She used a second amendment to support her argument that the gun is only for trained militia. The reason is that guns are dangerous, so keeping knives and dogs is safe. If I do not solve the main reason for the overall poor gun, Ivins' assertion is still unclear.
Ivins said, "Let me start the discussion, I will not point out that it is a counter gun, let me point out that I am a professional knife, let's think about the benefits of the knife" (323). If Evans is not counterattack, why should she raise this argument? She is a "pro knife" and she provides evidence of cutter benefits. Her proof supports the reason why she believes that a knife is safer than a gun. If you use a knife instead of a gun, health generally improves. We will be nationwide with wonderful runners. In addition, the tool does not bounce and people rarely die when cleaning tools (323)
If we want to have a knife we need to be healthy, but if we have a knife we need to be healthy. Therefore, I can not protect this person. We
In an endless argument about the right of the gun, "With the knife, getting the dog, getting rid of the gun," the author Molly Ivins uses humor as the main weapon to prove his own view I will. Through it, she understood all claims for more stringent gun control. It was her position and I shot down them with confidence with facts and confidence. Ivins started saying that her position is not that strict as saying, "I am not a gun, I am just a knife." It makes the reader laugh, so no one who opposes will not open his eyes. Subject In her next point, she also attacked the ancient gun control theory, the second amendment. She cited directly the constitutional statement that the right to carry weapons today includes the formation of a well-trained militia organization where most people will use small firearms. She continues this robust evidence model and carefully refutes the discussion of the entire article.
In her essay, "Get a knife and get a dog, but get rid of the gun" Molly Ivins controls the gun by expressing her belief that weapons should be banned . Evans declared her view clearly and strongly, but her overall discussion was ruined by her statement. It is not easy to judge whether Ivins' target audience is "progang" or "antigan". Then, if her goal is to persuade gun supporters to change their view, then she will not necessarily succeed; her goal is to build friendship among people who oppose the use of guns If she was, she would have worked better.