Concealed carry vs. colleges is a story about dont allow guns in campus. The gun control and gun rights is becoming a more and more popular topic after few gun shooting tragedies happened in schools, people are starting to worry about the security in schools. This story is part of editorials and debates in USA TODAY, and this story is published on September 27, 2012. There is no exactly authors name in the story. In the beginning, the story has an introduction about students in Colorado are allowed to carry guns about anywhere after summer break because in 2008 ,public colleges can no longer ban guns on campus in Colorado.
Then the author writes some opposing views about allowing concealed-carry on campus, and tells people it is dangerous that allow students carry guns in campus. In the story, the author effectively and persuasively employs the rhetorical appeals of ethos and pathos to support authors point which is universities should allow banning the firearms. This article is written by an author without name in USA TODAY, because this article has obvious political tendency, the author may dont want other people know his political thoughts, so thats why author didnt put his name in the article. USA TODAY newspaper is one of the biggest newspapers in USA, and this newspaper doesnt have particular audience, it faces to many different people all over the world, so this newspaper has very big influence and it is very convinced, the author chooses this newspaper to publish his article is a very good idea. The intended audiences for this article are teachers and students in universities; people who support gun control and most of them are mid-age and educated people.
The purpose for this article is telling people that it is dangerous that allow students carry guns in campus, universities should ban the firearms and give some advises to people on how to stop gun shootings in campus. The authors article effectively provide ethos by using the historical reference and relating to audiences thinking of ban carrying guns in campus. According to the article Massacre at Virginia Tech in 2007, when a deranged student killed 32 people in a matter of minutes. Pro-gun groups insist that an armed student or professor might have saved the day. But that notion is as far-fetched as it is alluring.(Editorial) The author uses a historical reference of the Massacre at Virginia Tech as his ethos to tell audience that professors and students cannot stop the shooting happened in campus. Many people believe that armed students or professor might have saved the day.
But actually, students and professors in Virginia Tech didnt stop the shooting in the school. Students or professors, they are not professional security who can keep the safety in school. So it is not necessary for students or professors to carry guns in the campus. On the other side, if students carry guns on campus and the shooting really happens in the school, then they try to use guns to protect themselves, it will become more risky. The author claims In New York City this summer, when police shot and killed a gunman on the street near the Empire State Building, they also wounded nine innocent bystanders. Imagine what might happen with armed amateurs firing away in a darkened theater, or a barroom brawl.(Editorial) The author uses another historical reference to remind audience that it is very risky for untrained students to carry and even shot guns to protect themselves, it may cause more injuries and deaths, because students or professors are not good at shooting, so if they try to shot, it may hurt innocent people. Even well trained polices would wound innocent bystanders. It must be very dangerous when students have guns even they just want to protect themselves. In addition, the author also provides some suggestions to stop the gun shooting in schools by using ethos to advice people how to avoid dangerous people to get guns. The author mentions Background checks are designed to keep the mentally ill, like the Virginia Tech shooter, from buying guns, but many states are lax in reporting mental health records to the federal system.
(Editorial) The author suggests the background checks are necessary, because most of the shooters are mentally ill people, so if those people cannot get guns they couldnt kill students in schools any more. But because many states are lax in reporting mental health records, so those mental ill people can get guns very easily, they could kill students by guns in just few minutes. So the author suggests that the mental ill reports are very important, it is a good way to stop the gun shootings in school. The other advice is training gun owners about how to use guns correctly and safely. The author argues In many states, including Colorado, a gun permit and a single training course, often lasting a day or less, are all you need to legally carry a concealed weapon. Many courses dont include live firing. (Editorial) The author wants every states have a strict gun training courses. In some states, people just need only take a day or less, it is not enough for a gun owner to understand and practice how to use the gun in a right and safe way. Many courses even dont include live firing, it means many people dont know how to fire the gun since they get gun permit.
The author is very worrying about this kind of situation, people cannot use guns in a correct may not protect themselves and even make a big tragedy. Lastly, the authors article succeeded in employing the rhetorical appeal of pathos to catch audiences emotion, and show the intense stage on banning guns on campus. According to the lecture, Colorado, of course, was home to this years Aurora theater shooting and the 1999 Columbine High School massacre. It doesnt need any more tragedies. Some Colorado professors and students, upset by guns on campus, are pushing for a new law to bring back the ban. (Editorial)The authors success in grabbing her audiences emotion is the use of powerful words. Colorado doesnt need any more tragedies, it shows that the most of the people in Colorado hate the gun shootings, and they will try their best to stop tragedies in Colorado. This also can have strong emotional effect on people in other states to support the gun control policy. The word like pushing shows how the people in Colorado want the new law which brings back the ban guns as soon as possible. This can also press more people to think about the gun control. The argument between gun control and gun right is becoming more and more drastically.
The people in United States start to think about this argument after few gun shootings in schools because they dont want to see tragedy any more. The author presents his ideas very well in the article and his ideas seems have powerful persuasion for audience. Authors ideas push people to think more about whether universities should allow banning the firearms. His rhetorical appeals of ethos have powerful historical references to persuade people and achieve his goal in the article which is banning the firearms in campus, and the author also provides some suggestions to stop the gun shootings in schools by advising people how to avoid dangerous people to get guns very easily in United States. Finally, the authors rhetorical appeals of pathos grab peoples emotion by using powerful and strong words. This article is strongly presents authors thought which is gun control is very necessary, because this can save many peoples life.
Editorial: Concealed carry vs. colleges. Editorial. USA TODAY 27 Sept. 2012. Print.