their company SawStop.”

4B. Inventors invented a saw that senses flesh and stops moving before it brutally harms the person using it.

4C. Type of claim: Factual Claim.

4D. The accuracy of this quote is that the saw is an invention that tries to prevent brutal injuries.

4. Consumer Safety Advocates

4A. “Very serious injuries, including fractures and avulsions, as well as amputations, have changed the lives of tens of thousands of consumers and impacted their families forever.”

4B. Many saws have the effect of harming people.

4C. Type of claim: Evaluation.

4D. Saws are a dangerous tool to use. Many people get harmed from saws. The invention of the SawStop, is a great help to prevent injuries.

3. Government Officials.

3A. “Now federal regulators are considering whether to make Gass’ technology mandatory in the table-saw industry.”

3B. Many people are getting harmed by saws. Government officials might make it mandatory for saws to have SawStop.

3C. Type of claim: Proposal.

3D. The SawStop is a great way to help people prevent getting hurt from saws. The government might make is mandatory for saws to have SawStop.

8. News Reporters (Mother Jones Magazine)


8B. A man named Carlos Osorio got a job as a floor installer. He accidentally got his hand sliced by a saw.

C. Type of claim: Factual.

D. Carlos Osorio had his hand sliced by a saw.

5. Personal Injury Lawyers.


5B. Saws are dangerous tools, and many people have accidents with them. SawStop was a helpful invention.

5C. Type of claim: Opinion.

5D. Richard Sullivan said SawStop was a “game changer”, which is an opinion. Many people have accidents with saws, and many people have lawsuits with the companies.

2 thoughts on “safer saws- summergirl1999”

  1. Summergirl, thank you. You’re the first, and so far the only, student to post this assignment. What I say to you here will be partly for your own benefit, but also, I hope, will benefit your classmates who are trying to decide how to proceed.

    First, I like it. Overall, I approve. You’ve followed the format, made smart choices, and analyzed individual claims.

    Let’s take a slightly closer look. Your first claim comes from Consumer Safety Advocates. You call it a Factual Claim, which I completely understand. The saw, according to their statement, “senses an electrical current in a finger, as opposed to a piece of wood, and stops before serious harm is done.” You and I have seen Steve Gass put his finger into a moving saw blade. The blade stopped and didn’t injure him.

    That sure seems like a factual claim. However, aside from “People get older, not younger,” or “Gravity pulls objects toward the center of the earth,” very few claims are universally accepted as FACT. Very likely, saw manufacturers tried hard to dispute that claim, and (who knows?) they might have been correct to do so.

    Your analysis of the claim should indicate that the motivations of the Consumer Safety Advocates to protect—or at least appear to be protecting—consumers would prejudice them in favor of this apparent slam-dunk innovation.

    In other words, even in cases that appear to be factual, perspective will influence judgment.

    Oddly, your second analysis, that “amputations . . . have changed the lives of consumers,” seems a much better candidate for FACTUAL CLAIM than your first one.

    I don’t mean to be over-critical here, SummerGirl. You’re doing fine work. But I’m always compelled to ask for more. It’s the nature of writing instructors to demand a better rewrite.


Leave a Reply


You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s