Introduction

A Social Issue that divides us is gun control. The Second Amendment says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  and the line “the right of people” is what divides us. Let’s view the rhetoric of some of the sources on that social issue. Since we (the people) don’t know how guns effects United States therefore more research is needed to dissolve this divide.

Source 1: Alan I. Leshner, Bruce M. Altevogt, Arlene F. Lee, Margaret A. McCoy, and Patrick W. Kelley, Editors. “PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH TO REDUCE THE THREAT OF FIREARM-RELATED VIOLENCE.” INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE AND NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES, 2013, www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1#ii.

Summary: From “PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH TO REDUCE THE THREAT OF FIREARM-RELATED VIOLENCE” says that there is not much data on gun control therefore further research is necessary. Research on topics such as Characteristics of Gun Violence, Intervention and Strategies, Gun Safety Technology, Video Games and Other Media, Risk and Protective Factors. The risks of firearm to be used are depending on cultural norm, suicide (inevitable & preventable), policies that hold high levels of economic or social inequality among societal groups. Poverty, drug exchange, drug use can affect humans actions for firearm activity (being drugged or looking for the money). Personal factors as impulsivity or being suicide (due to experience).

Rhetorical Situation: In January 2013, Barack Obama issued 23 executive orders as to improve knowledge of the causes of firearm violence, what might prevent it. In research stated “

Individuals use firearms legally for a variety of activities, including recreation, self-protection, and work. However, firearms can also be used to intimidate, coerce, or carry out threats of violence. “ and that is well stated truth. What researchers can is to learn what effect gun owners actions.

Purpose: Purpose was to highlight need  for further research, as there was absence of the research in those firearm-related violence areas could clear the misunderstanding of the effects that the gun bring. There were many factors and circumstances that affects behaviours of gun user.

Stance: This research intent was to bring understanding of the topics, to politicians, rather than giving concrete data. As for the gun control matter, there are many defining elements from which created many other obstacles as for gun control to be effective.

Genre: Scholarly Source that supported from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Academy of Sciences and numerous other, 2013 conducted research by Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of The National Academies on Priority For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence.

Audience:  Intended audience of this research are policy makers. It is policy makers since they are who influence United State with Gun Control policies.

Source 2: Zuri Davis. “A Father Defends His Daughter with a Shotgun When Cops Break Into the Wrong House.” Reason, 21 Sept. 2018 reason.com/blog/2018/09/21/maryland-cops-shot-warrant-wrong-house#comment.

Summary: From “A Father Defends His Daughter with a Shotgun When Cops Break Into the Wrong House.” shows a case  in Prince George’s County, MaryLand, father hearing a man attempting to break into a house quickly told his daughter to get back of the house and took his shotgun to face the intruders. Up at the coming of the Police, father shot one at the hand and another at the shoulder. Father than realized that they were cops ands said ,”You got the wrong address. Don’t shoot my daughter.” while dropping his gun.  After that accident police conclude that “the officers were attempting to serve a warrant after a police informant told them that a drug dealer lived in the home. As it turned out, the informant had given them bad information.” In this situation. He was freed from that accident though not every case was ended with this good end. “Colorado grandfather (and legal gun owner) shot and killed a home intruder, police mistook him for the invader.” from bad judgment of the police innocent people are suffering because they practice their gun rights.

Rhetorical Situation: Self protection use of the gun is represented here when cops try to break into your house and the only thing that could do is to protect yourself. Because of the police’s bad judgment of the innocent gun owners, the innocent are suffering because of that.

Purpose: Purpose was to show how law enforcement can ruin your life with no consequence as to the police department’s mistake. In this founded sources has short news which are biased to libertarians, although there is no author’s thoughts given on it. As for the gun control matter, it is a representations of how guns are seeing and be abstract by the police.

Stance: This is libertarian source has intention to inform audience who wants maximized individual rights. To inform libertarians that their correct usage of gun can backfire on their values is detrimental. Therefore, stance of this article is to inform how libertarians values can be threatened from the police enforcement.

Genre: This is article from website Reason, also known to print Magazines. This article libertarian peace that doesn’t represent authors own opinion but it does covers the situation and the topic as the whole.

Audience: Since article written in libertarian website,  the readers are libertarians. Libertarians are worried about their gun ownership, so they want to know what happen in the situation when a cop breaks into their house.

Source 3: Kopel, David B. “Hold your fire: gun control won’t stop rising violence.” Policy Review, no. 63, 1993, p. 58+. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http%3A%2F%2Flink.galegroup.com%2Fapps%2Fdoc%2FA13882634%2FOVIC%3Fu%3Dcuny_ccny%26sid%3DOVIC%26xid%3D35d02f48

Summary: From “Hold your fire: gun control won’t stop rising violence.” represents Pres Jimmy Carter wanting to find a case for gun control debate by asking the National Institute of Justice to research for one.” three scholars found no persuasive scholarly evidence that America’s 20,000 gun-control laws had reduced criminal violence”, which represent the fact that such a big amount of gun control laws doesn’t do a difference. They made a report (1982) of gun control that did not stop crime. In fact Gun Control Act of 1968 , made the criminal to find a gun from other sources and victimize the one in the state with the ban on interstate gun sales.

Rhetorical Situation:  Dave Kobel is writing this review in 1993, he wants to point out how much of the laws that enforced don’t reduce crimes as in Jimmy Carter case. Even though it is written in 1993 Kobel’s view can be interpreted in now days.

Purpose: The purpose of this Magazine Article is to represent how gun control doesn’t reduce gun control. It is well said that “ [ you can] able to acquire illegal weapons with ease, in spite of a nationwide prohibition on firearms” since people without a gun cannot protect themselves from being an easy target from criminals. Dave Kobel understanding of the laws and effects of it clearly says in the title “gun control won’t stop rising violence”.

Stance: David B. Koppel has stance of gun control to not stop rising violence. Kobel concludes his Magazine Article, “Today, rather than merely opposing poorly conceived gun-control legislation, right-to-keep-and-bear-arms supporters are working in positive ways. These efforts will enhance not only the rights of the 50 percent of American families who own guns, but also the safety of the 50 percent who do not.” since guns clearly is the factor of reduction in crime, gun-control is clearly a step in  a bad direction.

Genre: This magazine article, which does leans republican. Dave Kobel writes a lot about law making in his magazine, which is online.

Audience: Dave Kopel’s review are the people who interested in guns and also for those who want to find the argument to keep their gun themselves

Source 4: HALEY SWEETLAND EDWARDS “School Shootings Are Becoming the New Normal” http://time.com/5286666/school-shootings-new-normal-santa-fe/

Summary: From “School Shootings Are Becoming the New Normal”   talks about school shooting that happened in Santa Fe, Texas.There was 17 year-old student who stole the gun from his father, and killed 10 people in his school. Prior to that it was evident to of his behaviour as having T-shirt with with Born To Kill. After that different communities reacted differently one “ignited” conversation on gun violence and another giving power for the law enforcement to take away guns. From that accident,  President Trump “offered a grab bag of solutions: strengthen background checks, ban bump stocks, arm teachers.” This is important since this one accident would reveal on gun control would be interpreted by policy makers.

Rhetorical Situation: The rhetorical situation is the school shooting and it is hot topic to discuss on how gun regulations should be interpreted. With U.S. president Trump  as ““Your Second Amendment rights are under siege,” he told the crowd, “but they will never, ever be under siege as long as I’m your President.””. That follows with his interpretations that gun is not the problem in this school shooting..

Purpose: The purpose of this newspaper article was inform readers of the school shooting. This talks about the accident and the reactions resulted from that shooting. Since people are concerned that the shooting happened policy makers are restricting guns,”giving law enforcement the power to confiscate guns from people who make threats of violence online or in person” red flag policies that take away gun being one of them. In it is important to know how policy makers are interpreting such situation as to know if their usage of guns could be restricted.

Stance: The stance can be interpreted from this example  Quinnipiac University poll from February broke down that support by proposal: 97% of Americans support universal background checks; 83% support mandatory waiting periods for firearm purchases; 67% support an assault-weapon ban.” showing that people don’t want guns and therefore making the stance to restrict guns.

Genre: New York Time is Newspaper and the genre used is a Newspaper Article. This liberal leaning newspaper, it can be concluded from election of 2016 with articles about Trump always being bad and Hillary Clinton  always being good.

Audience: Audience are people who like to know what happen in the world in their spare time and prefer to  read NY Times and it is case they want to know about the school shooting.

Conclusion: Connecting everything together, it the audience of the reviewed sources are from different political parties (republican, democrat, libertarian), scholarly research source didn’t have disclose political affiliation so it fair to say to they are neutral. It can be said that division of this country is happening at the sources with different stances., one of them says we don’t know much, other say that guns would lessen their individual right another that gun laws don’t reduce violence, as well other with people don’t liking guns. Each of the source has its own purpose, one of them says we don’t know much so there should be research gun-related violence, other with law enforcement to have bad judgment on gun owners, as well how gun laws are making criminal easily to target disarmed citizen, and the other with being able to own gun at all. This all divides us, the Americans.