For
me the hardest part of this blog assignment has been finding sources and making
sure that they are creditable. There are just so many sources and articles out
there it is hard to find the one that you want and then once you have you need
to check to make sure it is creditable and not unreliable. Before, I thought that
finding out if it is creditable or not was checking the date and the website
but it’s not, it is so much more than that. Finding the date, the author and
his or her background, the subject of the article, are some of the many ways to
check its credibility. For this blog I will be focusing more so on the CRAAP
method and making sure that I put all of the information on the blog this time.
At this time there are not any comments on my phase 5 blog so I cannot answer
that question.
This
source (link is at the bottom of the page) was written about 3 weeks ago on a January
24. It is primarily on a bill that is being presented to congress soon and the
effects that it will cause. I feel that this relevant because it has a lot of
good information about why people want to ban assault weapons and why it is or
is not a good idea. Mark Kogan wrote this article and he is a lawyer that has received
a J.D. from Washington College of Law and also a B.A. from Stanford. I feel that
he is a reliable source and did his research before writing this article. He is
very accurate in his findings even quoted some senators in this article. I believe
that he wrote this just to inform anyone who wanted to know what is going on
and what kind of bills are trying to go through our government.
Dianne
Feinstein Assault Weapons Ban is Political Suicide For Democrats is the title
of this article and talks about the bill that Dianne Feinstein wants to pass. In
this bill it will limit the number of rounds you can have in your gun by taking
away and no longer selling high-capacity round mags. Also this bill will “ban
all weapons capable of holding a magazine with a greater than 10 round capacity”.
Meaning that most pistols and a lot of rifles and assault weapons will be now illegal
to possess and sell. This will not only not get passed but will also cause an
uproar in congress and sides will be taken.
What
this bill would do to me is take away my 45. Smith and Wesson pistol and limit
me to what I could buy in the future. If this is what people want then what
will be next to ban? Cars that go over 60 mph, because when people speed they
get into accidents and then that kills people. That is the same accusation that
we are making about guns. Guns don’t kill people, people that are mad, hurt,
confused, stressed out kill people. It’s the same with cars, cars don’t kill
people, people that are mad, sad, upset, confused, and emotional in cars kill
people. Plus you cannot just expect to walk up to someone’s door and knock on
it and say I am taking your guns because it is against the law, and not expect
for someone to act out in violence. If the government passes this bill I believe
that it will be one of if not the worst bill ever past.
Ben,
ReplyDeleteThis post addresses all the components for blog phase 6, and you chose an interesting article that, I agree, is relevant to your research.
I'd like to push back on a couple of your evaluations:
First, you say that the author is "just writing to inform" but look more closely at the introduction he includes before the article (the section in italics) as well as the tone of his language (for example, "misguided ravings" or "ineffective and divisive approach), which indicate he is trying to persuade his audience to think like him (these are not neutral terms). Also, accuracy evaluations should focus less on the author (that's what the other "A" category is for) and more on the evidence, language, and extent to which the information can be verified by other people/sources.
While I agree that the article is about Feinstein's political bill, there's more to the story. This writer has a definite opinion about the ineffectiveness of this bill as well as what the real is to gun control in America (reference his line on culture being the real issue). Having an accurate understanding of the article's purpose should also help you write a more effective response. Rather than just exploring your stance on the general issue (gun control), you should respond to the indictments and conclusions that the author is making. For example, do you agree with his assessment of Feinstein's bill? Do you think the course of action he suggests is legitimate and will work the way he says it will?