Essay On Blood Drive

Both texts provide great points and clearly send the message: guns should not be allowed for the public. However, Blood Drive is more persuasive due to the text being in a story format compared to a factual format. The Myth of The Good Guy with a Gun provides factual, quantitative values that represent the dangers of guns such as, “every 1 percent increase in gun ownership, there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7 percent increase in the total homicide rate.” The quantitative values help readers understand the exact degree of which guns are dangerous, but fail in connecting readers on an emotional level. Blood Drive, however, portrays the message more effectively by using the inverse extreme, instead of blatantly arguing against guns the …show more content…

The fear factor first appears when the narrator’s father tells the story of Raymo and how he shot him and never got caught, he says, “None of my buds were going to snitch. Believe me, Raymo was no great loss to the world.” The manner her father tells the story portrays that he feels no empathy for Raymo or his family, even though he mentions seeing the expression of Raymo’s face every night he never talks about how he felt. Furthermore, both texts include gun accidents but the fashion that the narrator from Blood Drive tells the story is much more unnerving. Immediately after McKenzie Batkin shot her own toe off the narrator tells the reader, “I remember noticing the football lying on the ground next to the jar of souls, and I thought it would make a cool photo for the yearbook.” She acts as if a girl misfiring her gun into her own foot is something that happens from time to time and thinks nothing of it which portrays empathy as being non-existent. Whereas, The Myth of The Good Guy with a Gun includes horrifying stories in which accidents had