USA Gun Controls

1. Provide a suggestion for changing or improving the introduction so that you are “hooked” to keep reading?  

On page 1, you talk about the ease of acquiring a gun. I particularly thought it interesting that at one point people could receive guns via mail order. That may be something that could hook readers.

1. What is the writer’s thesis (write it out here)? If he or she doesn’t have a thesis, suggest one. 

Stricter gun controls are important in reducing gun related deaths prevalence in the US.

1. Does the writer provide convincing reasons to support his or her argument? Highlight or copy here any that don’t and write the reason that they don’t.

I believe the reasons that you provide clearly support your argument.

1. Does the writer provide adequate evidence to persuade readers? Highlight or copy here places that don’t and write the reason that they don’t.

I think cited examples of law abiding citizens, or stand out citizens, (page 5) who have turned to crime or committed gun related crimes would be appropriate. I think this would emphasize the unpredictability of gun possession, even among those that society deems capable.

1. How does the author use the rhetorical appeals of pathos, logos, and ethos? In other words, does the writer persuade you emotionally and logically, and does he or she establish credibility in the writing? 

I believe you use all rhetorical appeals in an effective manner. I believe your most prevalent method is the use of logical arguments. Also, you present numerous statistical findings from numerous sources, and I believe he does this through credible means. You use examples that appeal emotionally, such as the numerous gun related tragedies that have occurred in recent history.

1. Where could the author be clearer with explanation of ideas? 

On page 1, you talk about the number of restricting gun laws in America (~20 thousand). Is that a relatively large number or small number compared to other places?

You also mentioned other countries have lower gun related death than America. What are the rates of gun fatalities in those countries? Since they have stricter laws, have their historical fatality rates remained somewhat constant?

1. Make suggestions for an improvement of the conclusion?

To me, the last sentence sort of introduces a new idea that may fit better near the beginning of the essay. I think this sentence establishes your stance of not trying to overhaul gun control laws, but rather broaden and enhancement them.

1. Highlight or copy here any sentences that are unclear (grammatically) and need to be revised for clarity.

This sentence on page 1 confused me: “Of the fatalities, 18,735, 554 and 11,826 were suicides, accidental, and homicides or from legal related (Congressional Digest, 2013).” Not sure what exactly the numbers represents, or what is legal related.

This sentence on page 2 is a bit long, maybe break it up: “Some measures requiring background checks on buyers and instituting waiting periods before approval to purchase and licensing requirements entrenched by bodies such as the National Rifle Association gained prevalence in the wake of a renewed gun control focus (Meier, 1994).” 

1. What does the author do well? Praise what you think is effective about the essay.

I believe you did a good job of relating statistics to events throughout modern history. You paint a picture of wavering gun controls that seem to correlate with tragic instances. I think he solidly backs up the thesis.

1. For the visual analysis, comment on if the image(s) articulates the writer’s position clearly or not, if it (they) represents the argument meaningfully, and if it is easy to interpret what the image(s) means.  Make suggestions for improvement. 

The images you used certainly depicted your stance. However, I think that your position on the subject is more articulated through the analysis than it is in the essay. From what I can gather from the analysis, your stance is a push for more restrictive guns laws to mitigate criminal use, but allow approved citizens to retain weapons for self-defense. The analysis helps validate the usage of the images, but the message concerning guns for self-defense was something I did not infer from the essay. Suggest maybe briefly explaining that guns are pivotal in self-defense, but it is a separate topic that does not apply to restricting guns to people with shady backgrounds?

1. For the reflective analysis, comment on if the writer relates design choices to the purpose of the image(s) well or not and if he or she presents in-depth discussion of the rhetorical appeals and other relevant rhetorical considerations.  Make suggestions as to how the writer can improve the analysis. 

As stated before, the essay provides numerous logical arguments that use statistics to effectively inform readers of the correlation between gun control and fatalities. The image choice of the reader helps emphasize the emotional appeal by subjecting the reader to two possible outcomes of a frightening event. The design of the image is definitely powerful, and the text displayed suggests that worst and best possible outcomes during an attack. You do a good job of explaining what the image means, and gives examples of how one would feel if this happened to someone they knew.

Your argument should be targeted for a specific audience and developed using 2-3 audience-based reasons. These are reasons that are rooted in your audience’s values and beliefs, reasons that will sound the most convincing for them. You should also identify 2-3 counter-arguments your audience may raise to challenge you and respond to them by either refuting or conceding to them. You will participate in a relevant discussion board to help you with this audience requirement. You should use rhetorical appeals (logos, pathos, and ethos) effectively with your target audience and purpose in mind. Your tone and diction (word choice) should also be appropriate for this audience. Ask yourself how you will appeal to your audience’s intellect and make a logical argument, engage them emotionally and appeal to their values/beliefs, and how you will come across as a credible, trustworthy writer. The following questions need to be answered and this will be about gun controls but pro gun. * Question of fact: What happened to create more stringent gun control and when? Who was involved in setting up the stringent gun controls? * Question of definition: What were the major contributing factors to creating the more stringent gun controls? * Question of interpretation: How do new gun controls differ from the previous gun controls? * Question of consequence: What types of changes will gun owners face in the future to their gun rights? * Question of value: Does the stringent gun controls hurt legal gun owners? Will the stringent gun controls keep guns out of the illegal gun holders hands? * Question of policy: Do the stringent gun controls need to be reviewed to ensure legal gun owners do not lose their right to bear arms?