Clinton and Guns article Essay
The analysis of article that was chosen for this essay deal with the expiration of the assault-weapon ban on September 13th, 2004
In what way do the articles reveal the assault-weapon ban?
What is the position of article “Liberals Scramble to Extend Clinton Gun Ban” by Susan Jones?
Why does the author take the ”non-judging” attitude?
The author of the article tries to analyze two different points of view on the issue, showing that in quotes given from both sides.
Clinton and Guns article Essay
Introduction: The articles that were chosen for this essay deal with the expiration of the assault-weapon ban on September 13th, 2004. The aim of the comparison of the following articles is to show the ability of the essay’s author to criticize and analyze. The first analyzed article is a CNSNews article “Liberals Scramble to Extend Clinton Gun Ban” by Susan Jones. The author of the article tries to analyze two different points of view on the issue, showing that in quotes given from both sides. The article is mostly an assembly of a whole bunch of quotes, through which the author is trying to hide his objective point of view, making the article sort of a quote-fact battle.”…
On Tuesday the 14th of September, an 18-year-old will once again be able to buy an AK-47 assault rifle in most states", claiming the existance of this only one law to control gun-selling on one hand and:“… In 1993, 'assault pistols' like the Uzi Pistol were banned under the importation law. In February 1994, revolving cylinder shotguns (Street Sweeper and Striker-12) were banned under the National Firearms Act”, contradicting the first quote on the other hand and making the viewer analyze the issue in details. The author does not judge, but lets the reader choose from plenty of facts which side to join. The author constantly gives the reader an alternative, giving quotes with contradictions. The quote language is quite convincing: ”Firearms that comply with the 1994 law "function mechanically the same way as 'banned' firearms and even use the same ammunition,- the NSSF noted”. The most convincing part is that the author always tells the reader who was the author of every quote he presents, citing either on known organizations or laws. The author does not use objective language in the article, but through the clear facts makes the reader follow his idea. The author shows the reader the words that can make a dramatically change in his point of view, especially concerning the latest events:”… the lapsing of the 1994 gun control law will give "terrorists, drug dealers, violent gangs the means to commit mass murder in a matter of seconds…".
Conclusion: The words chosen in this quote raise negative emotions in the reader, emotional pressure. The author makes a slight grave on the future consequences, trying to hide it between the quotes. The author’s thesis was not very clear, but strict analysis shows that he is against the expiration of the assault-weapon ban and wants the people that have the power to prolong it to really do something about it. This thesis was supported by the last paragraphs of this article: “Who needs an assault weapon?" is an illegitimate question because "in a free society, the burden of proof is not upon those who wish to exercise rights, it is upon those who wish to restrict rights".