Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Eng 111 Rhetorical Essay
Eng 111 Rhetorical Essay
11/7/18
ENG 111-990
Lutz 1
Throughout this article, the author uses logos by giving us her facts about how guns are
worse than knives. “In the first place, you have catch up with someone in order to stab him.”
(Ivins) tells us that guns can kill people from far away. You have to actually be in reach of a
person to stab them with a knife. Having knives to kill people instead of guns could make
everyone in better shape. If they killed people with knives as much as they do with guns, more
people would be physically fit and “We'd turn into a whole nation of great runners.” (Ivins).
With these facts about knives over guns, it helps to strengthen the purpose of the article. It
Ivins uses pathos by giving scenarios dealing with the damage of guns. “Anyone who has
ever worked in a cop shop knows how many family arguments end in murder because there
was a gun in the house.” (Ivins). This makes us feel connected with this scenario. Every family
gets into arguments, but not every family argument involves a gun. Ivins contributes to our
emotions by allowing the reader to be involved in her scenarios. The reader can step into their
shoes and feel as if they were the family that ended their argument with a gunshot. No one
would want this to happen to their family. Ivins helps us to realize this by getting to our
Ethos is used throughout the article by telling us all of the bad things that guns can do.
She does not tell us how guns could help in society. Ivins only sees the damage that guns can
Natalie Lutz
11/7/18
ENG 111-990
Lutz 2
cause. This article uses ethos to be credible to only those who agree with banning guns. If
someone would read this article who does not agree with Ivins belief, they would think that this
was incorrect information. They would disagree with all statements. Those reading that agree
with Ivins’ point of view, believe that this article is credible. They stand on her side of the
argument. “I don't know what is missing in their psyches that they need to feel they have to
power to kill.” (Ivins). This helps the reader to understand that Ivins does not think that guns
should be in society. Your perception of this right will determine if you think that this article
The author uses language to make you understand her negative tone. She employs negative
connotations on the words throughout the article to help you understand her side of the
argument. She tells the reader that “Permitting unregulated citizens to have guns is destroying
the security of this free state.” (Ivins). The reader can understand that she thinks guns are
tearing down our country. Ivins does not see any good reason that guns could be allowed for.
She realizes that “This is no longer a frontier nation in which people hunt their own food.”
(Ivins). One can gather from this that she does not believe guns have any purpose in our
everyday lives. We do not need guns to help us survive. Ivins wants us to realize that guns are
violent. If people want to kill, they need to kill with something besides guns. “You want
protection? Get a dog.” (Ivins). Dogs can help protect owners simply like a gun can.