California College San Diego Rise of Insecurity Cases in The United States Paper You will write a four-five page (roughly 1,200-1500 word), rhetorical anal

California College San Diego Rise of Insecurity Cases in The United States Paper You will write a four-five page (roughly 1,200-1500 word), rhetorical analysis the argumentative piece of writing that is listed down below and attached. Keep in mind, your goal is to analyze the ways in which the writers present their arguments and not to argue for or against an issue, or disagree or agree with any of these authors. Ultimately, you will be deciding whether the writer’s argument is effective based on specific, rhetorical elements, that we will be reading about and discussing in class.

The argumentative essay is and it is attached below.

“What Critics Don’t Understand About Gun Culture”
Here is a Helpful Overview of What a Successful Argument Entails An Effective Argument:
1.) deals with an issue that is debatable and open to different interpretations
2.) is not based solely on strong, “knee jerk” reactions or beliefs, unsubstantiated by evidence
3.) stands up to a critical reading (avoids logical fallacies)
4.) takes a position and makes a clear claim about the topic
5.) supports that position with detailed and specific evidence (such as reasons, facts, examples, descriptions, and stories)
6.) establishes common ground with listeners, viewers or readers and avoids confrontation.
7.) takes opposing views into account and either refutes them or shows why they may be unimportant or irrelevant
8.) incorporates the use of the three persuasive appeals: logos, pathos, and ethos
9.) presents reasons in a logical order.
10.) is engaged and vital, a reflection of the creator’s thinking rather than just a marshaling of others’ opinions. Some Advice on Writing a Successful Rhetorical Analysis:
In your essay, you will not be writing about every rhetorical element, but mainly focusing on the one’s that are relevant to the specific argument. You might use the questions below as a guide to your essay (though I don’t suggest that you organize based on the order of the questions). please make it as an essay rather than answering questions.
In addition to using support from the reading you are analyzing, you should also integrate evidence from “Backpacks vs. Briefcases…” and “Logical Fallacies,” if relevant. For instance, if you are analyzing ethos, it would be helpful to use “Backpacks…” to help define this concept. There will also be additional resources on Canvas to help you with this paper. Questions to Help you Develop Your Essay:
What is the author’s main claim? What is the main point the writer is trying to make? Is there a clearly stated thesis statement, or is it merely implied?
What are the exigence and constraints of the essay?
What support does the writer offer for the claim? What REASONS are given to support the claim, and what EVIDENCE backs up those reasons? Are the reasons plausible and sufficient?
How evenhandedly does the writer present the issues? Are the arguments appropriately qualified? Is there any mention of COUNTERARGUMENTS—and if so, how does the writer deal with them?
What authorities or other sources of information are cited? How credible and current are they?
How does the writer address you as the reader? Does the writer assume that you know something about what’s being discussed? Does his or her language include you, or not?
Be sure to check for FALLACIES, arguments that rely on faulty reasoning.
Who is the intended or unintended audience based on the context, formality, and diction (word choices, language, style) and tone?
What types of persuasive appeals (logos, pathos, ethos) does the writer use to convince the reader?

Of course, these questions do not cover everything, but they are certainly a good starting point.

Your Final Grade Will be Based on How Well Your Essay:

• Addresses the assignment (analyzes the essay from a rhetorical perspective)
• Contains a thesis statement that makes an overall claim about the argument and the rhetorical elements you are analyzing in order to come to that conclusion
• Invites the reader in with an engaging introduction (which not only provides biographical info. about the author but possibly a summary of the essay you’re analyzing) and closes with a satisfying conclusion
• Contains cohesive, focused, body paragraphs with topic sentences that relate back to your thesis

• Contains a logical structure and organization that includes transitional expression throughout the paper
• Maintains audience awareness (avoids overusing “I” and stays on topic)
• Incorporates evidence (direct quotes, paraphrases, and summary) from the argument you are analyzing and at least one other source: “Backpacks vs. Briefcases…,” “Logical Fallacies, etc.”

• Is nearly free of punctuation, mechanical, and spelling errors
• Is four-five pages typed, double-spaced and formatted in MLA style

Last notes: please do not forget to add a thesis statement that shows where you are heading at with the body paragraphs. And do not summarize or agree or disagree, analyze the essay and show the rhetorical appeals used from ethos paths or legos to the facts he used, any logical fallacies, exigence and constraints, etc.. What Critics Don’t Understand About Gun Culture
theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/gun-culture/554351/
February 27, 2018
Politics
I carry a weapon—and it’s tied me closer to
my community.
David French
Feb 27, 2018
Roanoke Firearms owner John Markell holds a Glock 9 mm pistol in Roanoke, Virginia,
Tuesday, April 17, 2007.Don Petersen/ AP
My wife knew something was amiss when the car blocked our driveway. She was outside our
house, playing with our kids on our trampoline, when a car drove slowly down our rural
Tennessee street. As it reached our house, it pulled partially in the driveway, and stopped.
A man got out and walked up to my wife and kids. Strangely enough, at his hip was an empty
gun holster. She’d never seen him before. She had no idea who he was. He demanded to see
me.
1/4
I wasn’t there. I was at my office, a 50-minute drive from my house. My wife didn’t have her
phone with her. She didn’t have one of our guns with her outside. She was alone with our
three children. Even if she had her phone, the police were minutes away. My wife cleverly
defused the confrontation before it escalated, but we later learned that this same person had
been seen, hours before, slowly driving through the parking lot of our kids’ school.
That wasn’t the first disturbing incident in our lives, nor would it be the last. My wife is a sexabuse survivor and was almost choked to death in college by a furious boyfriend. In just the
last five years, we’ve faced multiple threats—so much so that neighbors have expressed
concern for our safety, and theirs. They didn’t want an angry person to show up at their house
by mistake. We’ve learned the same lesson that so many others have learned. There are evil
men in this world, and sometimes they wish you harm.
Miles’s law states, “Where you stand is based on where you sit.” In other words, your political
opinions are shaped by your environment and your experience. We’re products of our place,
our time, and our people. Each of these things is far more important to shaping hearts and
minds than any think piece, any study, or certainly any tweet. And it strikes me that many
millions of Americans don’t truly understand how “gun culture” is built, how the process of first
becoming a gun owner, then a concealed-carrier, changes your life.
It starts with the consciousness of a threat. Perhaps not the kind of threat my family has
experienced. Some people experience more. Some less. And some people don’t experience a
threat at all—but they’re aware of those who do. With the consciousness of a threat comes the
awareness of a vulnerability. The police can only protect the people you love in the most
limited of circumstances (with those limits growing ever-more-severe the farther you live from a
city center.) You want to stand in that gap.
So you take a big step. You walk into a gun store. Unless you’re the kind of person who grew
up shooting, this is where you begin your encounter with American gun culture. The first thing
you’ll notice—and I’ve seen this without fail—is that the person behind that counter is ready to
listen. They want to hear your experience. They’ll share their own. They’ll point you
immediately to a potential solution. Often the person behind the counter is a veteran. Often
they’re a retired cop. Always they’re well-informed. Always they’re ready to teach.
Your first brush with this new world is positive, but it’s just a start. The next place the
responsible adult goes is to the gun range, a place that’s often located in the store. Sometimes
you buy the gun and walk straight to the range. You put on eye protection. You put on ear
protection. And if you’re honest with yourself, you’re nervous.
But, again, there’s a person beside you. They show you how to load the gun. They teach you
the basics of marksmanship. They teach you gun safety. Always treat the gun as if it’s loaded,
even if you think you know it’s not. Keep your finger off the trigger unless you intend to fire the
weapon. Only point it at objects you intend to shoot.
You do it. You fire. It’s loud, but if the salesman has done his job, then he’s matched you with a
gun you can handle. In an instant, the gun is demystified. You buy a box of ammunition and
2/4
shoot it all. Then you buy another box. For most people there’s an undeniable thrill when they
realize that they can actually master so potent a tool.
But something else happens to you, something that’s deeper than the fun of shooting a paper
target. Your thought-process starts to change. Yes, if someone tried to break into your house,
you know that you’d call 911 and pray for the police to come quickly, but you also start to think
of exactly what else you’d do. If you heard that “bump” in the night, how would you protect
yourself until the police arrived? You’re surprised at how much safer you feel with the gun in
the house.
Next, you realize that you want that sense of safety to travel with you. So you sign up for a
concealed-carry permit class. You gather one night with friends and neighbors and spend the
next eight hours combining a self-defense class with a dash of world-view training. And when
you carry your weapon, you don’t feel intimidated, you feel empowered. In a way that’s tough
to explain, the fact that you’re so much less dependent on the state for your personal security
and safety makes you feel more “free” than you’ve ever felt before.
And as your worldview changes, you expand your knowledge. You learn that people defend
themselves with guns all the time, usually without pulling the trigger. You share the stories and
your own experience with your friends, and soon they walk into gun stores. They start their own
journey into America’s “gun culture.”
At the end of this process, your life has changed for the better. Your community has expanded
to include people you truly like, who’ve perhaps helped you through a tough time in your life,
and you treasure these relationships. You feel a sense of burning conviction that you, your
family, and your community are safer and freer because you own and carry a gun.
It’s a myth that gun owners despise regulation. Instead, they tend to believe that government
regulation should have two purposes—deny guns to the dangerous while protecting rights of
access for the law-abiding. The formula is simple: Criminals and the dangerously mentally ill
make our nation more violent. Law-abiding gun owners save and protect lives.
Thus the overwhelming support for background checks, the insistence from gun-rights
supporters that the government enforce existing laws and lock up violent offenders, and the
openness to solutions—like so-called “gun violence restraining orders” that specifically target
troubled individuals for intervention.
Progressive policy prescriptions, like assault-weapons bans and bans on large-capacity
magazines, are opposed because they’re perceived to have exactly the wrong effect. They’ll
present only the most minor of hurdles for the lawless, while the law-abiding experience the
law’s full effect. It’s a form of collective punishment for the innocent, a mere annoyance—at
best—for the lawless.
Many gun-rights supporters were appalled to learn after the Sutherland Springs shooting that
the military was systematically underreporting disqualifying convictions to the federal
background check database. Under pressure, the military has added more than 4,000 new
3/4
names in just three months. Similarly, law-enforcement failures or background-check failures
that preceded, for example, the Virginia Tech, Charleston, Orlando, Sutherland Springs, and
Parkland shootings are spurring serious new consideration of the gun violence restraining
order, a move that would allow family members and others close to a potential shooter to get in
front of a judge to request that the court direct law enforcement to temporarily seize a
dangerous person’s weapons. It gives ordinary citizens a chance to “do something” after they
“see something” and “say something.”
It’s against this backdrop of experience and sincere belief that gun-owners experience the
extraordinarily toxic rhetoric of the public gun debate. People who want to stop murders are
compared to terrorists. People who want to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands are
compared to mass shooters. People are told they have “blood on their hands,” when they
aspire to have all the courage that Broward County School Resource Officer Scot Peterson so
clearly lacked.
And make no mistake, when it comes to rhetoric, the gun-owning community can give as good
as it gets. A movement that’s kind and generous to its friends and allies turns instantly on its
enemies, eager to believe the absolute worst about political opponents who are genuinely
stricken by the carnage in places like Parkland and Sandy Hook.
Because of the threats against my family—and because I don’t want to be dependent on a
sometimes shockingly incompetent government for my family’s security—I carry a weapon. My
wife does as well. We’re not scared. We’re prepared, and that sense of preparation is
contagious. Confidence is contagious. People want to be empowered. That’s how gun culture
is built. Not by the NRA and not by Congress, but by gun owners, one free citizen at a time.
David French is a senior writer at National Review and a veteran of the Iraq War.
4/4

Purchase answer to see full
attachment