Essay Analysis: Comparing Arguments on Gun Control and English

This discussion board post analyzes two essays, "Our Blind Spot About Guns" by Nicholas Kristof and "Don't Make English Official, Ban It Instead" by Dennis Baron. The post compares the authors' approaches to argumentation, with Kristof employing a direct, evidence-based approach to advocate for gun control regulations, and Baron using a sarcastic tone to suggest banning English. The student argues that Kristof's essay is more effective due to its use of logic and evidence, particularly drawing parallels between gun violence and automobile safety regulations. The post includes citations and a peer review, further exploring the strengths and weaknesses of each essay's argument. The student's work is a response to a week 4 assignment that focused on the different approaches to making an argument.

Running head: ENGLISH
English
Name of the Student:
Name of University:
Author Note

2
ENGLISH
In the essay ‘Our Blind Spot about Guns’ author Nicholas Kristof how the control of
guns is a necessity to ensure safety and security in America. Gun violence is a very debatable
topic, because the issue is quite alarming in America, as cases re reported for misuse of Guns,
almost every day, leading to injury and death. Some people point out that regulation of gun
manufacturing and distribution can help in controlling gun violence, while, others believe that
Gun violence has very much to do with people’s intensions. However, Kristof argues that an
annual background check can help in dealing with the situation, just like police confiscate
vehicles, if the drivers are found to be at fault. The author sounds convincing as he says “If we
had the same auto fatality rate today that we had in 1921, by my calculations we would have
715,000 Americans dying annually in vehicle accidents. Instead, we’ve reduced the fatality rate
by more than 95 percent — not by confiscating cars, but by regulating them and their drivers
sensibly” (Nytimes.com., 2020). The essay is effective, as it addresses a real problem with an
evidence based view. It is further stated that regulations on who can purchase guns, use it and
how to, should be more effective if it is strictly implemented and regulated within the nation
rather than actually using means to confiscate guns.
On the other hand, the essay ‘Don’t make English Official, Ban it instead’ is an essay in
which Dennis Baron points out why English should not be spoken in America. He puts light on
the considerations made by the Congress for English the official language, to which his responds
by contradicting to suggest the exact opposite and radical. Baron puts forth his arguments, which
is controversial by substantiating it with the evolution of languages and how one has replaced
another in history. He does not abstain from showing the positive aspects of Language English
while proposing to ban it. The primary idea behind Baron emphasizing on the ban is that he
wants to promote it more vigorously, which is only possible through a ban, when people, who do

3
ENGLISH
not speak English will also be tempted to pick up the language. This can be exemplified as
Baron (2020) says itself, as he states “Those who already use it will continue to do so, and those
who don’t will want to try out what has been forbidden.” The author has been humorous to put
his idea across through the essay, hinting at human nature to do the exact opposite of what they
are supposed to.
Peer Post One:
In the first peer post, the student contrasts the two essays concerning two very different
topic in a very precise manner. It has been pointed out very correctly that the essay “Our Blind
Post about Guns” employs a direct tone in addressing the issue of Gun Violence whereas. On the
other hand, in the essay “Don’t Make English Official- Ban it Instead”, the author has chosen to
employ a sarcastic approach to assert his point.
The post highlights the effectiveness of the essays and has been asserted that Nicholas
Kristof’s essay is more compelling as he has made use of logic and evidences to prove his point,
such as statistics of the death caused by Gun Violence and misuse of the same by comparing it
with misconduct of drivers and seizure of cars and licenses. It has been argued that Kristof’s
point to reduce gun violence with the help of regulatory measures. The points which have been
raised in the post are pertinent and have been justified with examples.
Peer Post Two:
The post talks about the two essays and their arguments even though, the essay “Don’t
Make English Official- Ban it Instead” has not been discussed while paying great attention to the
arguments which have been placed by the author, in the essay, in a sarcastic manner, expecting a
paradoxical outcome out of a rigid step, such as a ban. Dennis’s intention is not to propose a ban

4
ENGLISH
anticipating withdrawal of the language English, but expecting a rapid opposite reaction, by
embracing English as a language for communication as people tend to do the things, which are
not expected to do.
On the contrary, the post intends to put emphasis on the fact that the essay “Our Blind
Spot about Guns” is more effective as the author points out important points about safety by
making advances in security levels and eligibility to use a Gun. It has been correctly pointed out
in the post that the author has raised some very pertinent points which are useful in order to
regulate gun violence.

5
ENGLISH
References
Nytimes.com. (2020). Opinion | Our Blind Spot About Guns. Retrieved 30 March 2020, from
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/31/opinion/nicholas-kristof-our-blind-spot-about-
guns.html
Baron, D. (2020). The Web of Language. Retrieved 30 March 2020, from
https://blogs.illinois.edu/view/25/130039