The article could use an editor. There are a lot of little mistakes like this sentence:
The entire gun “debate” is purely emotional.
I suspect you mean that the "anti-gun debate is driven by emotion."
This next argument fails:
Guns are not dangerous. Bad people are dangerous.
Guns are dangerous. That is the whole point of a gun. Private people own a dangerous weapon that they can use to defend their family. The argument you are making in this section does not enhance the piece. I would cut it out completely.
Who is the person in your picture about criminals and guns? If the person in the picture did not actually say the words in the picture; then I would not use it. If the guy did say those words; I would link to his page. Writers can get in legal problems when they use stock photos for endorsements.
You have a nice start of a pro-gun piece. The piece would be effective if read out loud. It needs a big editing job if you intend to print it.
The article could use an editor. There are a lot of little mistakes like this sentence:
I suspect you mean that the "anti-gun debate is driven by emotion."
This next argument fails:
Guns are dangerous. That is the whole point of a gun. Private people own a dangerous weapon that they can use to defend their family. The argument you are making in this section does not enhance the piece. I would cut it out completely.
Who is the person in your picture about criminals and guns? If the person in the picture did not actually say the words in the picture; then I would not use it. If the guy did say those words; I would link to his page. Writers can get in legal problems when they use stock photos for endorsements.
You have a nice start of a pro-gun piece. The piece would be effective if read out loud. It needs a big editing job if you intend to print it.
Thank you! We are going to work on it.