Rhetorical Context

Henry Laks

Dr. Stephanie Brown

English 304

April 7, 2016

                                                      Rhetorical Context: Gun Protest

            The Gun Control advocates can be categorized into many different groups, because there are many different reasons why Gun Control advocates want gun regulation.  Gun Rights advocates generally can be categorized into one group they all seem to think similarly and in agreement.    That’s one reason the gun rights advocates strongly hold their ground, and they have done it effectively.  The question of the Gun Debate is whether or not the gun control legislation has helped to reduce crimes. As America has had population growth it has had an increase of violence, crimes, and an increase in shootings.  Gun rights advocates think that gun control is the reason why there is more crime, and gun control advocates think there should be much stricter gun control to stop the violence in our country.  Recently with in the past decade, well recognized studies have been released showing that gun control is not helping reduce crime.  With these new studies Gun Rights activists are gaining the upper hand in the gun debate.  This paper will point out some significant uses of rhetorical mostly how logos is used by the gun rights group to combat the gun control group’s use of pathos.   

            A rather famous argument is the “more guns cause more crime,” (Cook, James and Kristin A. Goss).  Most criminals don’t purchase guns from a dealer instead they borrow them from friends and family, buy them from a black market dealer, or obtain them through stealing.  Less than 20 % of caught prisoners admit to buying a firearm from a store (Cook, James and Kristin A. Goss).  In America it is estimated that we have in between 270 million and 310 million civilian firearms (Gun Policy.org Civilian guns).  That means we currently have more guns per capita than any other country in the world.  In an environment where guns are easier to come by, a criminal can get one if he wants one.  From that point of view, it would take banning guns and confiscating them altogether to get rid gun crimes, and even if they did somehow obtain all firearms, the weapons used in crime would just change form.  America will never get rid of its guns unless gun rights activists decide to stop protesting.

            Both gun control and gun rights supporters are fueled by pathos, but of the two gun rights supporters use logos more effectively.  For an instance, gun rights activists are emotionally driven by the idea that gun control is Tyranny trying to take away their freedom.  Gun rights give them freedom to protect themselves from enemies.  Gun control advocates see guns in a fearful manner; they either just don’t like guns, or they think they are the reason many crimes occur.  The idea is if there is enough government regulations, guns will not get into the hands of bad guys.        

            Pro-gun control advocates like to point out that “Legally owned guns are frequently stolen and used by criminals” (Gun Control procon.org).  Gun rights groups point out that “Gun control laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns or breaking laws” (Gun control procon.org).  This goes back to the previous argument if a criminal has the determination to break the law he will do it.  If he isn’t supposed to have a gun that will not keep him from getting one.  With our, quantity of firearms there will always be someone willing to sell firearms illegally for the right money.  However, gun control laws do prevent law abiding citizens from buying firearms.  John R. Lott, Jr. PhD writer of  “More Guns Less Crime” says,  

"The problem with such laws is that they take away guns from law-abiding citizens, while would-be criminals ignore them” (Lott, John: gun control misfires).

Assault rifles sound so dangerous don’t they?  Pathos is exactly what the gun control activists have compelling used to push their agenda along.  The name “assault rifle” projects the false image of crime on tactical weapons.  The assault rifle’s similarity in appearance to its prohibited fully automatic big brother the “machinegun” is often a point of confusion.  Despite any confusion, an assault is a very violent physical crime punishable by law.  “So-called "Assault weapons" are more often than not less powerful than other hunting rifles. The term "assault weapon" was conjured up by anti-gun legislators to scare voters into thinking these firearms are something out of a horror movie,” (NSSF).

   A popular gun’s right phrase is “Guns don't kill people, people kill people”.    This rhetoric works quite well with logos, because it emphasizes that guns cannot fire by themselves, just as much as a knife cannot stab someone by itself.  This phrase draws the negative attention from the guns to the people actually committing the violence.  It’s observes the problem that needs the most attention.  This rhetoric could still be stronger if it used the word murder rather than kill in the phrase.  Murdering is a crime but killing is not necessarily against the law.  If a man assaults a woman in a parking lot and she kills him out of self-defense, with a gun, that is categorized as killing and its legal.

Jeffrey Snyder wrote an essay on America and how its filled with cowards.  One strong part of his message is the power and responsibility of protecting yourself.  “Is your life worth protecting? If so, whose responsibility is it to protect it?  If you believe that it is the police’s, not only are you wrong-since courts universally rule that they have no obligation to do so-but you face some difficult moral quandaries.  How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself?” (Snyder, Jeffrey).  Snyder represents a large portion of gun rights activists who own guns for self-defense.  If people aren’t willing to protect themselves who will protect them in a bad situation?  Like Snyder points out police can’t always save the day, but you can take the responsibility given to you as a free American and protect yourself with “the great equalizer”.  The gun, the tool that can even the odds when the enemy has the advantage.