IIlusory Handgun Safety

A detailed Summary of IIlusory Handgun Safety

Cynthia Tucker is a writer whose article was syndicated in the Seattle times. She wrote an article published in 1993 titled "Illusory Handgun Safety". Her article argues against women buying handguns for personal safety. She is trying to convince young women who are either single or head of households, that buying a gun for personal safety is not such a wise choice.

Tucker portrays herself as a young woman who has moved now to the city, and is a bit concerned for her safety. She makes the point that she is accustomed to guns, and that her growing up with firearms in her house, and living in the country somehow qualifies her to speak on gun safety. Tucker uses such language as "It is easy to understand the inclination to go out and buy a gun. I know the instinct to ward off evil and the seductive appeal of the notion of firearms as instruments of protection" (A4). She insinuates that "Hey, I'm just like you".

Tucker then brings in her own father as evidence to support her credibility. Her father is a hunter "to whom hunting small game comes [] as natural as breathing". While her father may be used to handling guns in a rural country setting, he can hardly be called in as an "expert witness" to support her outlandis

Tucker successfully proves one thing: She herself is not responsible enough to own a gun, and we should be grateful that she, and others like her who can be swayed so easily, are not using guns. In effect, her article is very effective at reaching her target audience-never mind that they don't have the backbone to buy one. Her article will surely keep guns out of the hands of people who didn't have the maturity to own a firearm anyway.

Tucker cites a study conducted by Dr. Arthur Kellerman of Atlanta's Emory University saying that "handgun owners don't get what they pay for; instead, they get what they most feared. In homes with handguns, murders are much more likely to occur". There are two things in this quote illustrating an invalid statement. First of all, it suggests that the handgun is the object that is providing the safety, and that handgun owners thought that the gun would be the safety provider. A gun does not provide its owner with safety, and in that sense Tucker is right on the money. It is up to the individual to provide themselves with safety.

The author uses the same study again, and pulls this excerpt "You're in more danger with a gun around". Tucker completely ignores the fact that the gun does not have sentient thought, let alone the capacity to pick itself up and shoot. She later goes on to tug at the readers' heartstrings by bringing in the tragedy of children, and uneducated adults being killed at their own hands.

What Tucker is able to illustrate with her article, is that women do indeed feel insecure. Ironically though, Tucker does not offer any other alternative, sh

Some common words found in the essay are:
I'm Tucker, Emory University, Handgun Safety, Ironically Tucker, Attacking NRA, NRA NRA, Instead Tucker, Cynthia Tucker, personal safety, america's least-responsible lobby, gun ownership, least-responsible lobby, hunters guns, buying gun, tucker brings, america's least-responsible, gun tucker, gun safety, handgun owners,

Approximate Word count = 1091
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: English