In the passage “when may I shoot a student” A biology professor tries to persuade his argument over the issue regarding gun control in classrooms. His goal to legalize guns for professors. Also suggesting in unique cases in which professor should be allowed to shoot their students. In his article “ when may I shoot a student” in The NY Times, Greg Hampikian suggest that because students are allowed to be alarmed, it’s important that professors have the same right.
The reader initially creates a summary of the article he or she will most likely part ways with the author. Throughout the article Hampikian provides reasons continuously to deliver his claim. Such as suggesting, professors having guns will provide an incentive not to cheat
…show more content…
He just wants equality in the classroom! Isn’t that what the United States was founded on? Hampikian reality is that pass again right to professors is the easy part, but the exotic claims within his gun control amendment Matthew states will be extremely regulated. “ I assume that if a student shoots first, I am allowed to empty my clip.” (Hampikian 2) Hampikians’ argument is weak and by investing to the implications of went to shoot a student. Because it makes the reader second-guess their opinion, by thinking Hampikian is entitled to shoot any student in a particular circumstance.
Additionally, through the article it was emphasized repeatedly when the professor should be allowed to shoot, but never on when he should be. By acknowledging the balance on when to and when not to shoot a student it shows the educational over the topic. Hampikian makes comments such as “Am I allowed to fire a warning shot?” (Hampikian 2) Also, throughout the piece Hampikian repeatedly on why college students did not have the credentials to be allowed access of firearms on campus. But never stated on why he and the professors have more knowledge on firearms than any other