Rhetorical Analysis Paper
The scholarly article “Gun Shows and Gun Violence: Fatally Flawed Study Yields Misleading Results” first appeared in the magazine American Journal of Public Health in 2010. It was co-written by Garen Wintemute, David Hemenway, Daniel Webster, Glenn Pierce, and Anthony Braga. In their Journal entry they aim to convince their readers that the widely publicized case study “The Effect of Gun Shows on Gun-Related Deaths: Evidence from California and Texas” is a bunch of nonsense. “We believe the study is fatally flawed”. Toulmin’s Model, along with the three appeals to argument, are techniques frequently applied by the authors used to create their convincing argument.
Right out of the gates the authors inform us about their claim. “We believe the study is fatally flawed”. At this point you do not know as to which side the case’s evidence, but later you learn that the authors are saying that the study is flawed because not all gun sales are recorded. This means that there are many more gun sells made than there is evidence to show. They are leaning towards the side that says there is much more evidence to be found. Their perspective is that gun show DO result in gun-violence. I do not think they did a very good job at initially showing us this. I had to read the entire article twice just to understand which way the “bad” study data was leaning, and which way the authors were leaning. Once you know which way this paper is going, it is much easier to read ad comprehend.
Towards the begging the paper they hit us with their first warrant AND a pathos appeal. “We believe that the study discussed in the working paper contains serious errors in design and execution that fatally compromise its findings”. Now there warrant is pretty self-explanatory but the emotional appeal is first revealed. By using the works “serious errors” and “fatally” the authors begin to create a sense of emotion. At least from my point of view I...
Cited: Wintemute, Garen J., et al. "Gun Shows And Gun Violence: Fatally Flawed Study Yields Misleading Results." American Journal Of Public Health 100.10 (2010): 1856-1860. Environment Complete. Web. 21 Feb. 2014.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document