To Control or Not to Control - The issue of Guns in America

This is the second to last AP for our humanities class, Rhetoric. In this unit, we had an FE to Marquette Park Memorial, with the purpose of grasping the energy around standing where a major civil rights movement once took place and fully understanding its significance. We also had Ugo Okere come in as an FE guest to speak to us, via zoom, and share his experience from running for alderman in Chicago's 40th ward. After those FEs, we started focusing on news articles, specifically op-eds, and how they are an influential component to the article's editorial. We read a couple of sample op-eds and then were challenged with writing our own. For my op-ed, I decided to choose the topic of gun control because it is a current issue, especially in Chicago, and I feel like we need to move toward a solution. I hope you enjoy my AP!

 

Time Magazine (2011). Gun Statistics. 

In an op-ed for CNN, by Jill Filipovic, in 2019 called, “Fewer guns means fewer killings, and we all know it,” national gun control and gun violence are addressed after they reflect on recent mass shootings. Though a national issue, gun control needs to be resolved by each state individually, and right now, the state in question, is Illinois. As officials evaluate their options, it’s wise for them to study occurrences around the country, and realize the solutions should include gun control compromise and putting an end to NRA influence. 

Specifically, Chicago’s violent crime rate has declined in the past year, but this past summer, according to Newsweek, shootings were at an all-time high. The article shows that there was a 46% increase in reported shootings since July 12, 2019 - July 12,2020, and a 98% increase in those shootings, in just 6 days, compared to 2019. A question that should be asked right now is: What can we do to prevent this amount of shootings, and how can several groups of people be united in this decision? 

The CNN article states, “Most gun owners do not need their guns,” and, while this is agreeable, the determination of who owns a gun, should not be decided based on opinion. To uphold the freedom that this country stands for, the goal is not to take guns away, but to make sure they are obtained legally and safely. Of course, the legality of the process for obtaining a gun will need compromise between opposing groups. 

Many gun law opposers tend to use their 2nd Amendment right to back their defense that stricter gun laws infringe on those rights, saying things like: “We need to protect our rights. Guns are our rights. The second amendment is our right.” While that may be true, both sides of the gun control argument might agree that military-grade firearms should be banned from the general public. Putting firearms in the hands of a mentally ill person is putting fuel on a fire. In an attempt to create compromise, there should be laws supporting individual licensing for low-grade firearms, fingerprint-based background checks, mental health screenings, and required training before even touching a gun. Then, the right to obtain a gun would not be stripped, therefore, not obstructing the 2nd Amendment, but rather making it slightly harder, and, therefore, safer for the public. 

The point is, in many incidents, whether it be school shootings or targeted mass shootings, they prove to be highly preventable. Think about the numerous innocent school children, think about a regular civilian walking down the street, or finally, think about your own family - wouldn't you want to do everything to protect them? A recurring theme is a bullied student or a person with a mental illness, that was shockingly able to obtain a high-grade firearm with little effort. 

The final point mentioned in the CNN op-ed is how unlikely change is to come with the number of government officials so heavily financially incentivized by the NRA. Further explained in this article, the NRA has a history of swaying politicians to not act in the peoples’ best interest in terms of gun control. We need to put an end to corruption, which leads to an endless cycle of this argument, in order for the country to be unified in the issue of gun control. 

Addendum Paragraph: 

The use of rhetorical appeals and devices occur all throughout this op-ed. First, in paragraph 2, the appeal used is logos, and this is because there are statistics presented. Second, in paragraphs 1,2, and 6, the appeal used is ethos because of the cited sources, which creates trust. Lastly, in paragraph 5, the appeal that is used is pathos, because of the part asking you to think about individual people that could be affected by guns. In paragraph 5, the stylistic device present is anaphora, and in paragraph 4, there are two stylistic devices present, a metaphor and epiphora.