Gun Laws Language Analysis
The US will weep, it will pray, it will grieve. It's not enough is an editorial published in The Age on December 16th 2012. This editorial contends that stricter resistance to gun laws in the US is entrenched in society, despite the horrific shooting incidents of recent times. The article mocks the insanity of people in the US who seemingly value guns over the safety of their children. This is coupled with Ed Gannon's opinion piece, titled, Local laws on firearm ownership hits the mark, which presents a more balanced viewpoint yet still laughs at the absurdity of the US's gun laws. Gagnon contends that Australia's implementation of gun laws was very effective and that the US must follow suit, primarily to negate the number of fatalities from gun crimes. Further, the visual by cartoonist David Pope, exemplifies both articles contentions yet focuses intensely on the juxtaposition between life and death. It illustrates Americans intent on maintaining the right to bear arms, to the detriment of the counties safety and their children's.
The editorial presented in The Age presents a hard-line stance on the nature of gun crime and culture in the US. The bold and emphatic language choices in the articles title, adds a sense of power and emphasises that showing sympathy to the victims of gun crime is simply "not enough". The article immediately appeals to the emotional nature of the reader, complementing the opening paragraphs which are very high in emotional intensity. The editor uses strong language throughout, calling gun crime "shocking and distressing". This is used to attack society's lack of response to the issue, appealing to common sense. This appeal is re-iterated throughout the entire article as the editor attacks society, labelling Americans as lacking "sanity". This appeal to sanity is illustrated through the editors mocking tone which is used to criticise Americans "sentiment" to maintaining the right to bear arms over the safety of the nations children. The credibility of the editors response is aided by a frugal use of statistics that places this issue into perspective, contrasting the number of Americans shot each year with the MCG on grand final day. The Age's editorial is emphatically concluded by a clever use of forceful repetition, which states that these crimes are "so brutal, so bloody, so shocking". These strong language choices position the reader to feel aggrieved and demand immediate action.
Likewise, Ed Gannon's article is similarly opened by initially labelling the US Constitution's right to bear arms as "absurd". The use of this word positions the reader to be drawn into the article, questioning how Australian's values must be so far "apart from Americans on the gun issue". Gannon adds credibility to his article by appealing to patriotism, referencing Australia's gun laws as a successful scheme to reduce gun crimes. He said that "most gun owners accepted they had to give up their semi-automatic weapons for the greater good." This labels Australians as being responsible and reasonable, opening Gannon's attack on American society. He calls the American Rifle Associations members "nut cases", highlighting the stupidity of their suggestion to place guns in every school to counter school shooting threats. This is coupled with his severe attack on media personality Alex Jones, stating that "(he) wouldn't be surprised if the Oxford Dictionary is upgrading its definition of Loony ... to Mr. Jones". This completely discredits Jones viewpoint through the use of a mocking, almost disbelieving tone which was also evident throughout the editorial in The Age. In many ways, Gannon's and The Age's article share similar beliefs, stating that "Gun access for everyone is a terrible idea." Gannon's however presents a more balanced viewpoint, recognising that guns can be beneficial for some people saying that "It is wrong to think all guns are bad". This article focuses on appealing to the patriotism of Australians by lamenting the US as being irresponsible and incapable of properly dealing with the severity of gun crimes. The article concludes in a somber tone, recognising the need for guns in some occupations yet criticising America's lack of action. It positions the reader to condemn Americans actions and think "why can't they be like Australia?"
Finally, David Pope's cartoon skilfully juxtaposes life with death by comparing Americans need for guns as being as important as the safety of their children. Pope substitutes guns into regular activities undertaken with children to highlight the "absurdity" and "insane" nature of Americans choices. This technique strikingly exposes the lack of rational and common sense amongst American gun lovers. This cartoon aptly supports both The Age's editorial and Gannon's opinion piece however focuses intensely on the question posed in the editorial. The editorials appeal to sanity and human nature is reflected in this visual by laughing at Americans "(sentimentality) about their rights" compared to their "(sentimentality) about their children and the innocence of children". It mocks the stupidity of American policy by criticising the maintenance of the right to bear arms when school shootings are ending the lives of innocent children. Pope suggests that Americans value guns as much as their children and the right to bear arms is entrenched in their society.
In conclusion, the editorial in The Age as well as Ed Gannon's opinion piece both appeal to common sense, highlighting the lack of sanity and absurd nature of Americas lack of gun laws. Their use of statistics, strong language and severe attacks on the people of the US would likely persuade some on the basis of these arguments alone. However, The Age's tendency to simply reject contrary viewpoints weakens its case when compared to the more balanced opinion piece in The Herald Sun. These articles are astutely aided by David Pope's cartoon which acts to support both articles contentions, emphasising the sad extent to which guns are instilled in American society. It becomes increasingly obvious that these articles target regular Australian's who are ill informed about the issues surrounding gun crime in America, positioning them to question why the US has not taken any dramatic action yet.