Proposal bullet list:

Proposal bullet list: 

My topic is gun violence, and I think it is appropriate to my audience which is the government. (specifically congress).

Specific? I was very specific and went into detail about specific shootings, and how they really hit close to home.

My audience was specific, it was congress. This is appropriate because I am proposing strengthening gun laws, which rests in the power of the government.

My publishing plan is that I am going to first send my letter to any publishing company, that will most likely publish my writing. Even if I don’t get my work published I am going to send it to the State Government, and then I am going to write a letter to the National Government and see if I get a reply from either of them.

The genre of my argument is a letter to the government, both congress and the state government.

The purpose of my argument was to persuade the Government to create a stronger law that will limit the use of guns in the U.S., in hope to prevent gun violence. I want to end the loss of life from guns among the public in America.

My argument is a proposal, because I am trying to enact change in the issue of guns.
Some of the major claims that I said were: guns take our loved ones, we should value our safety over our rights to hold guns, and we are not safe anywhere today, not even at school.

Pathos: I used pathos when explaining how guns take our loved ones from us. I said that it is extremely hard when you lose someone, and how the pain of losing someone will never entirely go away.

Ethos: I established ethos through my personal experience with losing my grandmother to Pancreatic cancer. I also established ethos when I explained how as a student we are being taught run, hide, or fight drills. I also have a cousin that went to Virginia Tech at the time of the shooting.

Logos: I explained how 70% of homicide victims in 2013 were killed by guns. I also used the examples of shootings like Sandy Hook, and Virginia Tech.

Some changes I made to my original was who my audience was. Originally my audience was everyday Americans, however I made my audience more specific to members of the government, especially congress. This helped me to structure my argument and language better for the audience.

Clarity of writing: I was clear with my claims, and what my argument was. Throughout the blog I was very clear with my views against the usage of guns, and I was clear about how the issue can be prevented.

Gun Violence: A Proposal

To whom it should concern,

As you already know gun violence is an issue that has strongly hurt the people of our nation for too long! Guns have taken away the loved ones of more than 70% of all victims killed in homicides in 2013. These people who lost their loved ones have had to deal with the unbearable feeling of losing someone close to you, and even though time will help, their pain will never go away. Just think about if that were someone you knew, someone who you loved, who was suddenly taken away in the blink of an eye by something so simple as a gun? No one deserves to feel that pain, and that is the reason why a change needs to happen.

We can't just sit by as more people are killed, and more of their loved ones have to deal with the terrible feeling of loss just because we are too arrogant to change laws that have existed since the beginning of when our nation was formed. Think about it though, is it really worth sacrificing our safety, the safety of everyone including yourself and the people you love? I certainly don't think there can be any objections to the fact that something must be done, even though many pro-gun people don't want their rights as gun holders to be infringed. The truth is we need to start valuing the safety of the people in our nation, over the rights of gun holders. No one would want to lose someone close to them, so why not fix the gun laws in this country.

Before I get to the solution it is necessary that I introduce a personal story like many others that are out there, and have yet to be heard. If you haven't experienced the loss of a loved one it is like there is a gaping hole in your heart, the pain is unbearable yet nothing helps. Only time can diminish the pain, but in fact the pain will never go away as long as you live. I think it's ridiculous that we have done nothing, even after so many people are having to deal with loss. Frankly the correct word is shame, shame at our stance as a nation in doing nothing to prevent more shootings, and deaths from occurring. If we cannot unite as a nation now to fix something hurting so many of us than how can you say as a member of the government that your work has been to the benefit of the nation as a whole? In my school we have even taken on protecting ourselves with the "run, hide and fight" drills, because there is no other way to protect ourselves. What does this say about our society today, it is like we are just a bunch of animals being sent off to the slaughterhouse waiting for the death that will soon catch up with us. Yes this may be a very depressing statement yet today no one is safer at school, home, or frankly anywhere else.

It is the time, now, not in several years. We have to make it so guns are illegal, and can only be carried by members of law enforcement who have been mentally evaluated. We must strengthen the gun laws of the nation, forget what the NRA or anyone else says about being unconstitutional. Isn't being protected by our government a part of the Constitution? Call me crazy but if I'm the only person who feels that safety should be valued over our right to bear arms, then do nothing. However if the day comes that you ever lose a family member to gun violence, just remember you had the chance to save them, yet for some reason you failed to do so.

Toulmin Analysis of Gun Violence Ethos blog:

The major claims that I stated in my blog were: gun violence takes many of our loved ones from us, also it is not an issue that is occurring somewhere else, in fact it occurs close to home. Gun violence has caused the deaths of peoples children, friends, and other loved ones as for example the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, which occurred very close to home, only about a half hour away from Norwalk. Another major claim was we have done little to stop the issue of gun violence, and we should strengthen gun laws, make guns banned altogether from the general public, and value safety over leisure (hunting especially). Even though many lives have been lost to guns, we have failed to do anything to atleast strengthen the gun laws in the nation. Banning guns from the general public would be most effective because it would make it so only police can have guns therefore limiting the ability to even obtain a gun. We should begin valuing our safety over leisure even though many people may think it infringes on their rights, in the end it will protect us all, because right now we are not safe anywhere from gun violence especially at school. Think about your families!

The data that I used to support my claims were the Virginia Tech, and the Sandy Hook Elementary shootings. I was lacking the usage of quantitative data however but if i add numbers to my argument then it will make it a lot more effective. I could definitely add the number of people that are killed yearly due to gun violence, and how the people killed are of all ages and races, not just one group of people. By doing this it will help me show how gun violence affects people everywhere across the country, which will in the end make it easier for the reader to accept my argument. 

The warrants that I used in my blog were: that gun violence kills people which is bad, also we have not done anything to stop gun violence which is allowing it to keep occurring. Another warrant that I used in my blog was it is better to be safe than to worry about a law affecting leisure. The backing that I used in my blog was the shooting at sandy hook, and the shooting at Virginia tech. I also used my personal experience with losing my grandmother to Pancreatic Cancer. I also used the fact that many Americans have lost loved ones to gun violence, and how it is apart of human nature to feel sad at the loss of life as backing for my claims.

The rebuttal that I used for my blog was that i addressed the objections that gun violence does not occur anywhere by saying that it can, and does happen anywhere especially when I described how Sandy Hook is very close to Norwalk, and how if a shooting could happen there, what is preventing one from happening in Norwalk. Another rebuttal is that strengthening gun laws infringes on the rights of Americans, by saying that it is better to value our safety over leisure because any of us could have been the people to lose loved ones to guns. If we strengthen gun laws we will be helping to protect ourselves and our loved ones.

Some examples of qualifiers that I used throughout my blog were even though, especially, anyone, if, anywhere, yet, then, and more. By using these qualifiers I helped to acknowledge the limitations to my argument, which will make the reader more open to accept what I have to say. However I think I should use more qualifiers like few, one might argue especially when I talk about banning guns among the general public. I think that by doing this it will make my argument even more effective.

Social change: "Audience Brainstorming"

Possible Audiences: 

• People who buy guns
• Law enforcement (Police, etc.)
• National Government (the legislative and executive branches)
• Parents
• State Governments
• People who have lost loved ones to gun violence
• All races/genders

Three best audiences: 

• People who have lost loved ones to gun violence: The reason why people who have lost loved ones to gun violence would be a good audience is because they can relate to what my argument is, and they probably have the same thoughts as I do on the issue against guns in this country. By appealing to this audience a pro would be that they probably have more of a probability to agree with me because they have personally been affected by gun violence. Another pro would be that they would be more accepting to my solution to the issue than most other American's because they have been personally affected by guns. A con would be that I would have to be very careful with what I say, and how I word my claims so that I don't offend anyone who has personally lost someone to guns. 

• Law enforcement: Law enforcement would be a good audience to address because they may be more accepting of my argument, especially because of the fact that making guns illegal for anyone besides law enforcement should decrease the number of shootings yearly significantly. Police officers especially would benefit from this because there would no longer be the significant threat of being shot and killed on the job, which would give police officers more assurance when it comes to safety. A con of addressing law enforcement as an audience would be that I have to be very specific in my claims and provide sufficient evidence to how mental screening for all police and military people will benefit the country. Many law enforcement individuals may not like the fact that everyone would have to be mentally screened in order to be able to obtain a gun. 

• National Government: The reason why the National Government would be a good audience for my argument is because the they have the power to pass national laws that everyone must abide to. This would be a good way to actually get some form of legislation passed rather than having to address the people in order for them to take action and bring the issue to the government. If I directly address the government especially congress, then my argument would be a lot easier to actually influence some kind of change. The con to this is that I would have to create a very strong argument backed by a lot of sufficient evidence while using a lot of vocabulary to fit the high education of members of congress. I would also have to come up with a very distinct solution that is actually possible, and makes sense.

The Best: 

• The best audience would probably be the National Government because people who have lost loved ones to gun violence are already very likely to accept my argument. Also law enforcement follows the laws that the government creates, so the National Government would be a better audience in that it would be more effective. However I have to create a solution that is very possible and not far fetched from what can actually work well in significantly decreasing the number of guns in the country, and increasing the amount of mental health screenings.