American radio host and political commentator, Tammy Bruce, in her article, Why Gun Control Wont End Mass Murder, describes many statistics of gun violence. Bruce’s purpose is to make her readers aware of gun violence and the many factors contributing to it as well as how it is statistically unlikely that gun control will help. She adopts an aggressive tone in order to support those that agree with her. The main ideas expressed throughout this article are that politicians use shootings and gun violence for political gain and aren’t doing anything to stop it. She explains that gun control wont stop gun violence because of problems such as drugs leading to terrorists. Tammy Bruce in her article uses many statistics and viewpoints to support her claim against gun control. Bruce…show more content… The red herring is when an author uses unrelated evidence in her text. On page two Bruce states a statistic from the Mayo Clinic, “Nearly 70 percent of Americans are on at least one prescription drug, and more than half take two,” (Bruce, 2). This piece of evidence is completely unrelated to the topic and is not backed up for the reader in any way. Bruce also uses the fallacy of ad hominem. Ad hominem is when a writer attacks a person not their argument. On page one Bruce states, “…Hilary Clinton was ready at the smartphone. With little information and even less decency, she reduced the unfolding human catastrophe to a political opportunity…” (Bruce, 1). When Bruce states this she is attacking Clinton instead of how she assessed a situation of extreme delicacy. Not only that, but Bruce uses the stacked evidence fallacy. Stacked evidence is when a writer one talks about one side of a case. Throughout this article Bruce only talks about how horrible mass murder is and the problems that associate with it, she doesn’t bring up what gun control could do or what some people think it could