Kathleen Rice
Mr. Michael S. Henriksen
ENGL 1010
2 January 2019
Kristof’s Purpose
Rhetoric is defined as any form of communication with the intentions to persuade. One of
the rhetorical appeals that people use to persuade the audience is logic. In the article, “It’s Time
to Talk About the N.R.A.,” by Nicholas Kristof, published on October 30th, 2018, by The New
York Times, the text summarizes the issues with gun laws within the N.R.A., also known as the
National Rifle Association. The article sums up that there are definite pros and cons to having
the right to bear arms, and it goes in depth on both sides. Although some say the use of rhetoric
is ineffective, I will demonstrate that Kristof effectively uses logic to inform the audience why
people are fighting for gun laws, why others are against it, and to challenge the NRA by making
them question their power.
Nicholas Kristof uses logic to discuss why some people despise gun laws and why others
support it. There are people who think that no one should be able to own and bear a firearm,
possibly because they think people will misuse the right and use it for gun violence. Gun
violence is a real thing and is happening worldwide. “Every day in America, about 104 people
die from guns, while in Japan it takes about a decade for that many to die from gun violence,”
(1). By using this statistic, it blatantly points out some of the issues with gun laws and violence.
There is a real issue on gun violence and there are human deaths that actually occur. By using
logic, Kristof makes it more comparable to other statistics and points out which one is worse. On
the other hand, the NRA fights for the right to use guns because they believe there are many
effective reasons to use a firearm. For instance, in the text, it states “America’s gun culture and
Canada’s had been similar in the 1950s and 60s, focused on rifles used for hunting,” (2). This
statement uses logic to explain that early on, people for the most part did not use guns in a deadly
way, other than for hunting. The NRA supported tighter gun laws in the mid 1900s. Therefore,
according to Kristof, the NRA used to be about gun safety, but as time passed, they are now
focusing on gun marketing. In his article, it reads, “President Trump and members of Congress
denounced the violence but show no sign of actually doing anything to stop it: So Americans will
continue to die from guns at a rate of one every 15 minutes,” (1). Statistically, if all of this is
true, I can see how Kristof directly blames the NRA and encourages Americans to help stop gun
sales. If we do this, then it will hopefully decrease gun violence which will end up decreasing the
amount of deaths that occur from gun ownership.
Kristof uses logic to effectively challenge the NRA by usefully making them question
their power. In his article, he mentions, “There are no magic solutions to gun violence in
America, but neither is reducing the toll an impossible challenge. We can do better, and one step
would be to avoid demonizing gun owners, while relentlessly challenging the political influence
of the NRA,” (6). Kristof is a former member of the NRA, and from his perspective he sees the
association slowly changing. Because of this change, Kristof is entirely against the association.
Kristof simply says at the end of the text, “If we want to tackle gun violence in America, we can
start by discrediting it as an extremist organization that has been a boon to the firearms industry
and a catastrophe for the American public,” (6). From Kristof’s point, he blames the NRA in part
for the amount of deaths that occur from gun violence. Both arguments effectively use logic to
show that although there may not be a simple answer to gun violence, we, as readers, must be
aware of the issue regarding guns. In other words, if the NRA has become an extremist
organization, then it is in America’s best interest to challenge that.
In conclusion, I have addressed how Kristof uses logic to effectively inform the audience
why people oppose and support gun laws and to challenge the NRA by making them question
their power. There are many disagreements when it comes to tighter gun laws and gun violence.
The NRA has a big part in the argument because the organization fights against the laws, making
the restrictions on guns open to anyone. Overall, the issue on gun violence still exists today, the
NRA will continue to fight for less restrictions, and others, such as Kristof, will fight against that
claim. In order for gun violence to completely disappear, we, as Americans, must help challenge
the NRA by making them question their power.
Works Cited
Kristof, Nicholas. “It's Time to Talk About the N.R.A.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 29
Oct. 2018, [Link]/interactive/2018/10/29/opinion/[Link].