Justin Cronin Analysis

In the article: “The story of how millions of Americans discovered the urge to carry weapons—to join, in effect, a self-appointed, well-armed, lightly trained militia—begins not in the Old West but in the nineteen-seventies. For most of American history, gun owners generally frowned on the idea.” Evan Osnos cited a true historical fact that the beginning of people carrying firearms came from militia. Osnos through this incident to make people more aware of the source of civilian firearms, so articles are more detailed and more convincing. By using historical events in the article to create the credibility of the

In “Confessions of a Liberal Gun Owner”, Cronin is claiming that guns are not that bad. The thesis clearly states: “There is a pleasure to be had in exercising one’s rights, learning something new in midlife, and mastering the operation of a complex tool, which is one thing a gun is.” Cronin did a good job of providing

Proponents of more gun control laws believe that the Second Amendment was intended exclusively for militias, that gun restrictions have always existed, and that gun regulations would prevent criminals from possessing firearms. However, Opponents claim that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns, that guns are needed for self-defense, and that gun ownership helps to dissuade crime. Because of this obvious difference, proponents of stricter firearm regulation demand more laws to help prevent mass shooting, and want reform in the area of background checks. Meanwhile, opponents of gun laws often accuse the proponents of manipulating a mass tragedy in order to further strengthen their fight. Gun ownership has been a tradition within the united states since before the country itself was formed.

One weakness in Kristof’s essay, is that he wants guns to be sensibly regulated like cars. But not all the regulations enforced on cars are 100% safe, just like some of the ideas that were proposed for gun safety. Overall, Kristof has a valid argument but some points in his essay could use some better thinking. To sum up, Kristof believes guns should be regulated just like cars have been over the years.

Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. Many believe this, but columnist Nicholas Kristof, author of “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” published in 2014 in the New York Times, disagrees. A rhetorical analysis should consist of: logos, pathos, and ethos. Kristof’s use of logos is strong due to the amount of facts and statistics he offers to his audience, but he fails to strongly use pathos and ethos, due to the lack of these elements Kristof’s argument is weakened.

Another way Justin Cronin is trying to communicate his message is by giving all of the information about the gun owner because he is trying to show that he is just a normal person through his long introduction and he’s political view. I think that Justin Cronin does succeed to communicate in his short story “Confession of a Liberal Gun Owner” because of the ways he portrayed himself as an average person. Also by showing even the most die hard gun owners feel like they have been ashamed by the mass killings and shootings. He also feels like the ways guns are sold today is not perfect, but aggress that banning them is not the answer. This because of his description of the looting and stores wiped clean after the Hurricane he know that there need to be a way for him to defend his

Ethical arguments for gun rights center on the right of security, civic duty, and constitutional right of the people. Those in favor of gun control focus on the human toll, loss of life, and the distortion of what the Second Amendment’s original intent. Hope for change and improvement in this issue is a long shot at best due to each side becoming more entrenched within their belief system. Framing the violence in America as a mental health issue distracts from the fact that we do indeed have a gun problem in America. The guns in of themselves do not present the issue, it is the access, supply, and the operation of these weapons that bring this issue to the forefront every time one watches the news or reads a newspaper.

Regulating guns will not stop all of the killings that are occurring in America, and there are better ways to cease the killings than regulating guns. Body Paragraph One: Topic Sentence: Regulating mental health will be more effective in ceasing killings with guns than regulating guns. In an analysis provided, 22 percent of the perpetrators of 235 mass killing, could be considered mentally ill, many of which were carried out with firearms (Qui). Almost 25% of mass shooting killers are being considered mentally ill

On the issue of gun control, I had always thought along the lines of opposing or supporting the issue but had never thought that there could be another argument different from these two main ones that could be discussed. It was therefore quite refreshing to look at the issue from Novak’s point of view. The fact that he provided evidence to support his claim that law enforcement has worked before in reducing gun violence cases made his article all the more interesting and believable. He shows that the debate on gun control may just have been pointless all this time as the issue that should be discussed is really not whether people should have guns or not but rather how to enforce the law to ensure that perpetrators of gun violence are

Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror”. We as a nation need to think about the dangers that guns convey in this society. We need to think about the safety of our children, and not in the economic gains. I know this is a nation whose one of main incomes comes from the selling of arms, however, is money more important than a human life? Guns should not have the destiny of life in his trigger, no.

In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.

The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes.

PERSUASIVE SPEECH Choong Hwan Park Speech 101 Attention Getter: using the video that shows gun violence for 15 seconds. Thesis: In order to solve gun violence, only government officers such as police, firemen, or soldiers should be able to possess guns and civilians should not be able to own guns for any reason. Credibility: Since I was a little kid, I watched a lot of news that was related to gun violence in the U.S. Now that I am living in the United States, I sometimes feel that I am not safe when I take the subway or walk the streets at night.

Aren’t you tired of hearing on the news that someone has died behind a gun incident. Eighty eight point eight per one-hundred people or about two hundred seventy million guns which is highest total per capita number in the world. Twenty-two percent of Americans own one or more guns thirty percent men and twelve percent women. Gun control needs to be more improved in order to save lives. I think that they should be stricter because people think that laws do not need to be stricter because that means more trouble if someone tries to defend themselves.

Everyday in the United States, ninety families are changed forever; guns claim an average of ninety lives every day in the United States, 33,000 lives in a single year. Gun control has been a debate in the United States for many years and is constantly thrusted back into the public’s attention by horrific shootings. These shootings constantly cause individuals to petition the government to place stricter and stricter regulations of guns. However, these policies cannot be the solution to this problem. To determine a solution that will be both effective and constitutional, we must look at statistics and research that has been conducted to determine the best course of action.