Analyzing an Argument
This argument is directed to two different types of people: the police and the public. This addresses two different types of an audience. It addresses a hostile audience and it addresses a sympathetic audience. You can who the audience is because the author tells you in the essay. The tone of this essay is informative and it uses a lot of examples. This brings up our second major tool. This tool is called pathos. The author uses some very detailed examples of events that happened to get the people to have sympathy for the topic. The author tells his audience that most of the violence is directed towards African Americans and people of other races. This brings up pathos because race is still a touchy subject these days and some people can relate to what is happening in the world. The last major tool that the author uses is ethos. The author gains credibility through his quotes and his examples. He uses things from people like Yussuf Naimkly from the University of Regina. He also uses people like Patrick V. Murphy who was a head of police commissions in Detroit, New York and Washington, D.C. There are two major assumptions that I have taken from this article. The first major assumption is that some police officers are good but most of them are bad and use their power ungratefully. The second assumption is that most of the police brutality is directed toward people with and ethnic background. He uses some examples to back these up but what the author fails to realize is that there are other incidents in which these assumptions can be countered. I feel that the argument in this essay is pretty effective towards the public audience. I feel that if the political audience were to read it they would need a little more evidence in order for the author to swing them. The police can just make comebacks saying that are only a few events that have happened; although, the author does address a statistic that a police officer stated dealing with...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document