The author says that guns should be allowed to a well-regulated militia as it says in the Constitution. This comedic style of writing is used to make the side against which she is arguing appear absurd. Even with the high security and patrols of guns, many incidents and unnecessary actions occur because of them. Notify me of new comments via email. In an almost comical tone she explains the beauty of knife fighting and its practicality in comparison to using a gun. Although, it is very misleading after reading the entire article.
We will occasionally send you account related emails. It’s has steps to follow. The ownership of guns has always been a topic of heated debate in the United States. Sorry, but copying text is not allowed on this site. Tell me, do you see a pistol behind bars?
This is where the authors real feelings and thesis is located. She then proceeds to remind people that nobody alive now knows exactly what Thomas Jefferson was thinking when he wrote this amendment, so many interpretations and extrapolations of the text are inaccurate and knofe. You are commenting using your Google account.
Response: “Get a Knife, Get a Dog, But Get Rid of Guns” | Diana’s Blog
Letter from Birmingham Jail: You are commenting using your Twitter account. February 3, at In particular, she references the Second Amendment, raises counterarguments, or potential weaknesses, and then discredits them. The fact that you will have to chase a person with a sharp pointed object like a knife or use a dog to defend yourself. I feel much more informed about gun use in this country after reading such articles.
Get a Knife, Get a Dog, But Get Rid of Guns Essay
Click to learn more https: Are you interested in getting a customized paper? Ivins is certainly taking some chances with her rhetoric and the way she treats her audience may alienate some readers.
Response to Molly Ivins’s, “Get a Knife, Get a Dog, but Get Rid of Guns” | Zack Gala
Overall, I was pleased with the information presented in this article. This belittling of her opposition is a direct schoolyard attack, straight from the big bully handbook of how to make your enemy feel small. Gun control, however, especially when discussed alongside murder and death, is not a light topic and treating it as such is inherently risky.
The harsh language she uses here directly exposes her anger and resistance to her opposition. Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website! You are commenting using your Facebook account.
She gently coerces her opinions through some humor and levity as opposed to going right in with heavy artillery. This sarcastic but truthful point warms up her audience, and shows her readers where she stands on this issue.
She also compares guns to cars saying that because cars can be seen as weapons and kill people that we should ban guns because they do exactly the same. Austin and Ron Gleason. Cite this Essay To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below: Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website.
This is just a sample from a fellow student. Although it would be interesting to see what life would be like without guns and instead other combative tools, I agree with controlling the distribution of guns and enforcing strict purchasing regulations.
This essay has been submitted by a khife. Notify me of new comments via email. In order to persuade her audience, she uses a number of techniques such as sarcastic humor and general and political examples to prove that guns are lethal and must be controlled or, more preferably, banned.