Do you want gun control or not?

On Friday, October 18, 2019, a blogger under the name of Impala64ssa, posted a blog titled, Recalling the Tragic History of Gun Control. There are many weak points throughout this post. 

First and foremost, the publisher is trying to make an argument that is not concrete and all over the place. The primary dilemma with this blog post is that there is no real claim. The writer, Impala64ssa, states that "Maybe it's time to pursue real solutions to criminal violence and forget about a war on peaceable, law-abiding gun owners." It is hard to tell what the author's real argument is because, throughout the post, there is an implication that they want gun regulation, but then they seem to contradict themselves with the statement above. 

Another predicament with this post is that the initial poster did not break the piece into sections or paragraphs; this makes it more difficult for us to read and makes it seem like one big chunk of information. There is also a problem with the wording; it is quite offputting. It appears as if they were randomly throwing words into their writing because some of the words seem redundant and are not necessary.

Lastly, the author did not establish their creditability. They state that politicians respond to gun violence by using the same mechanisms, "creating more felonies to criminalize law-abiding gun owners," and they give us this immense lesson on what politicians have done throughout history. Yet, there is no evidence to know if any of this information is accurate or not. 

Putting all the critiques to the side, I can agree that politicians have been doing the same thing for years, and something needs to change, but I cannot agree with the rest of their "argument" and their outlook on gun owners.

Take A Chill Pill

On Friday, October 4, 2019, the Los Angeles Times published an article titled, If Democrats want universal coverage, they need to abandon the ‘Medicare for all’ fantasy. The author, Peter D, Salins, makes a strong argument, but there are a few weak spots throughout it. 

First and foremost, there are a couple of typos in the article, which could make readers think it was not proofread before submitting it. 

Secondly, at the beginning of the article, the author states that the progressives’ health care system plan is based on “serious misconceptions” but they do not necessarily state what the misconceptions are, just what is disregarded in their plan. Peter D. Salins, sounds very, anti-democratic progressives, throughout the entire article. They come off as quite hostile towards not just their ideologies or intentions, but for them in particular. Salins stated, “Further, every country so admired by the Democratic progressives” the tone set in place is very aggressive and sarcastic. Even the title of the article gives off a hostile feel. They should have steered clear of such tones. 

Although there are a few weak points in the article, there are some strong points as well. While Salins is pointing out everything wrong with the democratic progressives health care approach Salins also provides an alternate solution for the health care system. Salins reveals details about the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and how it can be strengthened. Salins also, provided statistics on other countries and their health care systems to back up their argument.