It is hard to believe that this time last year, the same discussion about gun control was happening. In light of the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that happened a few weeks ago, it was no surprise that this speech appeared on the TEDTalk popular feed. This topic is obviously controversial and highly debated; but this speech is inspiring, unique, and should be heard by everyone. In 2016, Dan Gross gave a TEDTalk in Vancouver, Canada that was titled "Why gun violence can 't be our new normal". The purpose of his speech was to inform American citizens why we need to vote and advocate for stricter background checks when it comes to buying a gun. Gross uses the rhetorical devices of kairos, and a mixture of logos and pathos to …show more content…
He recalls "Suddenly, my family was thrown into the middle of a nightmare, being told my brother was going to die…". Rightly so, this touches our feelings. It hurts us to see other people suffer, and we all know that gun violence affects many more people in our country than it should. Most of the time people are very separated on the topic of gun control. Either you are a republic, democrat, pro-gun, or anti-gun and this divide in the public is why nothing can ever get accomplished. Most people think that the divide is much larger than what is actually is, according to Gross. His speech never points out one specific side in the argument over gun control, instead, he focuses on what all the citizens of the United States truly believe and what his dreams are to fix the problem. In his first minutes of the speech he …show more content…
Their dream is to cut the number of gun-related deaths in United States in half by the year 2025. This timeline is extremely relevant because it is quickly approaching. The Brady Campaign Pointing out this use of Kairos works to Dr. Gross 's advantage. He knows that America is ready for the change, and all of the citizens of America know it too. He points out that millions of people are saying "enough" in response to the daily gun violence and mass shootings by people who should not have the means of acquiring a gun. The Brady Campaign is working hard to enforce background checks and stop the corruption of our government which accepts money from the corporate gun lobby. I think identifying this common ground is important. He is not advocating for the removal of everyone 's guns; instead he is proposing that detailed background checks could help stop a bad situation before it starts and almost all gun owners would agree with his proposal. The timing of his speech is impeccable. If written any earlier it may go unnoticed or ignored, but in a time where this is one of our most pressing issues among politics and everyday conversation, Brady struck gold on his timing and made a valid point to consider. The audience is really responding to his rhetoric throughout the speech, sometimes clapping before he can even finish his
"Time For Victims To Be The Change That We Need To See". The two articles “Famous Speeches: ‘We call BS,’ Emma Gonzalez's speech to gun advocates” by Emma Gonzalez and “Issue Overview: Guns in America” by Bloomberg have many similarities and dissimilarities in their perspectives. These two articles perspectives are alike and unalike in several different ways. There are many things that are alike about these two articles, one thing is that they both talk about gun laws and their effects on people.
In his article, “Gun Control Kills,” Jack Hunter tackles the controversial topic of gun control. Hunter makes the point that gun control is in fact bad for the United States and that banning guns would actually lead to more deaths per year, the opposite of the goal for those that support gun control. Hunter does this using a number of argumentative techniques in order to convince his readers that gun control is wrong. Many of the techniques that Hunter uses are effective in attempting to make people believe in his cause, however some of the points that he makes are also ineffective and somewhat discredit his point. There are times in the article in which Hunter shows his own bias towards the subject, and tries to service the article towards
Paul Barrett wrote about a discussion whether or not we should amend the second amendment. He used the words from a retired supreme court justice Paul Stevens to help justify the points on why we should amend it. The main points that came out are that the 2nd amendment was made for militias or the military to bear arms and didn’t let the federal government regulate weapons but only left it to the state governments. The right to bear arms is essentially not an unlimited one. As the country grows older the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changes as well.
Liberals don’t usually own guns, but he does and he wants to tell what it is like to own a gun as a liberal and with the point of view that a liberal has. He is basically “coming out of the
To understand the extent of how common mass shooting and gun violence is in our nation and why it feels like the nations is numb to gun violence, president Obama in his last national, which he was addressing the gun violence tragedy at Umpqua Community College, Roseburg, Oregon, said, “The reporting is routine. My response here at this podium ends up being routine. The conversation in the aftermath of it. We've become numb to this.” If the president expressed his feeling towards the frequency of gun violence tragedy and how predictable giving a national eulogy was, then it would be safe for me to assume that gun violence is a national issue that needs to be addressed and since nothing has changed so far, it is evident that the presidents speech is not as impactful towards law makers and the
“Our Blind Spot about Guns” Rhetorical Analysis Essay American Journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his essay, “Our Blind Spot about Guns”, addresses that if only guns were regulated and controlled like cars, there would be less fatalities. Kristof’s purpose is to emphasize how much safer cars are now than in the past, while guns do not have the same precautions. He constructs a compelling tone in order to convince the reader that the government should take more control on the safety of guns and who purchases them. Kristof builds credibility by successfully exerting emotional appeals on the audience, citing plausible statistics, and discussing what could possibly be done to prevent gun fatalities. Kristof begins his essay by discussing how automobile
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.
The PBS program “Gunned Down: The power of the NRA” highlighted how the NRA continues it’s stranglehold on the government and gun policies. It is quite clear that gun control advocates attempt to play off the emotion of citizens whereas pro gun advocates fear the public into believing the government is attempting to steal their guns and liberties. The side of the gun control advocates can be seen through the likes of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Conversely, the pro gun effort is shown through Ringleader Wayne LaPierre who continues to save the NRA and second amendment rights. President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were both portrayed as compassionate, caring individuals that were fighting for a life or
On, February 14, 2018, a mass school shooting in Florida got the nation’s attention, however, gun violence has always been an issue, and it is only getting worse. Now people are saying there needs to be something done, and there are many that agree. Starting off there should be stricter gun laws, because in today’s world it is too easy to get handguns and assault rifles. With, the capabilities a firearm holds, such as taking people’s lives there must be stricter restrictions that could help cut down the gun violence and save lives. Increasing the age of purchasing a firearm would be one step.
I believe during my speech my audience was in odd and in disbelieve as well as surprised due to the fact that, I myself was a victim to gun violence and the general realization of the impact that gun violence has in the U.S. as well as the medical cost and the amount of gun circulating the country. I definitely also believe that my audience felt very informed after hearing my speech and now have a better understanding of guns and their effects in the
Gun Control Debate Jake Novak, in an article for CNBC titled, “Gun control isn’t the answer. We already know how to stop the violence,” gives his opinion regarding the controversial issue of gun control. Novak argues that gun control is not the answer to rising gun violence but that proper enforcement of the law would go a long way in reducing the cases of gun violence in America. He states, “We actually solved the issue of rising gun violence in America in the mid-1990’s and again in the early 2000’s by doing something radical. We enforced the law” (Novak 28).
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.
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.
He proposed to ban military-style assault weapons, universal background checks and harsher penalties for gun traffickers. Yet the number of firearm incidents in the US has not changed. All due to the fact that the laws regarding guns in the US are not strict enough. This proposal was announced in the aftermath of the shooting in Sandy Hook Elementary School which occurred on December 14, 2012 where twenty children and seven women lost their lives. This was one of the most deadly and tragic mass murder shooting which has ever occurred in any school in the US.