Rhetorical Analysis Of End The Gun Epidemic In America

Rhetorical Analysis Essay

Gun control in America has always been an issue. With problems coming up such as school shootings, teens getting their hands on their parents’ guns, and kids accidentally shooting themselves, people want laws set forward to limit the use of guns. In “End the Gun Epidemic in America,” The Editorial Board talks about how they want stricter gun laws because no one really needs to own a gun. The Editorial Board believes there should be stricter gun laws in the United States because they think it’s too easy to get your hand on a gun and possibly injure someone. Their use of pathos throughout the article makes the audience want there to be stricter gun laws, but the use of logos and ethos is weak. The argument in “End …show more content…
These people feel the only way they can feel safe is to buy a gun, which is intended to hurt people. “It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.” (End the Gun Epidemic in America). Here is a sign of pathos in the article. The Editorial Board is trying to make you aware of the dangers of buying and using a gun. That when you buy a gun, you’re either going to be hurting yourself or another person. The Board also makes note of how officials try to distract the public with “arguments about the word terrorism,” (End the Gun Epidemic in America), but aren’t calling the shooting sprees and other gun shootings terrorism. Pathos was used well here because terrorism is always going to be an emotional and frightening topic to think or talk about. Especially since it’s happening in your own country but no one wants to shed light to the idea that mass shootings are related to terrorism. Pathos was effective because the argument to stricter gun laws provoked fear and emotions by shedding light on the real reason to buy a …show more content…
The United Kingdom also has strict gun laws and has the lowest crime rate. “They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France England, and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did. But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not.” (End the Gun Epidemic in America). The argument they had used to retaliate at those facts were weak. By saying, “... at least those countries are trying,” means they’re not really trying hard enough. E specially if killers are getting their hands on guns. Having gun control in those countries and people are still getting guns makes you want to fear for your life. The use of logos was weak here because if it had failed in those countries, what makes them think gun control laws will be obeyed here in the United States. Their facts show that even though those countries in Europe had stricter gun laws, determined killers still managed to get their hands on weapons. These facts show gun control in America would end up the same as it did in France, England, and Norway, ineffective. The use of logos was ineffective because it was proven killers still had access to weapons in countries with strict gun laws. Making it show the reader of the article would not have the same viewpoint as The Editorial