Australian Crime Rhetorical Critique
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Peter Saunders (1) makes the case that something must be done to halt the escalation of the crime rate in Australia which has occurred in the last 40 years, positioning Australia behind England and Wales on the rate of victimization and higher than any other country with regard to crimes such as robbery and assault. The paradox he addresses is that while crime has increased significantly, Australia has become less willing to send offenders to prison and by the mid-1980s, about 30 individuals were incarcerated for every 1,000 serious crimes as compared to 120 offenders per 1,000 serious cries in 1964. Saunders (2-3) goes on to make the case that: 1) the reduced risk of imprisonment may explain the continuing rise in crime; 2) in four countries (Australia, New Zealand, England, Wales, and the United States), as the rate of imprisonment for each crime fell, the number of crimes continued to rise; 3) in the United States, a get tough stance on crime led not only to a higher per capita prison population, but also a plummeting crime rate; and 4) prison deters while also incapacitates criminals and removes them from the streets. Using the Aristotelian rhetorical concepts of logos, ethos, and pathos, this particular article can be analyzed to determine its rhetorical validity and approach. Cockcroft and Cockcroft (23) point out that a persuader like Saunders generally fulfills an ideational function by using language that relates to the experience of the audience. In addit
. . .
te that many arguments succeed because they are based on facts that cannot be disputed. It is clear that Saunders (1-3) has presented in support of his argument some indisputable facts regarding Australia's crime rate, the incarceration over time, and the decline in staffing in the police and law enforcement departments in Australia. These are what Reinking, et al (158) consider established truths and they are offered by an academic (i.e., Saunders) who can be considered an authority in the field.
Considering the relative brevity of Saunders' (1) article, one can nevertheless identify the possibility of fallacies inserted into the argument. Reinking, et al (167) make reference to the fallacy of hasty generalization. Though Saunders (1-2) has given us a number of statistics that support his argument that increasing the likelihood of incarceration is associated with a decline in crime, he has used a sample of four very similar countries. He has not compared these countries to others that are significantly different in terms of culture, law, and approaches to punishment. Such a comparison may or may not validate his point, but it would definitively add to the logos of the argument he is making.
Interestingly, Saunders (
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Cockcroft Cockcroft, United Britain, Australia Reinking, England Wales, Australia Zealand, Wales United, Hart Von, United Kingdom, Using Aristotelian, Britain Australian, cockcroft cockcroft, robert cockcroft susan, reinking et al, cockcroft robert, cockcroft susan, robert cockcroft, persuading people, people basingstoke, cockcroft robert cockcroft, crime rate, et al, reinking et, persuading people basingstoke, 1992 pp, people basingstoke macmillan,
Approximate Word count = 1243
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Australian Crime Rhetorical Critique
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
