ENG week 4 discussion | latest 2022

Main Post Paragraph 2: Practice Using Your Voice in a Full Body Paragraph Toward Your Essay Referring back to the lesson, please compose and present a single, well-developed draft of one body paragraph for our argument research essay, paying special attention to making your voice the driving force and to using solid logic. Remember the parts of a good body paragraph for an argument essay:  Composing a smooth, clear topic sentence in your voice that provides a transition and that asserts your topic for the paragraph  Using your voice to introduce and present your evidence that supports your topic sentence  Using logic in your voice to tie the evidence to your argumentative point  Avoiding logical fallacies  Using concession and rebuttal if you are presenting opposing viewpoints  Ending strongly with your voice in an extended explanation of how all factors involved in this paragraph drive home your argument in this particular point  Making sure to synthesize throughout, with clear connections between all evidence and all of your logic and assertions Hello Everyone, Main Post Paragraph 1: Evaluate an argumentative point This discussion is chosen from the article Allowing Guns On Campus Will Invite Tragedies, Not End Them by Dr. Daniel Webster and Ronal Daniels that is located on page 470. Dr. Daniel Webster is a well-respected professor of health policy and management at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and also the direct for Gun Policy and Research. Furthermore, he studies and writes about public policy, economics, and community development (Seyler & Brizee, 2019). Throughout the article, both authors use their voices to oppose allowing guns on any campus. The authors research proves the proposal for allowing the guns to be brought on campus and carrying a concealed weapon for reasons of perpetrators knowing that their victims will be unarmed and defenseless due to the legal restrictions, fatal mass shootings, and that gun carrying civilians are rarely able to stop the perpetrators (Seyler & Brizee, 2019). The one logical fallacy that was noticed while reading the article was contending that if citizens were armed with firearms, could end the carnage of active shootings. I believe that the intent was approaching the topic from another’s point of view and vaguely support that if one perpetrator came through the doors, then the vigilantes would be able to prevent a mass shooting. Though, immediately it presents evidence that it rarely occurs. The author emphasizes that if firearms were allowed for strictly self-defense, it would not affect their risks of being injured in one way or another. The form of reading this article does match the writing we are learning so far in this session. Although short and written differently in the ways we are expected to write our essays, it provided research for evidence to back up their claims of opposing being allowed firearms on campus. It also created great counter claims that were then rebutted to lean the reader towards their side of the argument.