Compare And Contrast Wayne Lapierre's Argument

Words: 989
Pages: 4

Arguments that stand up for a cause can be seen in many aspects, but you question yourself on what or who to believe, that is the hardest part. Everyone’s beliefs are different, but I believe that Wayne LaPierre’s argument is more effective than M.D. Anderson’s argument because this argument brings in the logical appeals, fact based reasoning, and pathos, the emotional appeal to the readers.

Thinking of an argument and the argument of these two articles, logic is significant for readers to see, giving it that support or proof for what they are taking about, in this case, gun control. Applying evidence into a claim greatly helps defend their thoughts and feelings. For instance, if I start telling people that I believe
…show more content…
Putting this appeal into this argument makes it really pull you in, gets your attention, and gets into your heart. This type of emotional appeal seems to have a different type of effect on an argument. For example, “We love our families and our country. We believe in our freedom. We’re the millions of Americans from all walks of life who take responsibility for our own safety and protection as a God-given, fundamental right” (Rottenberg, Winchell, 2015, 502). This quote was found at the end of the first article, but when reading this, I put myself into this quote, that it is my God-given right to protect myself and my family. This is how I am every day of my life, I chose to be the type of person that decided to arm myself. People have different feelings and attitudes towards this topic, although as the article in the book says right here, we believe in our freedom. When this talks about the “God-given fundamental right,” I think of the 2nd amendment, “The Right to Bear Arms.” This is a right we were given, but people are trying to take that away from