Ouellette 1

Ryan OuelletteAshely Humphries ENC 110122 April 2015Gun Rights or Human Rights Humans are very efficient at targeting the fears of others to persuade them one way or another through the use of print advertisement. With inventions such as the printing press and the computer, print advertisement only became more efficient. However companies and organization are notorious for stretching and fibbing the truth of something to make it appear more persuasive or relevant than it actually is. The organization Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America aims to hit their target audience by focusing on the gun fear culture of American moms. My anti-ad attempts to be relevant by focusing more on the overarching human rights mistreatment issue around the world instead of the popular gun fear culture found in the United States.Everytown for Gun Safety is a nonprofit organization that was founded in wake of the Sandy Hooke Elementary School shooting back in December of 2012 (Evertown for Gun Safety Inc.). Their organization aims to limit and ban the use of fire arms in the United States by lobbying at the municipal, state, and federal level. Their organization has picked up steam over the past few years by aligning themselves with other gun control groups like the Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Perhaps their most well-known ad campaign, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, compared the use of assault weapons and much less harmful objects that have been banned in areas around the country. The ads attempted to point out the absurdity of banning objects like books and toys while allowing assault weapons to be legal. One of these ads portrays two children, one holding a dodgeball and one holding an AR-15 carbine, in gymnasium.The original ad endeavors to go for the cute and innocent approach to persuade its target audience, which are American moms. The ad uses the recurring phrase of, One child is holding something that has been banned in America to protect them. Guess which one, to try and get the audience to seriously ponder the topic of gun control. By phrasing the ad in this way, Everytown attempts to make the topic hit home with moms by placing the assault weapon in the hands of young, innocent looking children. The ad essentially tries to ask the question, We allow assault rifles but not dodgeball? How can this be? By asking this question, the ad attempts to point out the ludicrousness of banning a game as non-life threatening as dodgeball but still allowing assault rifles, shotguns, and hand guns to be legal. However, this is misleading to the audience as it cherry-picks the truth by using the blanket statement of, we ban the game of dodge because its viewed as being too violent. Back in 2013, dodgeball was banned in several school districts in Maine, New York, Florida, Virginia, and Massachusetts, however a couple of these districts lifted this ban (Crockett). By not clarifying this fact, this ad becomes misleading and only partially true. Misconceiving elements like this one led to the construction of my anti-ad. The anti-ad I constructed uses enough elements as to draw the comparison to the original, but is still quite different visually and in its overall message. In the reconstruction of the ad, I replaced elements such as the text and the background, from the first ad, to better support the new stance it takes. The original title says, One child is holding something thats been banned in America to protect them. Guess which one. This statement is very efficient at narrowing the focus and topic of the ad to the America population. The new version spoofs the title phrase by saying, These three individuals are holding items that people around the world rely on. By using this technique, it allows the focus of the ad to shift away from the lone, American perspective.The recreated ad attempts to convey a need to protect not only American children, but all of humanity in general. Changing the logo and name of the ad campaign from Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America to Humanity Demands Action for Human Rights in all Countries helps deliver this message. By doing this, it forces the audience to witness and understand the horrors in less fortunate areas of the world, as well as in the United States. Americans these days are generally caught up in their own issues and fail to see what is happening right in front of their eyes. Thousands of men, women, and children around the world, in countries like Syria, Iraq, Ukraine, and South Sudan, are brutally butchered and murdered every day by rebel militant and extremist groups. However, since these issues do not directly impact most Americans, many couldnt care less. These victims rely upon the use of rifles, handguns, and assault weapons to protect themselves and their families, just as Americans rely upon these weapons to protect theirs. While most American families dont suffer the same indignities as those in third world countries, they also fall prey to thugs, thieves, and other criminals nonetheless. The three men wielding an assortment of assault weapons and hand guns helps further support this opinion. The new ad includes a trio of men holding an assault rifle and hand guns. The original ad attempts to convey a need to restrict and ban the use of assault weapons by civilians by using the two children as a fear tactic. Everytown attempts to evoke the maternal instinct found in most moms to scare them into supporting their stance. The new ad attempts to convey a need to protect American children, and people in general, by focusing on the root of the problem, dangerous people. The saying, Guns dont kill people, people do, is especially prudent and relevant to this argument. Imagine gun violence, if you will, as a mathematical equation where the dangerous person is the variable, the fire arm is the constant, and (for lack of a better phrase) violence is the answer. Everyone is focused on attempting to fix the constant when the real focus should be spent on trying to solve for the variable, the dangerous person.This leads directly into my next reason for changing the description at the bottom of the ad. The original states, We ban the game of dodgeball because its viewed as too violent. Why not assault weapons? The new ad states, We spend millions of dollars in lobbying for assault weapon bans in the United States when thousands around the world rely on them for their own safety. Why not use those resources to help ones in need? By changing the description in this simple way, the focus is shifted away from attempting to fix the constant to bidding to solve for the variable. Consider this, gun ownership rights are imbedded within the Bill of Rights of the Constitution, no amount of lobbying is going to change this fact anytime soon; however, over sixteen million dollars were spent last year on fire arms lobbying (OpenSecrets). Instead, if both sides were to focus on the real issue, dangerous, unstable people, the need to ban assault weapons would no longer be the issue. If you take the person away from the weapon, the weapon is useless. But if you take the weapon from the person, the person still possesses the capacity to harm others. By finding out what causes a person to act out in such a heinous nature and attempting to correct it, the variable is solved for and the constant is one less issue for people to worry about. And it is with all of these elements, the children, the name, the title, and the description, that makes this anti-ad persuasive and effective.I believe this anti-ad is persuasive to the target audience, being the American people, and to most people in general. It appeals to the American public by focusing on the American issues in the ad, but also by appealing to the general helping nature of humans. While it tends to focus on the suffering of children around the world, it also has an overarching focus of humanity in general. In essence it draws the audience in with the children, but retains the audience with overall issue of human rights, dignity, and protection for every man, women, and child.Ideally, this advertisement would be most effective and persuasive in pretty much any location, in any form. This ad is effective at its mission, which is to spread the word of human injustice, to men, women, and children of all ages. This issue transcends all forms of issues, whether they deal with race, color, religion, or ethnicity. This is an ad about humans, for humans, by humans. It is that simple. To get the best possible reaction to this ad I would place it in highly populated areas or cities. Places such as New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, and Miami would most likely get the best reactions from the ads. Internationally speaking, places like London, Paris, Beijing, Sao Paul, and Tokyo would benefit extremely from this anti-ad. Assault weapon problems, while increasingly more frequent, have been around for a long time. One cant have war without peace or good without bad, just as one cant have assault weapons without their corresponding issues. But for all of the issues they cause, they shouldnt shadow the good they do or more pressing issues such as human rights infringement. While both ads attempt to convey a good willed message, the anti-ad deserves more attention. The themes and ideas found in the anti-ad, like equal rights and protection for all, impact all humans, not just one specific group. Just as Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce Tribe stated, The earth is the mother of all people, and all people should have equal rights upon it, is it just to allow one person to live in safety and happiness while another lives in destitution?Original ad:

New ad:

Works CitedAbout Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense In America. MomsDemandAction. Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund., n.d. 3 Apr. 2015.Chief Joseph Quotes. BrainyQuote. BrainyQuote., n.d. 3 Apr. 2015.Gun Control. OpenSecrets. The Center for Responsive Politics, 11 Feb. 2015. 3 Apr. 2015.How Dodgeball Became America's Most Demonized Sport. Priceonomics. Disqus. 17 Apr. 2014. 23 Apr. 2015.