President Lincoln’s assassination is one of the most famous murders in history. When Marche makes reference to it referring to what John Wilkes Booth said after he shot him made a powerful push for logos “firing immediately after the line that always got the biggest laugh: “Well, I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old gal — you sockdologizing old man-trap!” The fact that Booth himself was an actor might play a role in why he said that but why say those words unless it had some underlying meaning? In addition Marche quotes what Booth wrote in his diary after being captured from the police “After being hunted like a dog through swamps, woods, and last night being chased by gun-boats till I was forced to return wet, cold, and starving, with every man’s hand against me, I am here in despair. And why? For doing what Brutus was honored for.” In this quote it Booth clearly states that in his mind during the shooting he thought he was acting as if he were Brutus in “Julius Cesar”.
He makes a point to inform viewers that the U.N. nation’s gun-grab agreement is unconstitutional, politically suicidal for those who support it, and down-right-idiotic (2012). He really does have a variety of personal clips of political representatives using them as media propaganda to inform the viewers the pros and cons on gun control. He states that when guns were banned in Great Britain, murders increased by 41%. In New Orleans during the hurricane, the crime rate increased from people entering houses. They showed a picture of a map of a location where someone’s daughter would be in the event an emergency broke out.
By comparing the more usefulness a knife has than a gun, sarcasm irradiates when she writes “a general substitution of knives would promote physical fitness” (line 5). The hyperbole used shows that a knife creates physical activity whereas a gun might diffuse the common man from a life of physical fitness; furthermore, the hyperbole shows the passion Ivins has against handgun ownership. When Ivins uses the rhetorical question “how do they know [that owning guns] was the dearest wish of Thomas Jefferson’s heart that the teenage drug dealers should cruise the cities of the nation perforating their fellow citizens with assault riffles,” yet again she expresses her witty style against handgun ownership (16- 18). The exaggeration expressed by Ivins “dearest with of Thomas Jefferson” expresses her passion completely against the ownership of a gun. A tone shift occurs from sarcasm to passionate occurs when Ivins states “a gun is literally the power to kill” (50).
Rhetorical Analysis of Bowling for Columbine Michael Moore’s film Bowling for Columbine examines the use of guns and related violence. Moore’s main argument in the film is that Americans are kept afraid of each other, which is what causes disproportionate gun violence, as compared with other nations. It is especially evident that the film is intended to appeal to an audience of individuals who are against guns or are advocates of gun control and safety. Moore’s appeal aims to take the audience through an exploration of the history of guns and violence, while stirring up the question of when young people commit violent acts, who should be blamed? Bowling for Columbine follows a rhetorical format that applies heavy use of ethos, pathos, and logos to form his message of a “trigger-happy” America.
Bowling for Columbine Michael Moore's film Bowling for Columbine talks about guns control and its related violence, which arouse the attention to the public insecurity, media propaganda and government problems, the main argument of the film is that Americans already lost trust among each other, which cause the over control of guns compare to other nations. there are many impressive scenes in the movie that make people have a deep thought about what is wrong in the U.S. by using various techniques of persuasion such as the use of ethos, pathos and logos. one techniques Moore uses is ethos or the ethical appeal, means convince an audience of the author's credibility or character. it's not hard to see, Moore well-used of interviews from both sides of the guns issue, from not only victims but also the related association to build a full credibility to the audience, the interviews of victims in Columbine slaughter and the president of National Rifle Association could be the best example to show it and Moore try to explain that he is trying to get all the facts start with the bottom of the problems; not just this one support his argument, other example use of ethos would be appeal to celebrities, such as the interviews with rock star Manson and use a clip from a comedian show called "bullet control"; also example is appeal to authority, for instance, Moore interviews the headmaster of a elementary school in Michigan, where a 6 years old child was shoot to death by his
Influenced by the modern day context, Luhrmann adopts the indiscriminate usage of guns in place of sword fighting to depict violence and lack of social order caused by an “ancient grudge”. His construction of a pastiche that combines the Western film genre through the close up of Tybalt’s cowboy boot, with a series of car chase sequences, makes the film more accessible to his audience. As a result, modern viewers are able to comprehend the societal chaos intended in Shakespeare’s play and can understand the enmity that presides over the two families, ultimately allowing them to value the rare occurrence of untainted love that arises between Romeo and Juliet. Additionally, there is no black-and-white depiction of love in Baz Luhrmann’s film, as the influence
Wills’ claims that the federal government's chief law enforcement official might need a refresher course on federal law pertaining to legal immigrants. Some American legislators have taken up the position that prohibiting bilingual ballots would be racist. However, evidence shows that millions of other American citizens feel that prohibiting the bilingual ballot is a step in the right direction. Wills’ begins his article with a political anecdote quoted by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. When he was asked whether he would favor the prohibition of the bilingual ballot, he simply stated, “Of course not.” Wills’ continues in the next section stating that our national identity and our federal laws are being weakened by immigration that is influenced by these bilingual ballots.
They government is emphasizing more on the fully automatic weapons, explosives, armor and other things that only the military should have access to. Some people do not see that the violence taking place in the U.S. has to do with the access to guns and the mental health of the individual. The people who are victims to some of the most recent shootings should speak up and tell others why we need to make obtaining these types of weapons much more difficult. Many individuals choose what they want to see, hear and believe, as in seeing the massacres happen and believing the government is taking their right away and not letting them have what they have the right to have, which is “the right to bear arms.” Most citizens do not see that making further background checks and regulation on the amount of ammunition that is
Connie Bashford Ken Malveaux English Composition I March 18, 2013 Regulation of Guns The debate over gun control has once again become a heated debate. When we hear about a mass shooting, gun control is put in the forefront of the American public. President Obama recently introduced a bill to ban assault weapons, outlaw gun magazines holding more than ten rounds and requiring detailed background checks on any gun purchased. An effective approach in gun control would be to enhance our background checks by mandating states participate in reporting to the FBI individuals convicted of domestic violence or those forcefully admitted to mental health institutions. The Brady Campaign to prevent gun violence outlines that background checks are
I am one that is for stricter gun laws in America, as it is scary to think of future generations where gun ownership is just as common as owning a car. On the Whitehouse website, the first thing that popped up when researching about gun laws and violence with weapons was, “Now is the time to do something about gun violence.” Now to me, this sounds like congress has every intention to do “something” about guns and gun violence, but what? After the Sandy Hook shooting, in Barack Obama’s speech he mentioned that it was an “obligation” for America to do something to prevent events like this from occurring again. The site also says, “Most gun owners are responsible and law abiding.” The key word here is “most”. What about the others who are not responsible and law abiding?