Rhetorical Analysis On Gun Control

74). This shows an example of pathos, because if anyone who has been involved in a scenario similar to this one, will instantly obtain a wave of grief or sadness. This could also apply to anyone who thinks about any recent massacres. Goldberg, most likely chose this type of “modes of persuasion” due to it’s personal connection with the viewer, which in the end winded up strengthening his article as a whole.

The 2nd amendment is always in dispute. In the article Common Sense Gun Control written by Barack Obama addresses his stance on the topic. The main idea of Barack Obama’s speech was to inform people that the goal is to not take away peoples’ 2nd amendment but to prevent people from buying and killing people with guns. He is trying to persuade them to be for stricter gun control; not taking away the 2nd amendment. He accomplishes this by using different forms of persuasive elements such as using facts, using reasoning, and appealing to the audiences emotion.

Guns are one of the most controversial and debated-upon topics in America today. In the Constitution, Americans are given “the right to bear arms,” and many Americans are proud of and believe strongly in that right. Though, that right has been constantly misused. Homicides by gun are at a higher rate in the United States than any other country in the world, mass shootings are at an all time high (many of which have occurred in the past two years alone), and terrorism has been at an all-time high. So, naturally, it is a topic that needs to be discussed. In the articles Change Your Gun Laws, America (1), author Fareed Zakaria provides the readers with some harrowing statistics on guns and insight over how the U.S. laws on guns need to be managed.

In 2016 there where more deaths due to firearms in American then due to car accidents, according to the National Centers for Disease control. It can happen anywhere, anytime, and anyplace. It can happen to anyone, young old, black and white. It can be an accident, it can be on purpose. Gun deaths happen everywhere, even right here in Iowa. In the editorial featured in the Iowa City Press-Citizen, “Students, Families Deserve Common-Sense Gun Safety Laws,” the author uses logos, pathos, and ethos to convince legislators to pass common sense gun laws. He believes Iowans deserve these laws passed to better protect us.

Using Rhetorical Analysis for gun control Gun control is currently one of the most talked about subjects in America today, but knowing the difference between mass media and scientific studies can help you determine what the truth is and what is made up. Due to its high popularity the media tries to give gun control the most exposure possible. Using rhetorical analysis to determine the truth behind gun control can help you gain a better understanding of it. Finding statistics and facts will help uncover what the mass media isn’t fully telling you. It can help you find what is similar and different between the mass media and scientific studies.

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

“This is about these families, and families all across the country, who are saying, ‘Let’s make it a little harder for our kids to get gunned down” (Barack Obama) Every year there are about 18,000 suicides, 12,000 homicides and 2100 unintentional deaths from guns. Many mentally and untrained individuals get a hold of unnecessary firearms. The outcome of gun control do not decrease violence; the lack of gun laws could be the reason of unnecessary violence (Douglas Murray). The United States (US) should increase the requirements for an individual must need before purchasing a gun.

“Gun violence,” is a word that has been in the media too frequently over the last several years across America. Not a new problem, it is a reoccurring problem on school and college campuses, in shopping malls, in workplaces and even in movie theaters.  Sadly, around 32,300 Americans are killed every year "from firearm injuries in the 24-year period from 1980 to 2006, accounting for 6.6% of years of potential life lost prior to the age of 65” (Morabia, Alfredo).  Federal, state, and local governments have each been involved with the discussion and have implemented stricter gun control laws, yet these restrictions are not stopping the massacres. Many people believe the only way to solve this problem is to ban guns entirely, while others believe guns should not be banned at all. However, as hard as this polarizing issue is, there is a middle ground which gives the opportunity for law abiding citizens to own guns if they so choose to. The middle ground allows the government to restrict magazine size capabilities on all semi-automatic rifles and enforcing stricter background checks, without interfering with the rights of American citizens. While opponents claim it is unsafe for guns to be allowed, the second amendment guarantees citizens the right to bear arms and it should be obeyed in order to ensure the safety and constitutional rights of American citizens.

Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal

The President’s experiences over time and his potent status lend extensive credibility to the speech. He demonstrates a sufficient understanding of the topic’s controversial nature by appealing to those that have suffered from loss due to misuse of guns or gun violence by stating, “In this room right here, there are a lot of stories. There’s a lot of heartache. There’s a lot of resilience, there’s a lot of strength, but there’s also a lot of pain.

America 's love for guns can be traced back to when we were a young country trying to settle the frontier. Guns played a vital role in the daily life of isolated pioneers, whose survival was often dependent on one 's ability to protect oneself, hunt for food, and on occasion used for sport. Guns were a necessary evil. Yet when towns became established and the amenities of a citified society emerged, people continued to keep and use their weapons. Today the issue of whether our government needs to regulate the ownership of guns is widely debated. Any effort to limit gun ownership is often viewed as an infringement of individual rights. It is an emotionally charged topic and both sides take a strong position. Yet, the issue warrants a discussion because of the high mortality and injury rate caused by these weapons. It addresses a fundamental Constitutional right, and the right to protect oneself from harm. This essay addresses the need for sensible gun control legislation that defends the Second Amendment and the right of a citizen to protect himself, while instituting some laws that will safeguard society.

Over the past decade, gun control raised controversy upon the American people and changed the way people foresee firearms. Most of these controversies still continue to be brought up today. The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In January of 2016, Obama stated his gun control plan that would more strictly enforce existing laws including firearms. People deserve the right to have firearms for the ability to protect, defend, and entertain themselves and others. The biggest controversy including firearms is the way people are introduced and informed about them. People are given the thought that “guns kill people,” when in all reality, “people kill people.” Although there are around 10,000 people killed in the United States each year from firearms, guns are not the main conflict in the killings, the people behind the guns are.

However, today, this authoritative nation faces a problem with what once gave people its major authority: guns. This problem of gun violence has been unsolved until now. According to the gun violence archive, in this year, 9,187 gun incidents have occurred. It means that every day, roughly 133 people get injured or die by gun violence in the U.S (“Gun Violence Archive”). There is no safe state from gun violence for people to live in this nation. This gun violence threatens our children, family, friends, peers, and the entire nation. According to President Obama’s

The second amendment to the US Constitution is momentous, as it guarantees the right of each citizen to bear arms. It also states that the right of individuals to bear arms, “shall not be infringed” (United States Constitution, n.d.), which makes the issue of gun regulation difficult. Americans in astronomical numbers exercise their right to own guns, as studies “suggest that about a third of Americans have at least one” gun (Fox, 2015) . The issue of gun violence, however, has become commonplace as “more than 11,000 Americans were killed by gun violence in 2013 alone” (Obama, Common Plance of Gun Violence, 2015). Similar to the Gun Control Act signed in 1968, further gun regulation will not encroach on gun rights, but instead expand on those

Obama opens his statement by revealing the nation has experienced a mass shooting once again. The mood of his national address was set automatically by his earnest tone. Furthermore, Obama expressed his condolences to the families and the community affected by these senseless killings, as well as ridiculing the routine nature of and response to mass shootings in America. He emphasizes that Americans are slowly becoming desensitized to shooting sprees, and eventually move on without taking action, or preventive measures so incidents like the Roseburg shooting can’t happen time and time again. To illustrate, the growing concern, Obama goes on to say, “But as I said just a few months ago, and I said a few months