Pro Gun Control Speech
The issue of gun control is a controversial debate. Currently, the United States of America constitution does not have any restrictions on gun ownership. The lack of gun restrictions has led to massive loss of lives, most of them being mass killings. The U.S. National Riffles Association continues to sell guns to people without any background checks since it is not mandatory. Whereas more people continue to die due to poor gun policies, some people still argue that people have a right to protect themselves using their guns. Some pro-gun control activists dedicate their time campaigning for stricter gun control policies in America. One way of campaigning is by delivering speeches and addresses on gun control policies.
Emma Gonzalez delivered a moving, yet fierce gun control speech in 2017 after a gunman attacked her school. In February 2017, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school was ambushed by a gunman who killed seventeen people. The gunman, who was a student at the same high school, had purchased a gun, with which he used to kill his schoolmates in a fit of rage. Although officials cited that the killer was mentally unstable during the incident, the lack of gun control policies in America enabled the teenager to access a firearm. Emma Gonzalez, a senior student at the school, delivered a speech calling out the government for the lack of gun control policies, which had left seventeen innocent people dead and hundreds of others psychologically unstable. The address by Emma is not only using logic argument but also shows consistency in her plea to advocate for a change in gun control policy. Emma utilizes her credibility, appeals to the emotions of her audience as well as use logic and irrefutable facts to fortify her argument.
Emma comes out as a reliable source of information during her address. As stated earlier, Emma is a senior student at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school. Therefore, she is a member of the affected school. Furthermore, Emma is a student, which makes her a voice for the students at the school. Also, Emma notes that she interacted at a personal level with the killer, and he did not seem mentally unstable. Emma says, “From the interactions that I had with the shooter, before the shooting and from the information that I currently know about him, I don’t know if he was mentally ill.” Therefore, Emma is asking people not to blame the mental status of the shooter since it was poor gun policies that enabled him to access a firearm.
Emma is a reliable source of information because she is a victim of inadequate gun control policies. If, for instance, another person who is not a victim of the mass shooting delivered the address, the speech would not be as persuasive. However, Emma has experienced a mass shooting first hand, and she knows better the adverse effects of ineffective gun control policies. Also, Emma states that it is up to the victims of poor gun policies like herself to be the change since all the government does is send prayers and thoughts after a mass shooting. Thus, since Emma is a victim, she adapts a persuasive tone that narrates the plight of poor gun control policy victims.
Emma utilizes emotional appeal to present her speech as persuasive. Most people rely on their emotions to make significant decisions. Therefore, when pitching an idea, it is vital to appeal to the feelings of the audience and argue the facts emotionally. Death resulting from poor gun control policies is an emotional and sensitive topic. Therefore, Emma already has an emotional audience, but an emotional address will move the audience into taking action. As mentioned earlier, the shooter who ambushed Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school shot and killed seventeen people. Thus, the entire Marjory fraternity is grieving. Emma begins by urging all victims of poor gun policies to take action since the government refuses to implement strategies. In the second paragraph of her address, Emma says, “We certainly do not understand why it should be harder to make plans with friends on weekends than to buy an automatic or semi-automatic weapon” that statement depicts the extent of the damage done by poor gun policies. That it is easier to buy an automatic weapon than to make weekend plans with friends is ironic. Ideally, gun control policies should be strict to reduce the number of people in possession of firearms. Ironically, gun control policies are so ineffective to the extent that a middle school student can access a gun.
Emma appeals to the emotions of her audience when she mentions the lack of action from the government. At first, Emma says that guns in America have developed at a rate that makes her dizzy, yet gun control policies remain unchanged. Logically, gun control policies should advance at the same pace as the development of guns. However, all the government does is hold debates on gun policies and suppress bills that advocate for stricter gun policies. Emma states, “A.P. Gov had about three debates this year. Some discussions on the subject even occurred during the shooting while students were hiding in the closets.” Sadly, the government turns a blind eye to such mass shootings even when they occur right under their noses.
Emma also appeals to emotions when she calls out the National Riffles Association. In her address, Emma notes that government officials, including the president, receive donations from the National Riffles Association. Thus, many leaders suppress bills advocating for gun control policies because they benefit from the manufacturers and distributors of the firearms. Emma states, “To every politician who is taking donations from the NRA, shame on you.” Also, Emma recalls that one year earlier, President Trump repealed an Obama-era regulation that would have made it easy to deny the access of firearms to mentally unstable people. The leaders and politicians in the government value money more than the lives of American citizens. At the end of her speech, Emma calls out all arguments that object to gun control policies. The senior high school student fearlessly condemns all politicians who suppress gun control policies motions because they are funded by the National Riffles Association and all the objections they put forward to cripple gun control policies. Emma says, “That us kids don’t know what we’re talking about, that we’re too young to understand how the government works. We call B.S.” Therefore, although the leaders think the children cannot make a change, the kids understand how the system works since they are the real victims of inadequate gun control policies, unlike the politicians who sit safely in their high horses and assume mass killings.
Emma also uses irrefutable facts to make a logical argument about gun control policies. One would think that a mass killing of seventeen innocent people, among them high school students as enough reason to implement strict gun control policies. However, the U.S. government continues to sit tight and ignore the problem at hand. Emma mentions a website that is meant to track the number of shootings in the USA, but the data collected is not used to implement gun control policies. To show the negligence of the U.S. government, Emma gives an example of several countries that implemented gun control policies and reduced the number of shootings. Australia has one mass shooting, and after introducing gun safety policies, Australia has never experienced another mass shooting. Similarly, Canada and the U.K. introduced gun control policies after experiencing mass shootings, which reduced the number of shootings. Japan, on the other hand, has never had a mass shooting. The facts stated by Emma make a logical argument that gun control policies reduced the number of shootings, just like in Australia, Canada, and the U.K.
Emma uses facts about the money politicians receive from the National Riffles Association. Emma states, “Thirty million dollars. And divided by the number of gunshot victims in the United States in the one and one-half months in 2018 alone, that comes out to being $5,800. Is that how much these people are worth to you, Trump? If you don’t do anything to prevent this from continuing to occur, that the number of gunshot victims will go up, and the number that they are worth will go down. And we will be worthless to you.” That statement by Emma is laden with emotions as well as irrefutable facts. It is illogical that a politician would vote for a bill that would suppress their financier. As long as leaders continue to receive donations from the National Riffles Association, the government will never implement any effective gun control and safety policies.
Emma also mentions a senator who sponsored the bill that ensured gun owners underwent mental health checkups. Initially, the FBI conducted background checks adjudicated to be mentally ill to prevent them from accessing firearms. Ironically, the same senator states, Well, it’s a shame the FBI isn’t doing background checks on these mentally ill people” the statement by the senator goes to prove that as long as politicians accept donations from The National Riffles Association, America does not stand a chance in passing effective gun control policies.
In conclusion, Emma Gonzalez delivers a persuasive pro-gun control address. Her speech is emotional, as well as logical. Being a high school student and a victim of a mass shooting makes Emma the ideal speaker to deliver a persuasive address concerning gun control and safety policies.
Work Cited
CNN. Florida student Emma Gonzalez to lawmakers and gun advocates: ‘We call BS’. 18 February 2018. 21 October 2019 <https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/17/us/florida-student-emma-gonzalez-speech/index.html >.