IIlusory Handgun Safety
Cynthia Tucker is a writer whose article was syndicated in the Seattle times. She wrote an article published in 1993 titled "Illusory Handgun Safety". Her article argues against women buying handguns for personal safety. She is trying to convince young women who are either single or head of households, that buying a gun for personal safety is not such a wise choice.Tucker portrays herself as a young woman who has moved now to the city, and is a bit concerned for her safety. She makes the point that she is accustomed to guns, and that her growing up with firearms in her house, and living in the country somehow qualifies her to speak on gun safety. Tucker uses such language as "It is easy to understand the inclination to go out and buy a gun. I know the instinct to ward off evil and the seductive appeal of the notion of firearms as instruments of protection" (A4). She insinuates that "Hey, I'm just like you". Tucker then brings in her own father as evidence to support her credibility. Her father is a hunter "to whom hunting small game comes [] as natural as breathing". While her father may be used to handling guns in a rural country setting, he can hardly be called in as an "expert witness" to support her outlandis
He could have suggested a self defense class or offered to buy a body alarm that would sound in a violent situation. What would have made Tucker's argument better would have been her father giving some sound advice. She later goes on to tug at the readers' heartstrings by bringing in the tragedy of children, and uneducated adults being killed at their own hands. If Tucker had bothered to read anything about the NRA, beforehand, the way she sought out information to support her claim, she then would not have been so blatantly ignorant in her statement. She is blindly attacking guns, instead of the finger that pulls the trigger. Responsible gun owners do not "play" with guns, as I am sure an educated person knows. Attacking the NRA by calling them "America's least-responsible lobby" clearly demonstrates her one-sided argument. Hunters use guns to kill game for food and trophy. Her father most likely has never had to deal with the perils of a city, so he most likely can't know what her situation is like in the city. First of all, it suggests that the handgun is the object that is providing the safety, and that handgun owners thought that the gun would be the safety provider. Tucker has already demonstrated that she is easily and whimsically swayed by people of her own authority. There are two things in this quote illustrating an invalid statement. Tucker completely ignores the fact that the gun does not have sentient thought, let alone the capacity to pick itself up and shoot. Tucker successfully proves one thing: She herself is not responsible enough to own a gun, and we should be grateful that she, and others like her who can be swayed so easily, are not using guns.
Common topics in this essay:
I'm Tucker,
Emory University,
Handgun Safety,
Ironically Tucker,
Attacking NRA,
NRA NRA,
Instead Tucker,
Cynthia Tucker,
personal safety,
america's least-responsible lobby,
gun ownership,
least-responsible lobby,
hunters guns,
buying gun,
tucker brings,
america's least-responsible,
gun tucker,
gun safety,
handgun owners,
|
Acceptance Essays
