Kristof is sarcastically and quietly confident in his belief that America is the second most armed country in the World, with the first being terrorism-plagued Yemen in the midst of a “minor civil war”. In this anti-weaponry advisory, readers are informed of gun fatality statistics, the self-imposed dangers of owning a firearm and stand witness to Kristof’s somewhat comical discrediting of many exaggerated pro-gun claims. He recruits academic authority, Harvard professor and author David Hemenway, regarding his perspective of the prevalence and effects of the soaring numbers of gun ownerships in society vs popular opinion regarding personal safety afforded by said ownerships. Kristof neatly concludes his argument with a one handed clap to Congress’ …show more content…
Upon reading and analyzing Kristof’s arguments and conclusions on this issue, the reader can come to respect his perspective as he satisfies the first quality of a responsible reasoner. The first of four criteria “Responsible Reasoning is Well Informed” is outlined as stating; “To argue responsibly, a person must support his or her opinions with reliable and current evidence.” (Crusius and Channell 9). Through the use of authority via the voice of David Hemenway, author and Harvard professor, Kristof presents the reader with Hemenway’s stance that, “the gun debate [is] a public health challenge, [making] clear that a gun in the home makes you much more likely to be …show more content…
As detailed by Crusius and Channell;
“Part of being well-informed means knowing something about the history of an argument. An argument’s history tells us how and why people’s viewpoints formed and gives us a context for our own views. Knowing context means knowing the current range of opinion on an issue. We have to know what other people are saying to make our own reasoning relevant.” (10)
Being “an Oregon farm boy who was given a .22 rifle for my 12th birthday” (Kristof), it’s safe to say that Kristof is acquainted with guns and in having this first-hand knowledge, has developed a valid mechanical perspective on the subject. He gathers information from authorities as well as International procedures in the realm of gun control to form a well-rounded opinion. His intertwining of others’ viewpoints displays an attempt to rationalize his own opinion and assimilate into the cultural context of this sensitive social discussion. Directly referring to Tucson (the most recent mass shooting at that time), he validates himself in the currency of the issue. His arguments are not fanatical or grandiose, aggressive or offensive, but subtle and confident, inviting, open for discussion and within the realm and climate of this unfortunate public
In “Reading, Reasoning, and Writing”, James Crosswhite teaches the reader to reason in order to formulate a convincing argument. After reading a piece, the first step is to think of a controversial question. Finding a question is hard, so Crosswhite suggests that you ask five questions: Who? What? When? Where? How? It’s also important to take note of things that you don’t understand or seems contradictory. He also suggests that the best questions can be the ones that are left unsaid. There are six types of stasis questions that make for an enthymeme including questions of fact, questions of definition, questions of interpretation, questions of value, questions of cause and effect, and questions of policy. After finding a question, you need
In his article “Gun debate? What gun debate?” Mark O 'Mara discuses the controversial issue of gun control. O’Mara takes the tragic school shooting in Oregon as an opportunity to voice his opinion on the debate of guns. He clearly states his position and explains that gun violence has increased enormously because of the lack of command by the government and support from the public to speak out against it. O’Mara claims the issue is no longer a debate because it is so evident that guns have become a significant problem in this country and therefore actions must be taken to control and govern gun laws. In his article he attempts to raise awareness to the severity of the issue and tries to persuade his readers to take a stance against gun violence
Guns have possessed the spotlight of almost every news station. From the latest tragedy of a shooting killing innocent men, women and children to the arguments centering around if our gun laws possess strict enough qualities to keep our country safe. Charles C. W. Cooke, the author of “Gun-Control Dishonesty”, spreads his conservative view on the topic by ripping away any hope for a brighter day. Cooke’s main idea states that if nothing has happened to make gun law more strict even after the lives of innocent children were mercilessly ripped away from their young bodies than nothing should or could ever change. On the other hand, Adam Gopnik wrote his article, “Shooting”, uses a more liberal approach and inspires his audience to act upon the much needed change in our society
"Battleground America," written by Jill Lepore, provides a strong history of guns and the way they have changed in the eyes of the American through the years. She proves her point with strong evidence throughout her article, sprinkling it with opinion and argument that is strongly supported. She presents her argument to convince her audience that the open availability of guns allows citizens to undeservingly purchase them by displaying the credibility in her sources, using negative connotations in her speech, and the strength and objectivity only a strong logos appeal can provide.
In this article the author Fawn Johnson gives us a brief look of what goes on during the great gun control debate. This article gives us a look at the gun control proposals, from American’s not bein...
He demonstrates when guns are found in every household, gun control can do little to restrict access to guns from potential criminals. (McMahan, 3) So, McMahan’s main premises comes into play, either everyone has guns, including criminals, or nobody has guns. “Gun advocates prefer for both rather than neither to have them” McMahan remarks, but ultimately that will just leave the country open to more violence and tragedies. “As more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, personal security becomes a matter of self help, and the unarmed have an incentive to get guns.” (McMahan, 2) Now everyone is armed, and everyone has the ability to kill anyone in an instant, making everyone less secure. Just as all the states would be safer if nobody were to possess the nuclear weapons, our country would be safer if guns were banned from private individuals and criminals.
Aroung the time of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the controversial and widely argued issue of gun control sparked and set fire across America. In the past decade however, it has become one of the hottest topics in the nation. Due to many recent shootings, including the well known Sandy Hook Elementary school, Columbine High School, Aurora movie theater, and Virginia Tech, together totaling 87 deaths, many people are beginning to push for nationwide gun control. An article published in the Chicago Tribune by Illinois State Senator Jacqueline Collins, entitled “Gun Control is Long Overdue” voiced the opinion that in order for America to remain the land of the free, we must take action in the form of stricter gun laws. On the contrary, Kathleen Parker, a member of the Washington Post Writers Group whose articles have appeared in the Weekly Standard, Time, Town & Country, Cosmopolitan, and Fortune Small Business, gives a different opinion on the subject. Her article in The Oregonian “Gun Control Conversation Keeps Repeating” urges Americans to look at the cultural factors that create ...
A man by the name of Sean Faircloth, who is an author, an attorney, and a five-term state legislator from Maine; went against Sam Harris to give his own beliefs on the ordeal. Faircloth also wrote an article for The Week in response to Harris titled, “Why more guns won’t make us safer” in which he claims that Harris neglected the two largest problems involving gun-violence. Faircloth believes that Harris failed to acknowledge the substantial issue of gun-related domestic violence against women, and the success of gun-control legislation in foreign countries. Utilizing statistics, real world examples, and his own logic; Faircloth goes in depth with his core arguments. He wrote his article to dissuade the readers of Sam Harris’s article that “Why I own guns” lacks
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
An estimated 30,000 people are killed each year by guns in the United States alone according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Gun Control, Funk & Wagnall’s). Though there have been some restrictions and laws placed, both the conservative and liberal sides are not pleased with either the lack of action or the fact that there has been too much action that has taken place. “About 38% of U.S. households and 26% of individuals owned at least one gun, with about half of the individuals having 4 or more guns, according to a 2004 survey by the Harvard School of Public Health (Gun Control, Funk & Wagnall’s).” Both sides turn to the one document centered on the argument for evidence to support their side: the Second Amendment.
In his article “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” Nicholas Kristof argues for making guns safer for the people who use them by bringing up the comparison of guns to cars; “Cars don’t kill people. People kill people,” (261). Kristof’s purpose is to address the fact that guns are not as safe as they should be and are the cause of thousands of deaths each year. Although his ideas for increasing gun safety are interesting, there is a shortcoming in the comparisons he used. In order to make a stronger argument, one must use literary devices. In this case, Kristof used ethos, pathos, logos, and additional rhetorical devices.
Gun control is a controversial topic in today’s society. Some people believe that guns should get taken away from citizens completely, while others say there should just be tighter laws. Nicholas Kristof has been a journalist and writer since 2001, and a winner of two Pulitzer Prizes. In 2017, Kristof wrote the article “How to Reduce Shootings”. Kristof have three main points, the first point was that stricter gun laws lowered homicide rates. The second point was how there is a lack of research on guns. The last point he made was the mass shootings are not the main cause of loss of life. The article has been held up by liberals because the article argues that fewer guns will cause fewer deaths, however, the article has a number of critics who argue that the article doesn’t focus on the safety of Americans. In the article “How to Reduce Shootings”,
Crusius, Timothy W., and Carolyn E. Channell. The Aims of Argument: A Text and Reader. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.
In a world full of hatred and hostility, gun control may seem like an easy fix to the ongoing issue of mass shootings and murders in the United States, but in reality placing restrictions on guns will not eliminate the problem entirely. Nicholas Kristof argues about this issue in his article, “A New Way to Tackle Gun Deaths,” posted in 2015 in the New York Times. Kristof claims that instead of banning guns entirely we should learn how to coexist with them. He argues that for change to occur throughout the world, it would be nearly impossible to rid the world of guns and that evil will always remain, but serious government threats could potentially eliminate this problem. Kristof builds his credibility by including statistics, incorporating
The conversation of gun control and gun regulation has been a great debate over the decades. NRA Executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, in his speech on Newtown Shooting that occurred on December 21st, 2012, addresses the topic of gun control and argues that guns are not the cause of gun violence. LaPierre's project is to instead of gun control and decreasing the numbers of guns, increase the numbers of guns to solve the problem of gun violence. On the other side of debate, an American journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his journal, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" argues that guns are the cause of gun violence, but they should not be banned. Kristof's project is to regulate guns with many cautions. While these two authors have different arguments and projects, they use similar strategies to advance their claims. This paper will focus on the way each author strategically uses compare and contrast, cause and effect, and problem-solution to advance their claims and how effective these strategies are used.