Pitbulls Should Be Banned

The issue whether pitbulls should be banned has been prominent in the media in recent weeks since poor Ayen Chol was brutally attacked. In the letter to the editorial ‘these dogs are guns without a safety catch’ published in the Herald sun, on the 19/08/11, by Leanne Pelen contends that pitbulls are vicious, savage, dangerous animals that need to be banned by the government. In an outraged tone, the article targets those who own pitbulls as well the government officials who make the laws about dogs, in a bid to get them to see that pitbulls are vicious killers who are to have no pace in our society.

Throughout the article the writer uses a number of persuasive devices in order to manipulate the audience’s response. These include metaphors, anecdotal evidence, repetition, rhetorical question, attack and emotive language. In the heading, one example of a persuasive technique used is that of a metaphor. A metaphor is when the author makes association with a vivid image. An example of this technique throughout the article include: “these dogs are guns without a safety catch on”.

It manipulates the reader in creating a sense of fear by using the powerful image of a dangerous deadly weapon and associating this image with pitbulls such quotes have left the reader to believe that pitbulls are dangerous, vicious, brutal dogs that should be banned. Another example of a persuasive technique used that is of attack to the government, an attack is when the author position the reader to agree that if an individual is flawed, their messages must be to, an example of this technique throughout the article include ‘has the law gone mad? and ‘How little the government will protect us.. ’ this attack makes the reader feel outraged that the government in doing little to help the community. The author uses emotive language to describe the bravery of her husband and the innocence of the young girl Ayen Chol. An example of this highly emotive language throughout the article include: “acting so bravely without thought of his own safety”, this quote make the reader feel admiration of how the husband’s brave action and relief that he was there in order to prevent a atastrophic event for his family . Another use of this highly emotive language include: where the other victim young Ayen Chol was described as “poor little girl”, the use of “poor little girl” makes the reader feel sympathy for a young victim barely started her life, the author creates a petrifying image “as she frantically tries to fight off the dog”, “as she clung to her mother’s leg” the author also manipulates the reader in feeling penetrating grief that this disparaging attack could’ve been avoided had happen in someone’s lounge room.

With a series of highly emotive language, for example the terms used to describe the dogs as “these vicious dogs”, “savagely behaviour”, and their “murderous aggression”. Not only does the author use these words she also inclines the reader to see that these dogs are nothing but dangerous ruthless killers with no mercy, and to agree with the author in asserting that these dogs should be banned. Reference to the well-known authority of RSPCA state president Hugh Wirth sways us to accept that these dogs are indeed ruthless creates as he describes the pit bulls as “killing machines”.

Dr Stephen Tate, a veterinarian and director of the Bureau of Animal Welfare at the Department of Primary Industries says “pit bulls were specifically bred to be dangerous when they attack. This predisposes the reader that also the experts know that pit bulls are vicious, brutal and dangerous. The author concludes this article with a rhetorical question “when will these people learn that we need to treat these breeds like guns without a safety catch on”, this rhetorical question is also a repetition of the metaphor which appeared in the headline.