I have grown up around and been raised by people who would consider themselves gun rights activist, and my early views of the topic was molded through them. As I go older though I became more aware of the all the statistics behind gun violence and realized the issue wasn't as clear cut as my family made it seem. After looking into the issue independently, I came to the realization that what I heard was not always correct, and in order to further educate myself I needed to think more critically on the issues surrounding that topic and come to that conclusion on my own. That is exactly what I have done.

My values, and the values and rights of everyone in this country are effected by how we approach government evolvement in gun safety. More personally speaking, I don't think that any person should be able to buy an assault weapon. I am qualified to write about this due to all the research I have done on this topic in the past to stay informed on the issues. After all the research in the past, I know both sides on the issues, and I believe the background checks are the best way to move forward.

I think the best way for me to approach this issue was to make a claim and stick with the facts. I say this because I know my side could be argued in a way that chooses to take a moral high ground. This would make my argument seem more sympathetic, but I was am afraid doing this will create an argument that belittles any counter argument and forces the opposition to be in the wrong in some way. I think since the argument of doing anything to prevent deaths and mass shootings is an inherently pathos argument, it would be better to let that side speak for its self and focus on creating a logos argument.

That being said, I don't think I could make a good argument around credibility. This is because I am not a credible person, but a freshmen in college. Also, there is a lot of disagreement between people that are credible in one way or another. Over all, creating an ethos argument would be too difficult for either side, so I won't focus on it.

After I lay out my supporting points, I think it would be a good time to break down opposing arguments. In these break downs, I can analysis the assumptions made in their writings and prove why the assumptions are false. If any bias appear, I can address that as well.

To end the essay, I would address the significance of the topic in further detail as a way to lead to the conclusion. In my conclusion I would restate my thesis in a way that incorporates my main points. To end the essay, I would find a way to tell the reader how they could help make background checks mandatory.
