Rhetorical Analysis Of Just Take Away Their Guns By James Wilson

The important question of how we should deal with gun control inflates more and more each and everyday. In his essay, “Just Take Away Their Guns,” author James Q. Wilson gives his unique solution on the issue of gun control. He emphasizes that his argument is not to disarm law-abiding citizens, but “to reduce the number of people who carry guns unlawfully” (Wilson 126). He uses a variety of strategies such as the use of tone and logic, to effectively support his claim, however the absence of sources leaves a hole in the argument to which the reader may question the validity of the argument.

Wilson begins his essay in a very uncommon way. Although he doesn’t assert his claim until the fourth paragraph, he gives the reader a hint of what he wants to discuss. When Wilson says, “The public supports more gun control laws but suspects they won’t work. The public is right,” (125) he immediately conveys to his audience the

uncertainty that the general public has on the topic. This introduction instantly questions the opposing sides of the argument without completely telling the reader his claim.

Wilson further persuades his points by targeting the reader’s emotions. By informing the audience on how prevalent guns are in our society today, he begins to demonstrate a concerned and uneasy tone. He provides statistics on illegal gun possession in order to make the reader question how dangerous the issue truly is. This proves to be effective because the reader is dragged down into a sense of doubt and therefore is more likely to have an open mind to what Wilson has to say.

Wilson also does a great job with the way he connects with the reader and demonstrates an unbiased argument. The first example on how he does this is the particular method in which he establishes common ground with the audience. Although many writers use this strategy, they tend to simply include “we” and “our” throughout their papers. Wilson executes this establishment of common ground in a very precise way. In the fourth paragraph, where he asserts his claim, he specifies that it is “our goal...” By waiting until the fourth paragraph to establish common ground, the claim becomes much more effective. His claim is strengthened by placing the responsibility in the hands of the reader. He then refrains from using personal pronouns until the end of the essay. The repetition of the word “we” in his conclusion, serves to make the reader feel obligated to what the author is presenting. His clever choice of when to include the personal pronouns reinforces his argument at very crucial points.

Another critical piece to the strength of Wilson’s argument is his ability to analyze varying points of view. Not only does this serve to rid of any possible biased notions, but it also helps to discredit any counter-claims. Wilson draws people to his point of view by evaluating multiple opponents’ arguments, then clearly dismantling them. He first attacks the argument of gun control advocates by explaining that “the rate of fatal gun accidents has been declining while the level of gun ownership has been rising” (127). Later, he goes on to refute the counter argument of the National Rifle Association by pointing out reasons such as, “the prospect of being locked up may deter criminals” (127). These two reasons greatly improve the author’s overall credibility.

The main strategy Wilson implements into his argument is the use of logical analysis. In almost every paragraph of the essay, he includes rationale reasons and explanations. In the tenth paragraph, the author analyzes the thought process of a criminal. Wilson investigates the mindset of a criminal by explaining that the criminal recognizes that the chances of him being shot are equivalent to the chances of him going to prison. He points out and analyzes a variety of crucial ideas which tremendously help his argument’s clarity (128). Wilson offers more logical reasoning in paragraph 14, in which he explains the reason why criminals carry guns. He points out the worsening issue of gang violence and how criminals carry guns not to rob stores, but to protect themselves from other armed criminals. He explains that this is crucial because, “guns often convert spontaneous outbursts of anger into fatal encounters. When some people carry them on the streets, others will want to carry them to protect themselves, and an urban arms race will be underway” (128). The illustration of logical correlations that Wilson provides tremendously enhances his argument by aiding the reader in connecting with his own personal thought process.

Although a very well-written piece, Wilson’s essay lacks a very key element to a persuasive argument- citing his sources.

Wilson’s argument is centered around statistics and facts, however on many occasions he does not include a source to where he found his evidence. For example, in the eleventh paragraph he discusses a great point that, “in fewer than 2 percent of the gun fatalities was the victim someone mistaken for an intruder,” (127) but fails to provide any statistical proof that could verify his point. By overlooking the importance of including his sources, Wilson’s argument could easily be seen as untrustworthy.

James Q. Wilson does an outstanding job at persuading his reader in his essay, “Just Take Away Their Guns.” Wilson cleverly instills fear into the reader while still establishing common ground and remaining unbiased throughout the entire essay. Aside from the lack of sources for his statistical evidence, he applies an exceptional amount of logic to the entire argument, which made the essay a very persuasive

piece.