One of the most widely debated topics in America is gun law; it pervades every election, is extensively discussed surrounding mass shootings and unjust murders, and is immensely contentious. Jill Lepore, in her article “Battleground America” (2012), uses history and calamity to guide the reader through the development of the National Rifle Association (N.R.A) since it’s establishment, and how it has affected gun legislation over the years using money and political influence. Amy Shwolter, on the other hand, provides us with a measurable list of campaign tactics employed by the N.R.A that has played a huge role in it’s success with her article, “Five Reasons the N.R.A won the Recent Gun Control Debate that have Nothing to do with Politics” (2013).
…show more content…
Brooks doesn’t outwardly take a stance on either end of the spectrum, but instead uses hyperbolic language to illustrate how utterly useless it is to think in black and white. Through mockery, he stresses the importance of owning a firearm while simultaneously implying that we must stray from the idea that neither stricter nor increasingly lenient gun laws will lower gun related violence in this country. Brooks uses anaphora to add a dramatic and passionate appeal to his article, such as when he accuses Americans of believing that they can evade the startling number of gun related deaths “by avoiding confrontation, by going to work in the morning, by not buying guns” (Brooks). He then goes on to immediately refute that belief, employing the use of his signature irony, stating that two reporters who were shot recently by an ex-coworker “thought they would be safe from shooting if they stayed away from bullets, but they were taking a terrible risk” by working with this man who was let go from the news company. Brooks’ sarcastic tone helps to cushion the harshness of the gun control debate. He attempts to use the most extreme belief systems possible in order to appeal to a wide array of readers, making his audience, without question, the most varied in comparison to Lepore, Showalter, and
Brooks doesn’t outwardly take a stance on either end of the spectrum, but instead uses hyperbolic language to illustrate how utterly useless it is to think in black and white. Through mockery, he stresses the importance of owning a firearm while simultaneously implying that we must stray from the idea that neither stricter nor increasingly lenient gun laws will lower gun related violence in this country. Brooks uses anaphora to add a dramatic and passionate appeal to his article, such as when he accuses Americans of believing that they can evade the startling number of gun related deaths “by avoiding confrontation, by going to work in the morning, by not buying guns” (Brooks). He then goes on to immediately refute that belief, employing the use of his signature irony, stating that two reporters who were shot recently by an ex-coworker “thought they would be safe from shooting if they stayed away from bullets, but they were taking a terrible risk” by working with this man who was let go from the news company. Brooks’ sarcastic tone helps to cushion the harshness of the gun control debate. He attempts to use the most extreme belief systems possible in order to appeal to a wide array of readers, making his audience, without question, the most varied in comparison to Lepore, Showalter, and