Lois Beckett's article on gun control is about the disparity of violence between blacks and those of other races in the wake of multiple mass shootings. That isn't what is going to be discussed in this essay, however.  This article uses logos quite well by including graphs, numbers and facts to prove the point that there is trouble in the black community.  The article came at a perfect time after multiple mass shootings of black communities, bringing great attention not to gun control itself but the impact of guns on a singular community.  There is also a good use of ethos, bringing in multiple first-hand accounts of mass shootings as well as experts on gun violence and articles detailing efforts taking to curb gun violence in a plethora of ways.  Where this article shines, however, is in the use of Pathos.  Many articles would use an over abundance of anger and rage which lessens the arguments intent, making the author seem uninformed or only acting on their anger rather than forming a well organized argument.  By not overdoing the use of Pathos and keeping the wording cool and collected, Lois Beckett's article on gun control keeps it's organization and most importantly, it's argument, intact.

The black community faces a major problem in the violence it faces, from outside the community via the mad shooting of a church in Charleston by a racist white man or from the inside with rampant gang violence in the inner cities.  Beckett brings great attention to the internal violence present in the black community by saying, and I might use light paraphrasing in this but, "black people are dying and both sides of the gun control argument are ignoring causes that don't fit their rhetoric" which pulled me out of my 'guns are great' mood into a more passive mood as it isn't so much about politics but ending the sordid state of affairs of inner city life.  I've lived in poor areas and the difference between where I've lived and pictures of the inner city is an entirely new world of desolation with broken cars and dilapidated housing on every corner.  The big things being so bad makes the small things like arguments between two gang members turning violent was so commonplace.  Beckett uses phrasing like "Then follow up on those promises" (Beckett) to use pathos to accentuate the importance of creating ideas, like Operation Ceasefire - which used the group dynamics of blacks to bring blacks together instead of against each other- and putting them into place.  She then backs up her pathos with logos to further strengthen her argument.  I found it quite effective and didn't quite play on my heartstrings so much as convince me there are better ways of curbing gun violence other than the practiced ideologies.  The article might be more effective than I first thought it would be.

Further into the article, the mixture of logos and pathos continues, combining numbers and emotions to further strengthen the argument.  Starting with the statement of the fact "About 11,000 to 12,000 a year [killed]" and "about half of those killed this way are black men" (Beckett), the article reels you back into reality as you think about the number of people killed and realized a scary amount were all just one race, especially since blacks "make up just 6 percent of the U.S. population" (Beckett) which pulls at the empathy receptors in your brain to make you feel sorry for black communities as well as wanting to have change occur.  Many of the changes that could occur will not get to the root of the problem, like the assault weapons ban which "does nothing" as most laws only do "the bare minimum" (Beckett) and if I saw that a law was useless, I would be pretty affected, as I, like many, think that laws are supposed to do good or at least do something more than the "bare minimum."

In the vein of a bare minimum, Beckett uses the Justice Department's non-funding of Operation Ceasefire, previously seen to be very effective in curbing deaths of blacks, in order to again use human empathy to further the argument as the quote "Absolutely...if we had been awarded that grand we would have had the financial carryover to move the program forward" shows that the funding lost would have started a branch of Ceasefire which could have changed the situation for Indianapolis but instead the homicides continued without an interfering force to prevent them.  This article just contains how law-makers and politicians failed the black communities by either releasing feel-good legislation or not funding and organizing Ceasefire and other operations successfully.

The use of pathos in this article is subtle and well used and tempered with logos and ethos to create a very strong argument I can't find any holes in.  From coming at a time where gun control concerns were again at a high as well as backing up every point of pathos with experts and first-hand accounts or numbers and data.  The article brings up a small idea that happened to be very effective and then shows us how poorly it was handled after its inception, along with other programs meant to curb the violence seemingly inherent in the black community.  The article also presents evidence of assault weapons bans being ineffective or how schools don't need cops to prevent in-school homicides as there is a, again lightly paraphrasing "6,000 year waiting period" for those.  This article really made me feel a bit for the plight of black communities as they aren't being helped by the people elected to do their job and can't get enough help from the community itself given that most of the violence takes place in the poorest areas of a city.  As I read and write the article grew on me and the subtle pathos subtly affected my opinion on the situation.  I just hope that I didn't mess this whole essay by confusing pathos with some other rhetoric.

