Sorry Andy... I got a little angry about your topic.

Peer Review and Commentary—Feature Story

The Lead:

How does the lead pull the reader in and entice her to read on?  Is it surprising, or are claims made that are common knowledge (note: the reader shouldn’t be able to say, ‘well duh.’)?  Is it effective?  Can it be made more effective?  (think details, human drama, evocative language—why/why not do you want to read on?)

The first two lines need better flow, the transition is choppy. Poor syntax “Yes guns..carry knives” UM PEOPLE ALREADY CARRY KNIVES… Next sentence- grammar could be altered a bit. THEY ARE TRYING TO STOP PEOPLE FROM ILLEGALLY PURCHASING GUNS… I really don’t want to keep reading. You need to remember that there are two drastically different views to this topic and you need to keep it open ended during the first paragraph and less opinionated.

Does the lead give a clear indication of what the story will be about, or rely on mystery, or both?  Would more of a thesis be helpful?  Would less of a thesis be advised?  Is the reader aware of the importance of a topic—why it matters and is worth learning about?  Adversely, if for more entertainment purposes, is the topic engaging enough to compel reading?

The lead is very effective at telling me what the rest of the paper will be about but on the other hand I really don’t feel like figuring out what the following paragraphs have to say. You could definitely assume I am pissed but that is because I am a liberal who completely supports and is for gun control. And back to your knife comment, knives are available in the kitchen department of stores like Macys, Target and are even sold at your local grocery store so that is a really bad argument to make. Plus people have been sent to jail for killing with knives plenty of times. You could also say that toxic chemicals should be outlawed too because they can kill people. How about cars? They kill people too. So does alcohol and eating unhealthy. It is all about CHOICES.

Organization:

Consider how the story is structured.  Chronological, thematic, chapter/section-based, inquiry-driven?  Is it effective?  Be specific—if a paragraph doesn’t transition well into the next, mention it and provide suggestions for improvement.

I am going to guess it is thematically structured? You go from one idea to the next so that is just what I am going to figure… I think it is very effective how you present an idea and then your next paragraph discusses it.

Is each paragraph well focused, or are several ideas competing for attention?  How can better focus be achieved?

The paragraph is very well focused, stays on the point of describing how gun auctions are. You could include where they are held and what type of people go to them, what kinds of guns are sold? Is there an age limit to those allowed in? You could also suggest that people should be required to submit a background check before being allowed to attend an auction.

Are there certain points (factual or narrative based) that require more development?  Are you, the reader, unclear at certain points?  Are any ideas superfluous or distracting?

You’re okay with background checks but you’re not okay with gun control? Explain please… It seemed like avid gun owners are pissed about possibly needing a background check before they can buy yet another one of their precious pieces of metal. I would also like to know why men are so angry that the government is trying to oppress their guns but these same people are perfectly fine with women not having the right of a choice over their own body? The same men who want secret guns are totally against abortion and women’s’ rights. So no, I don’t want them to get their secret guns.

Balance of human interest and information.  Point out sections that become too bogged down in dry facts.  Adversely, find sections that rely on narrative without giving the reader proper background information and factual points of reference.

So far there haven’t been many facts supported by citations, just claims. Many things are illegal but still occur, people will always do what they want and try their hardest to do it without getting caught. That’s like complaining about people speeding because there are speed limits on like every road in America. By the way, in the paragraph that begins “Within the past one hundred years…”, where are you finding all your ‘fun facts’? I am curious how you know this information because I do not remember learning this is any of my AP history classes. WAIT! What happened in China between 1949-1976? P.S. 20 million people WERE killed by the government (not was) and contribution should not have an s at the end if he only did 1 thing.

Are claims backed up by examples, evidence, research?  Are sensory details employed effectively?  Are abstractions made concrete through use of examples and details?

Claims are backed up but I don’t think you should compare other countries to us when America is not like other countries. If you want to make a claim about how violence is going to break out then you should use evidence like how violent Americans got during the prohibition period when alcohol was banned, this is a paper about America and our rights, not China’s, Germany’s or Russia’s rights.

How is the story concluded?  Does it wrap up the topic neatly and provide closure?  Does it ask bigger questions or compel the reader to search for more?  Are you left wanting more (and is this a good thing)?  Is it effective?

The author did not provide a conclusion.

Voice and Audience

Characterize the story’s voice and tone?  Is it suitable for the topic?  Is it engaging?  Is it consistent throughout the piece?  If first person POV is used, is this effective or jarring (remember, most story’s should rely on the strength of the topic for engagement, not the evidence of authorial intrusion).

The authors tone is passionate but my mood toward the topic made it harder to read. It is consistent throughout the paper.

Try to characterize the audience.  What venue (publication) do you think this story suits?  Why?  Does the author effectively address this audience (too dumbed-down or sensational, too dry and esoteric)?

The author’s audience is gun lovers because he sure did not appeal to gun control activists. This venue suits a gun magazine. He effectively addresses his audience by supporting free gun purchasing.

Mechanics

Mark any ineffective or over-used word/phrase choices.  Mark any repetitive sentence structures.  Offer advice on vocabulary, syntax, and sentence structure.

My comments on vocabulary/syntax/sentence structure are above.