The notion of power : can we say that the subject of weapons is a factor of division of the american population ?

        I am going to talk about the notion of power. First of all, I would like to give a definition of the power: it's when a person, a group or a nation having great influence or control over others. To illustrate the notion, I have chosen two documents; first, there is “Welcome to the NRA”, a commercial by the National Rifle Association, to protect the right to keep and bear arms. Next, I chose the extract entitled “At the bank”, which comes from the documentary “Bowling for Colombine”, by Michael Moore, who is con-guns. Can we say that the subject of weapons is a factor of division of the american population? I will show that some people are pro-guns whereas other are opposed to it.

        To begin, “Welcome to the NRA” is a very powerful group in the USA, which promotes firearms and defends the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which gives the right to keep and bear arms. Indeed, members of this association consider that this right is fundamental and it does part of traditions of the USA. The commercial deals with this topic. People who realize its put forward the fact that it's very important for them to retain the right to use guns because they are characteristics of the history of the USA. It's for them a real symbol of independence and liberty. Nevertheless, they want that the use of firearms is done safely. Both “Welcome to the NRA”, we can realize that some people are still nowadays very attached to this right, and that guns are a cultural form of power.

        Next, the extract “At the bank” depicts an other point of view about guns. Indeed, Michael Moore, the director of the documentary is opposed to firearms. In a first time, he denounces the fact that the bank uses the pretext of firearms to attract people, that it to say, that it uses of something which is very dangerous, only for economical reasons. Actually, the dangerous aspect of guns is where upon the director wants draw our attention: he puts forward the fact that this free access of guns can have serious consequences, because everybody can have access of it, even if he is mentally defectiv, lunatic … except if he has a criminal record. Thus, anybody can get a gun and kill someone other, threaten at any moment someone who is in conflict with him, commit a suicide … So, this extract shows someone who is con-guns, at first, because guns became a way to attract people, and next, because they are very dangerous. In this document, arms are really an economical form of power because it's a mean used to influence people to open an account in their bank.

We can conclude that the topic of firearms is a factor of division of the american population. Indeed, in the one side, some people are pro-guns and think that the right about guns should never be taken away because, for them, it is a right, like any other right. And, in the other side, other people are opposed to this right because the easy access of guns increases the dangers. I think that this form of power is not the most efficient. Actually, it does many casualties each year, without necessarily to settle problems; it only increases divides between people.

...