Prisons around the world reflect a high incarceration rate and along with the high incarceration rate there is a majority of individuals who belong to the minority, who are people of colour. The article titled “Canadian prison system is not flawed”, written by Lorne Gunter, is an article that discusses the racial aspects in prison and tries to dictate to its readers that the large amount of coloured individuals in jail is not an issue. The author, Lorne Gunter, opposes the argument made by Howard Sapers, the Correctional Investigator for Canada, who believes that the Canadian prison system is flawed. Sapers believes the prison system is flawed because the number of aboriginal and visible minorities in correctional facilities is not representative…show more content… Gunter’s use of this technique is one reason why his argument is faulty. He relies on personal attack to further his argument. Gunter attacks Sapers by describing him using negative diction in two parts of his article, rather than solely attacking Sapers' argument. For example, Gunter states that "Sapers was even more scathing, blaming the government", thereby commenting on his behaviour as a person. By using the word “scathing” to describe Sapers, he is setting up the tone to be negative towards him. This word is used to attack Sapers, when all Gunter had to do to make a point was to explain why Sapers opinion on the prison issue was invalid from his perspective. Gunter also attacks Sapers later on in the article by saying Sapers is a "hug-a-thug theorist", implying that he is supporting or sympathetic to "thugs". Gunter uses this technique of attacking Sapers in order to make the reader feel inclined to believe Sapers is not someone to agree with, by painting him in a negative light. His use of ad hominem in this article proves that his argument is faulty. Gunter relies on attacking Sapers, who has the opposing perspective, in order to make his argument seemingly more correct in the eyes of the…show more content… He discusses that the cause of the crime rate decreasing is due to the amount of individuals locked up in cells: “Has it never occurred to these alleged experts that the crime rate is falling precisely because so many more crooks have been locked up?” This discloses how the author has a narrow mindset, and rather than opening up about how this theory is correct he bluntly throws it out and never retouches up on it again. The author also assumes that taking offenders off the streets is what is causing the decrease of crime. The author then assumes by locking the criminals up and keeping them in jail, is the result of crime decreasing. “So by taking more of these repeat offenders off the streets, it is entirely possible that less crime is being committed as a result of higher incarceration rates and longer sentences.” He does not support these ideas with any proof our statistics. It ignores other factors of why crime rates are going down, thus showing that Gunter is confusing association with