I have chosen two very juxtaposed website on the idea of gun control both in the argument itself but also the way they have chosen to put forward their argument. Both of the websites I have chosen however have had a slightly confusing method of argument where throughout it is almost uncertain of whether they are for or against gun control.
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/baldwin/130921
The first thing that draws your attention on this web page is the title of the article itself 'Guns don't kill people: Gun control laws kill people,' this hard hitting title gave me a hint that this website would be slightly too forward and cynical to make a convincing argument. Through most of this web page I found myself cringing at the racist and bias remarks against the government and without a single mention of the gun control issues itself properly until after a what seemed like a moan from the writer I was driven off of the argument against gun control altogether. Another thing that caught my attention on this webpage was the top banner
'Renew America' with a picture of the signing of the Constitution, this made it very clear that the argument was against Gun Control, with renewal being Ironic as the argument is against change but the argument itself is arguing that every thing should stay true to history and the constitution of America. Statements like, '
This is the second time in recent memory when some wacko shoots up a military installation. The first killer was a Muslim; this one was a Buddhist. He also happened to be a black man and an Obama supporter' made me feel like this particular website was not specifically against gun control it is in fact against people of other cultures (Muslim), races (Black), religions (Buddhist) and more specifically those who supported Barak Obama. The hindrance in this web page is their slanderous terms against others and their government which made the web page overall a very uncomfortable read which left me feeling slightly outraged and angry. However we do have to ask ourselves why such an article against gun control uses an argument like this to argue for their cause. '
It is past time for these so-called conservatives in the GOP to grow some man stuff and start taking their oaths to the Constitution seriously.' The harshness and immaturity of this article makes it one that should not be taken seriously, it's argument is very rash and bold in the wrong way, the message is very clear that their issue is not with the gun control itself it is more of a way to moan about the
'miscreants in Washington.'
http://proguncontrol.net/
Similarly to the Anti gun control website the argument on the website is slightly vague, this is seen through the use of the title 'Whether you are for or against gun control, the statistics are on your side.' Firstly this makes me believe that this website is in fact a balanced argument of gun control arguing both sides however this is not the case when you read through the site. At the offset the title makes the argument seem very weak and worthless, however it gives the site more of a liberal feel, it gives you a sense of freedom to choose, it isn't as overpowering or offensive as the first website. This instantly makes it seem more convincing as an argument. The website in general seems more factual, the website is more statistical based rather than opinionated which also makes the argument seem more convincing. However because the title makes the website seem balanced and the argument is not strong it is more facts around gun control and the opinions of those who are pro gun control like,
'Some of those in the pro gun control movement want to see certain guns taken off the shelves, while others believe that they should be outlawed entirely.' This makes the argument seem unspecific and too vague to be a strong and convincing argument.
All in all, both of the websites have there weaknesses and are both unconvincing in their own ways, the first is too strong and opinionated and can often seem too biased or insulting to be a convincing argument. Whereas the second website is not strong enough, the facts show the truth behind gun control but do not evoke any passion towards the cause, making it also unconvincing.
No comments:
Post a Comment