The public is divided in the opinion, and so is the parliament, regarding the issue whether civil ownership of guns should be disallowed or the current practice should be continued in order to check the growing amount of violence.
The article discusses the key issues related to the growing violence in Switzerland on account of the allowance of military gun to the general public in Switzerland. With the help of various statistical data, the writer attempts to bring out the present situation effectively. In the article, emotionalism is less stressed upon for emphasizing the point and the issues are discussed in the light of logical argument with the help of available data and the opinions of various individuals. The arguments seem to be objective and do not seem to hold any bias for any specific side. The writer presents the arguments crystal clear and nowhere beating about the bush to convey his ideas.
In order to put forward both the sides, the writer has displayed their respective point of views that happens to be contradictory; one advocates the civic ownership of guns by arguing that laying ban on public ownership of guns would not help in any manner to prevent public violence, as other European countries having such bans also face equal amount of violence resulting from guns, and such bans in Switzerland would be in contrary to its age old tradition. The counterview suggests that individual gun ownership would make the society less safe as all individuals are not equally capable to handle guns in times when one is under the effect of mental stress and thus inflicting the society to be more prone to gun violence.
Is the stance of the writer evident How is it shown
The writer has effectively taken information from both the sides and presents an unbiased view of the entire subject. In the entire article, the writer nowhere favors any particular side and at no instance does he stand by any one of them to give his personal opinion. He only relies upon the available data and the opinions of the other people to carry foreword the thesis. The argument is generated and left at a level where the reader is expected to take out inferences out of the topic, as per his own wit.
Are there any sub messages to the reader How clear are they to the uninformed reader
The presented information is discussed out in a clear manner with no room for any subtle meanings. However, it can be presumed that the article attempts to make a reference to the increasing violence resulting from the use of guns by civilians and the resulting amount of violence. This can be understood from the referred example of the Virginia tech university.
Is the writer ethical in your view
More or less it can be said that the writer has practiced ethical journalism, this can be seen from the fact that he has not predominantly favored any side, and has objectively presented the existing views of different relevant individuals. It has been taken care of, that during the process of writing; the writer does not consciously or unconsciously flavor the article with his own thoughts and belief system. The writer gives a balanced view of the issues and attempts to display a total picture of the issue by voicing important issues from both the sides without adding any personal bias or any preconceived notion.
As a reader, are you satisfied