At the beginning of his essay, Gopnik used a passionate and emotional tone to address to his public readers because he wanted to impact as many people as possible, making them to empathize with this dramatic incident and read more to figure out what he has to say, by telling them “to imagine the feelings of the police as they carried the bodies and heard the ringing is heartrending; to imagine the feelings of the parents who were calling dread, desperate hope for sudden answer and the bliss of reassurance, dawning grief is unbearable.” Beside calling the reader’s attention, he wanted to let people aware that united we can make our government to act, when he points out that “in Quebec, after a school shooting took the lives of fourteen women in 1989, the survivors helped begin a gun-control movement that resulted in legislation bringing stronger, though far from sufficient, gun laws to Canada.” The rest of essay he used a persuasive tone to address to the U.S government by stating real facts like, “United States claimed seven on a recent list of the fourteen worst mass shootings in Western democracies since the nineteen-sixties, and just as important, no other country on the list has had a repeated performance as severe as the first.” He also makes comparisons about the others countries reaction and United States inaction after mass shootings, like he mention in one of his example that “in Paris suburb of Nanterre, in 2002, a man killed eight people at a municipal meeting. Gun control became a key issue in the Presidential election that year, and there has been no repeated incident.” Unlike United States that “forty years ago, a man killed fourteen people on a college campus in Austin, Texas; this year, a man killed thirty-two in Blachsburg, Virginia. Not enough was done between those two massacres to make weapons of mass killing harder to obtain.” All those
At the beginning of his essay, Gopnik used a passionate and emotional tone to address to his public readers because he wanted to impact as many people as possible, making them to empathize with this dramatic incident and read more to figure out what he has to say, by telling them “to imagine the feelings of the police as they carried the bodies and heard the ringing is heartrending; to imagine the feelings of the parents who were calling dread, desperate hope for sudden answer and the bliss of reassurance, dawning grief is unbearable.” Beside calling the reader’s attention, he wanted to let people aware that united we can make our government to act, when he points out that “in Quebec, after a school shooting took the lives of fourteen women in 1989, the survivors helped begin a gun-control movement that resulted in legislation bringing stronger, though far from sufficient, gun laws to Canada.” The rest of essay he used a persuasive tone to address to the U.S government by stating real facts like, “United States claimed seven on a recent list of the fourteen worst mass shootings in Western democracies since the nineteen-sixties, and just as important, no other country on the list has had a repeated performance as severe as the first.” He also makes comparisons about the others countries reaction and United States inaction after mass shootings, like he mention in one of his example that “in Paris suburb of Nanterre, in 2002, a man killed eight people at a municipal meeting. Gun control became a key issue in the Presidential election that year, and there has been no repeated incident.” Unlike United States that “forty years ago, a man killed fourteen people on a college campus in Austin, Texas; this year, a man killed thirty-two in Blachsburg, Virginia. Not enough was done between those two massacres to make weapons of mass killing harder to obtain.” All those