Anti-Hunting argument

Hunting Issues & Arguments

By

Tim Spencer, Anti-Hunting Writer

http://www.google.com/imgres?

In Tim's article, he writes about how killing animals is wrong and goes on to explain how hunting is not pest control, the inefficiency of hunting and the myths behind hunters statements. However, the main point of his article is an argument against fox hunting. He goes on to writes through the article that fox hunting is an unfair sport and is not needed in society. He also talks about the use of hounds and the harm that is done to both the dogs and the fox.

The author establishes his credibility by explaining who he is and the anti hunting business he is apart of. His purpose of writing this article is to inquire people to stop hunting foxes, he uses emotional appeal when he talks about people hunting fox cubs in order to decrease the population. He also uses emotional appeal through out his article when talking about the dogs, this is very affective due to the fact that most people like canines. He writes about how hunting dogs are mistreated and often become sick due to bites and infections from the animals and how the life style of a hunting hound can be considered cruel and abusive. Then after he gets the readers emotionally involved he changes his tone from a concerned appeal to an aggressive tone trying to get the reader to feel the same emotion which would overall lead to the reader sharing the same type of opinion as the author. I believe that his targeted audience would be people that are, "green" to the world of hunting and do not understand why people hunt. I think this is very obvious in his article because he talks briefly about the history of hunting and the reasons why some people participate in the activity. Then he hones in on the sensitive issues to attempt to stir up an emotional conflict with the reader in order to pull them to the negative side of the activity so that they become against the activity as he is. You can also tell that he is addressing this article to this type of audience through his one sided approach. He writes vastly on the negative appeal and only briefly describes what it is like on the other side of the fence. This ensures that the reader is not truly opened to his/her own opinion on the activity because it is a biased article. This leads to the subject being misunderstood and people disagreeing simply because they were coaxed into a daze by someone who only told them what they wanted them to know.

Article Link:

http://www.chaos.org.uk/~maureen/issues.html