12 Angry Men Rhetorical Analysis

Reginald’s Roses purpose in writing Twelve Angry Men is to point out that justice can be oblivious unless someone or something acts upon it because in some cases, we are over powered by our biases or by individuality and/or conformity that we don’t focus on the facts, or we don’t even bother caring about sending someone to the death penalty because all we want is to rest.
For instance, Juror #3 bias of his son made him think of his kid, ignoring the fact that the trial was about another individual, not his son. He believes that all the teenagers are the same, when in reality, they are not.“…When he was sixteen we had a battle. He hit me in the face. He’s big y’know. I haven’t seen him in two years. Rotten Kid.” (Rose 18).
Additionally,

not only can our bias intervene with what we believe is fair, but also our individuality and conformity. For example, juror #8 shows a great example of individuality. He does not go by what others chose, instead, he expresses his own opinion and is actually taking the time to go over the case. On the other hand, Juror #3 wants to fit in with the rest of the group and involves personal issues in the case, making him naïve and unaware of the trial itself because he is busy focusing on his personal bias . In this case, the only one that seems to care about making an honest decision is Juror #8is important when it comes to deciding on whether someone is guilty or not.