Outline(this is my outline of argumentative essay named 'should gun ownship in Australia be more regulated', I hope that it can help you understand the basic writing structure of English debateble essay clearly)
Introduction(BITS):
Background: Martin Bryant, a lone gunman, killed many of the 35 victims at Port Arthur in April 1996. After the massacre, the federal government under Prime Minister John Howard introduce a range of gun control measures designed to reduce the number of self-loading and pump-action rifles.
Issue: Whether the government should regulate gun ownership has been widely debated in the community.
Thesis: The gun control laws make Australia a more society.
Scope: This essay will consider some opposing arguments and point to some of the problems with them.
Body paragraph
Paragraph1:
Opposing argument: Australians should leave gun deaths alone, because only 60 persons are murdered with guns every year
Argument: the government needs to be concerned and carry out some measures
Support: most traffic and medical accidents occur occasionally and are just that, accidents.
Support: gun-related crimes are an issue of real concern in the community
Paragraph2:
Opposing argument: gun-law reform has done little to prevent crime because when a criminal wants to kill other people, they can use knives or another blunt means.
Argument: gun control cannot stop all violent crimes, but it indeed controls the availability of guns to criminals and avoids criminals to commit their crimes.
Support: the power of guns
Paragraph3:
Opposing argument: most legitimate gun owners don’t commit firearm crimes.
Argument: anyone could be a criminal if a situation gets out of control.
Support: ‘gun massacres are usually not premeditated. The fact is that all of these
perpetrators were law-abiding citizens.’
Conclusion: gun control indeed will make society safer.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment