Introduction Texting and Driving

Texting and driving is a serious problem we face today. Thousands of innocent lives are being taken unnecessarily and can be prevented. This problem can be fixed by those who have anything and everything to do with a cellular device. Texting behind the wheel is extremely dangerous. Cell phone companies have the capability to control this potential addiction, so why don’t they? Having cell phone technology companies putting restrictions on electronic devices as well as enforcing laws can lower the risk of car accidents. In order to regain control, this involves cell phone companies, service providers, app developers, and local and state governments developing and implementing laws.

Research Presentation

From our research, we had to present the proposal of our arguments as a start for our essays. My classmates had some very good facts on discussing their topics. They fully described their side of the argument to prove the other students including myself why we should side with them. From the student's presentations, I viewed they felt very confident in their arguments and gave great information on their topic. However, there were those who had some facts wrong and had gotten the definitions wrong for their argument... At least the students are getting feedback for their presentation to make their essay better and more organized. I loved listening to my classmate's side of the story and the arguments they proposed. I think more eye contact and memorization will help them to really get their point across. The reason is some of us read word for word and we shall persuade our proposal not just by reading the information but fully explain why.

During my presentation, I felt as though I presented my argument thoroughly. Unfortunately, I need to work on more eye contacts and not reading word for word on the power point. I need to be more confident in my argument and prove that I know what I am for and against.

Distracted Driving (Texting while Driving)

I chose this topic for my final essay because it is a huge problem that not only America faces but the world. Texting while driving is a bigger problem than drinking and driving, while drink and driving are dangerous more people are out 24/7 operating their cellular device. The majority of our population is constantly using their electronic devices, it is how we communicate with the world. Statistics prove that using an electronic device while driving leads to 1.6 million crashes each year.

Another problem we face due to texting and driving are deaths. Statistics prove that eleven teenagers die every day as a result of texting and driving. I know it is a big scare to lose your child to something so little yet it can be preventable. Ways to prevent it is through cell phone companies, service providers, app developers, and local and state governments developing and implementing laws. All of these will be my controlling ideas throughout the argument. My goal is to prove to people that if we truly cared we would do more than catch phrases "it can wait" or even apps that we download... For example, AT&T and Verizon developed apps that stop notifications while driving. However, this is not enough to stop it. I understand everyone will find a way to get around it, but what if they cant? It is similar to the law for no drinking under the influence or no drugs, yet people still find a way to get the drugs and alcohol... Let us find a way to stop this addiction!

Work Cited:

GHSA.” Home, 2017, www.ghsa.org/state-laws/issues/Distracted-Driving. 

Herron, Will, and USC. “7 Free Apps to Prevent Texting While Driving.” HONK, 1 Apr. 2016, www.honkforhelp.com/explore/2016/5-free-apps-to-prevent-texting-while-driving/. 

Richtel, Matt. “Phone Makers Could Cut Off Drivers. So Why Don't They?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 Sept. 2016, www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/technology/phone-makers-could-cut-off-drivers-so-why-dont-they.html.

Snyder, Edgar. “Texting and Driving Accident Statistics - Distracted Driving.” Edgarsnyder.com, www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cause-of-accident/cell-phone/cell-phone-statistics.html.

Stand by me

Marc Johnson made a documentary, "Playing For Change: Peace Through Music. This shows us that we all need to come as one and stand by each other if we can through music why cant we in reality.He traveled all over to capture people singing "Stand by me," different people and different instruments used throughout the video. This documentary proves that we can come as one to sing a song, but we also need to come together as one, to stop the war and give peace. They used the song to show people that you'll always need someone by your side.Marc uses all of the rhetoric elements to create his argument within the video.

Marc Johnson used inventions to find ideas or prove what is argument shall be about. In the video he needed people to play and sing the song "Stand By Me," also he needed to find the places to film to make his documentary a hit. I noticed in the video just about all of the musicians are all using different instruments, this shows you that they are from all over the world.Next Marc uses disposition, which he needed an arrangement of ideas/arguments. Marc arranged the video by involving different people to sing and play instruments from all over the world. He uses different scenes, people, and instruments to get the look that he was searching for.The style of this video appealed to me by the music and viewing different people from all over.
 Marc created an audience appeal with the song and the filming. The song he chose for this gives you joy and love! The song makes you feel as though you are not alone in the world, and there is always someone there for you know matter who or what they are. Race, ethnicity does not matter as long as you stand together.
Memory is knowing what the authors' message is and the knowledge behind it. Therefore Marc Johnson's message is that it does not matter who you are we all need some compassion and someone to stand by your side and to know there is always someone there for you. The knowledge is to always stand with someone to become united as one.The message Marc Johnson delivered was to love and to care. This was all delivered through the song, by the emotions the citizens sang with, the melody for the music, and the tone of the song.  The song pulls everything together and gives it a different meaning on life.The pictures in this video argument toward violence by stating there should be violence. The reasons are if we all can come together and sing a song, why is it we can come together to stop violence against each other. Stopping the war, It's proven we can sing a song about standing together, however, action speaks louder than words.

Stand By Me: The website is playing for a change.
Work Cited:
Johnson, Marc. "Stand By Me." YouTube, 6  Nov. 2008,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us-TVg40ExMJ

Critical response Gerard Jones

Gerard Jones wrote, "Violent Media Is Good For Kids." He argues that violence are good for children and the reason why. He claims that it has helped him and others. As young boy he was unable to view violent media. His parents were English teachers that were against violence. He was taught that conflict was not the key and rage can be controlled. In paragraph one he claims "I suffocated my deepest fears and desire under a nice boy persona". Which had him pretend he was somebody he was not, causing him to struggle with fitting in.

Although Jones acknowledges in paragraph 3 that comics contains "lofty messages of pacifism and tolerance," he admits that it was the violence that attracted him to read them. The characters in these comics were strong and in control with superpowers. For example, the incredible hulk had qualities that allowed him to overcome his fears.
Gerard explains about a psychologist with a P.H.D named Melanie Moore in paragraph nine through ten. She studied teenagers for three years based off how they react with violent media. She makes a statement "Children need violent entertainment in order to explore the inescapable feelings that they've been taught to deny, and to reintegrate those feelings into a more whole, more complex, more resilient selfhood." Jones and Moore both developed a program to help children use violent media to conquer their feeling towards mixed emotions. This is a good reference for his article by using a psychologist and her findings to help persuade his side of the argument. Also since he claimed that she was a psychologist I took the time to do some research and she graduated from Stanford with her P.H.D, therefore this information is credible.

However, Gerard presented references that are questionable. He claimed he knew two girls who used drawings and music for interpreting violence to help with reality. One of the girls had parents who were separating and she drew comics to control her world. He declared "She came out of it just as fiery and strong, but more self-controlled and socially competent".  He discusses how they used her comics to tell her stories in ways she cannot explain. Jones continues on into paragraph 15 and mentions a girl he worked with who made rap music that was violent. He takes in how she uses this to help with family issues she was facing. "she found a theater of the mind in which she could be powerful, ruthless, invulnerable," quoted by Gerard Jones. The stories of the two girls are similar, however, it is not a reliable source. The reasons are no hard evidence, you cannot prove that these stories of the young ladies are based off true events. It is his word against ours, although he makes good points about them just not enough verification. He needed more explanation, For example, if he found an article about a study of these instances online it would be more persuading to the opposing side.

It is plausible that Gerard Jones observations and personal experiences are true, That violent media is good for children. Violent media can help children cope with feelings as well as teaching them right from wrong. Jones fails to provide enough evidence to persuade the opposing side. He needs to look up studies and articles to refer to them as a source. It will give the audience more justification that violent media is good. Part of his concluding statement "In the process, we risk confusing them about their natural aggression in the same way the Victorians confused their children about their sexuality." The whole point is not to shelter your children. Kids are going to be exposed to anything and everything when they step out into the real world. The Victorians just could not speak of the problems that were occurring, they also did not have as much access to the world like we do now.  I understand the point that he is trying to make. The Victorians were unable to discuss body parts, sexuality, and had laws like not having sex till marriage. I can see where he tries to resemble the two, however, children are going to be exposed to it whether we like it or not it is 2018. Gerard Jones did not have a well-developed argument because he lacked his evidence in violent media by not having a positive outcome.

Gerard Jones needs more evidence on violent media having a positive outcome on children. He makes good points but only has one strong piece of evidence that is convincing, and that was Melanie Moore. Jones gives the audience a different perspective on viewing violent media, he talks about Moore findings and the two girls he knew, trying to persuade that violent media can be good for children. Although there is no known proof, he still makes a good statement. All of his evidence is based on personal experiences which are decent yet not convincing enough. They are conceivable points, yet not a hundred percent accurate.

Work Cited:
Jones, Gerard. "Violent Media Is Good For Kids." Practical Argument, 3rd ed., edited by Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Bedford/St. Martin's, 2017, pp. 64-67

Audience appeal

Kirsten and I both believe that the thesis is clear because he states unequivocally that higher education is broken. The writer uses sources that are documented appropriately by giving credit to other authors use of evidence. For example in passage six he state a quote by Daniel Park in his book, A whole new mind: Why right brainers will rule the future. His quote was "Free agent economy which was envisioned by Daniel Park. We both can relate to the fact that not everyone needs to go to college unless their career choice is within the health care field. He states that college is expensive and we as readers can relate due to the fact that most of us students are taking out loans just to become successful.

College is a waste of time

The four pillars of an argumentative writing are thesis, evidence, refutation, and concluding statement. In the essay I just read it had all of the pillars. I believe the thesis statement is in the first paragraph when the writer claims in the last sentence "I believe higher education is broken". That is an argumentative statement many people can disagree with. The next pillar is evidence, which is based off facts, unsupported opinions,  and supported opinions. The author provides facts in paragraph four by quoting sociology professors in that "36 percent of college graduates showed no improvement in critical thinking, complex reasoning, or writing after four years of college". Next he states more evidence in passage five with his opinion on success of people who never completed nor attended college. The author attempts to convince you with his evidence because he's listing facts with his view point, causing the reader to slowly come to agreement. Another form of evidence is in paragraph six by referring to author Daniel Park in his book, A Whole New Mind: Why Right Brainers Will Rule The Future. Quote that the author of the essay used was "free agent economy". Refutation is in paragraph nine. The writer says "Of course, some people want a formal education". He then explains how he doesn't think everyone should leave college, for example those looking for a career in the health care field. Refutation is in the passage because he is challenging their position and their opponents.  Finally, the conclusion will reinforce the authors statement. The conclusion is in paragraph ten. He uses a few common stereotypes of college drop outs to make the argument that those people would be doing those types of activities if they are in college or not. Those who take the opportunity to move their education outside of college make the world better.  The author makes his conclusion restating the same argument that higher education is broken.  

    I believe that the author appeals to his audience by explaining how college is not for everyone and even if some do not have a formal education does not mean they can not go far in life. Within some circumstances most people need an education based on their profession of choice. It can be compared to judging a book by its cover, For example, when you look at someone without a college degree does not mean that they are not sophisticated enough for a professional job? Depending on the career, most people need a high school diploma, and can be taught on the job with minimal expense.  The author explains that not all people want to spend thousands of dollars on school tuition which causes young adults to have to spend years paying off  debt. So why go to college and spend money?  Your profession may not require it.