How Gun Control Kills Rhetorical Analysis

610 Words3 Pages

Jack Hunter’s “How Gun Control Kills” takes a more logical stance on the current issue of gun control. However, Hunter starts off using pathos, an appeal to emotion, and ethos, appealing to ethics. “Is there an evil worse than killing children?” Hunter asks in the opening paragraph. “Is there anything more heart-wrenching than the feeling of absolute helplessness in our inability to protect them?” The first question tests the reader’s ethics by making them think about how serious a child’s death is to them, and if they could think of anything worse. The second question uses pathos to invoke desperation and sorrow for those who have experienced a situation where they were helpless and could not protect someone, specifically an innocent child. Hunter’s word choice, such as “heart-wrenching” and “absolute helplessness” help to convey this feeling. He successfully captures the reader’s attention by beginning the article in this way. …show more content…

The article states, “Gun control deters violent crime as well as the death penalty” (Hunter). The author uses logos here to point out that gun control is an ineffective as the death penalty when it comes to preventing violence. This supports his argument against strict gun control because, according to Hunter, many Liberals claim to oppose the death penalty because it does little to prevent future crime, yet Liberals are for strict gun control. However, strict gun control isn’t going to prevent criminals from committing crimes, because criminals do not follow the law

Open Document