Writers Blog Post - Polished position paper

Matt LaValle

Firearm Safety for Buyer’s

“...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (2nd Amendment right- U.S. Constitution), largely influences modern America. Although the Constitution states that this right is not to be limited or undermined, there should be more gun control in certain aspects, such as safety courses and general firearm education. Many people in Washington state are fearful of more strict regulations and requirements before purchasing a gun, and some people are simply unaware of the positive effects of firearm awareness.

Gun control and firearm safety is a very important subject when it comes to purchasing, owning, or just handling a firearm. When it comes to firearms, many liabilities may occur if a firearm is handled improperly due to ignorance, which is why certain gun control laws should be enacted. For example, in Washington state, there are almost no restrictions on purchase, registration, licensing, or permits on firearms with the exception of handguns (a required concealed carry permit but no class needed to obtain). It is extremely easy to purchase and own a gun or concealed carry permit. Although it is a right to the people to bear arms, there should be some requirements at the state level before an individual is to own a firearm. Of these requirements, a firearm safety course is most important.

I have shot and owned a variety of guns for seven years and have taken multiple firearm safety courses myself. In my opinion, many “accidental” shootings could be prevented if owners were simply educated about the potentially deadly weapon that they were improperly wielding. For example on February 27, 2015, a 3 year old boy, “. . .died after unintentionally shooting himself in the neck with a gun he found in his house” (Peters). And on March 1, 2015, another boy died after “unintentionally shooting himself with a gun he found stashed under a bed” (Peters). Both incidents could have been avoided through proper knowledge of storing a firearm. Scenarios like these would prevented if the owners themselves had the common sense and knowledge of not storing their weapons in such open places, especially around young curious children, or at least not storing the ammunition in or around the firearm. Some people keep loaded guns at home for protection, but proper storage, such as a safe, can be implemented if the owner is aware of the possible risk factors that come with easily accessible firearms and ammunition. That common sense and knowledge is exactly what a safety course can teach potential and future gun owners. Some may argue that a safety course isn’t going to make a difference and if they do, well then, they are just foolish to believe so.

As of 2006, the number of hunting incidents has declined to under ¼ the original number as a result of the required hunter’s education course to anyone ". . . born on or after January 1, 1972 who intend to buy a Washington hunting license" (WDFW). In the U.S. a total of about 3,800 people were killed by, “. . . unintentional shootings between 2005 and 2010” (Smartgunlaws.org). That number could have been significantly reduced if a safety course was required to every potential buyer for firearms of any type, which is exactly why our country should enact such a law.

An individual may say something along the lines of “guns kill people!” or “simply banning guns completely will prevent all shootings of any kind”. In my opinion, they are mistaken. As a matter of fact, “...a study conducted at Harvard [University] found that the more guns a nation has, the less crime it tends to have” (Michael Snyder - American Dream). To me, banning guns is a way of making people more vulnerable to becoming victims of criminals because it provokes the fear of getting shot. If a criminal knows that, then he or she is going to have the advantage when it comes to doing what they say. “The places with the highest crime rates are the major cities where strict gun control laws have been passed” (Snyder), and if you believe that police are always going to serve and protect in an environment like that, think again, “...police are so overwhelmed that they have announced that they simply won’t even bother responding to certain kinds of crime anymore” (Snyder). So if you think a gun ban approach to gun control is going to solve homicide, “accidents”, and crime then you might as well wave a white flag to everyone saying, “Hey, come break into my home and steal all my stuff”. Laws which ban certain things will not make it go away. For example, crystal meth is extremely illegal in all forms, but methamphetamines continue to be widely used and distributed. In the end, the “bad guys” are going to be the ones who continue to carry and abuse, and the “good guys” who choose to own guns for recreational or safety purposes have the intention to use their guns in a safe and responsible manner. Educating the public will inform the majority of “good” gun owners to use their guns in the most responsible way.

In conclusion, gun control should be enforced in the form of education and awareness of firearms, not fear tactics. My personal proposition would be to exercise safe handling techniques and to require mandatory safety classes to anyone who wishes to purchase a firearm and or a concealed carry permit. The only thing more dangerous than an attacker is an uneducated carrier. Uneducated carriers may improperly handle a firearm in the simplest of ways, such as putting their finger on the trigger whilst picking up the gun, storing the gun in overly accessible places, not wearing proper ear or eye protection, looking down the barrel, not checking if the gun is loaded, not checking the safety, and so many other potentially fatal mistakes. It is not only a hazard to oneself, but also others. Therefore, if everybody who bought a firearm went through some kind of basic pistol course, or basic firearms course, the country could be a more confident and safe place to live.

  

http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41 (2015) - Washington State Legislature chapter 9.41 RCW Firearms and Dangerous Weapons Laws

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2015/03/three_children_shot_in_houston_these_weren_t_accidents_they_were_the_result.html (2015)- Justin Peters - slate.com - child incidents

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/huntered/ - WDFW Hunters Education

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/huntered/hunting_incidents.html - WDFW hunting lisences

http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Universal_Background_Checks_for_Gun_Purchases,_Initiative_594_%282014%29 (2014)- initiative 594 Washington Universal Background checks for gun purchases

http://www.infowars.com/18-little-known-gun-facts-that-prove-that-guns-make-us-safer/ (2015)- Michael Snyder

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/ (2015)- Michael Snyder “American Dream”

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/10-gun-safety-mistakes-learned-hard-way/

Writers Blog Post - rough draft (800 words)

Matt LaValle

Firearm saftey in the U.S.

“...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (2nd Amendment right- U.S. Constitution), has a massive role in modern America. Although the Constitution states that this right is not to be limited or undermined, there should be more gun control in certain aspects, despite what our country wants to believe.

Gun control and firearm safety is a very important subject when it comes to purchasing, owning, or just handling any firearm. When it comes to firearms, many liabilities can occur which is why certain gun control laws should be enacted. For example, in Washington state, there are almost no restrictions on purchase, registration, licensing, or permits on firearms with the exception of handguns (a required concealed carry permit but no class needed to obtain). Now, not every part of that is an extremely big deal, but there should be some requirements for the state before an individual is to own a firearm. One of those requirements should be a firearm safety course.

Honestly, many “accidental” shootings could be prevented if owners were simply educated in guns. For example on February 27, 2015, a 3 year old boy, “. . .died after unintentionally shooting himself in the neck with a gun he found in his house” (Justin peters). And on March 1, 2015, another boy died after “unintentionally shooting himself with a gun he found stashed under a bed” (Justin Peters). In truth, there should be no such things as “accidental shootings”. There are only dumb owners. Both of those incidents could have been prevented by the owner(s) themselves if they had the common sense and knowledge of not storing their weapons in such open places. Or at least not storing the ammunition in or around the firearm. That common sense and knowledge is exactly what a safety course would’ve prevented. Some may argue that a safety course isn’t going to make a difference and if they do, well then, they are just foolish to believe so.

In Washington state, the number of hunting incidents has declined to over ¼ the original number as a result of the required hunters education course to anyone born on or after January 1, 1972 who intend to buy a Washington hunting license. In the U.S. a total of about 3,800 people were killed by, “. . . unintentional shootings between 2005 and 2010” (Smartgunlaws.org). That number could’ve been reduced to under 100 if a safety course was required to anyone purchasing a firearm of any type. Which is exactly why our country should enact such a law.

One counterargument of gun control includes banning guns. Where an individual may say something along the lines of “guns kill people!” or “If we banned all guns, there would be nothing to shoot at eachother with”. Well, in my opinion, they are mistaken. As a matter of fact, “...a study conducted at Harvard found that the more guns a nation has, the less crime it tends to have” (Michael Snyder - American Dream). To me, banning guns is a way to make people more vulnerable to becoming victims of criminals because it provokes a fear of getting shot and if a criminal knows that, then he or she is going to have the advantage when it comes to doing what they say. “The places with the highest crime rates are the major cities where strict gun control laws have been passed” (Michael Snyder), and if you believe that police are always going to serve and protect in an environment like that, think again, “...police are so overwhelmed that they have announced that they simply won’t even bother responding to certain kinds of crime anymore” (also Michael Snyder). So if you think a gun ban approach to gun control is going to solve homicide, “accidents”, and crime then you might as well wave a white flag to everyone saying, “Hey, come break into my home and steal all my stuff”. In the end, the bad guys are going to be the ones who still carry and abuse.

So in conclusion, gun control should be enforced in the form of education and awareness of firearms. Not in the fear that something bad is always going to happen. My personal proposition would be to exercise safe handling techniques and requiring mandatory safety classes to anyone who wishes to purchase a firearm and or a concealed carry permit. The only thing more dangerous than an attacker is an uneducated carrier. Therefore if everybody who bought a firearm went through some kind of basic pistol course, or basic firearms course, the country could be a more confident and safe place.

Writers blog post- Really rough draft

Gun Control

Thesis-

There is much debate on the delicate topic of gun control in today’s america. but what does the meaning “control” mean? well, to many, it means undermining the 2nd amendment and to others, it means the complete abolishment of firearms. but neither of those are right. Gun “control” should mean an understanding of right and wrong.

Body paragraph 1-

firearm safety, what does it mean? how is it achieved? what are some examples? statistics and facts

Body paragraph 2-

how are people affected by firearms? what happens? statistics.

Body paragraph 3- counterargument: why is banning guns a bad idea? what are statistics and facts

conclusion- why am i right?

In class lab: Sourcing cites

In an article by Bill Flax on The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State, Flax states that, "Americans are frequently reminded of what the revisionists deem our greatest achievement: 'Separation of Church and State.' .  . Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance."
Flax, Bill. The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State. Forbes. Jul 9, 2011. Forbes.com. Nov 19, 2015.

Flax writes that,"This legislation certainly did not diminish religious influence on government for it also provided stiff penalties for conducting business on the Sabbath." Meaning that separation from church and state was to prevent different views effect the way in which the constitution was followed. 

"Our forefathers never sought to evict the church from society." The goal of separating church from state was to acknowledge differences in what people worshiped and to come together peacefully, however it did not mean to prohibit the influence of religion in state. 

Flax, Bill. The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State. Forbes. Jul 9, 2011. Forbes.com. Nov 19, 2015.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2011/07/09/the-true-meaning-of-separation-of-church-and-state/

p.80 group response to Spriggs' essay

Similarities and Differences in Spriggs Essay

Similarities

·         All three articles state positions clearly

·         All articles similar to Spriggs’ essay include appropriate background information

·         All articles have authoritative tones which is similar to Spriggs.

·         All articles appeal to the readers values (pathos).

Similarities/Differences

·         Half of the group articles include responses to what others have said or done

·         A third of the group articles include clear indications of why the topic matters as does Spriggs.

·         A third of the group articles include evidence to their arguments which is similar to Spriggs’ essay.

·         A third of the group articles include more than one point of view which is similar to Spriggs’ essay.

·         Two thirds of the group articles address global issues which is similar to what Spriggs addresses. 

Writers Blog post p.100 #1-4

1. Spriggs convinced me that buying local matters because the amount of greenhouse gasses we make in shipping produce and the amount of pollutants that affect water, soil, and air will eventually destroy our earth. Spriggs establishes the importance or greener living by explaining how industrial sized farming harms soil fertility and results in costly equipment and fuel whereas a small farm is more efficient and has a cycle to how things are grown and harvested. Spriggs supports her claims with first hand evidence from a from a family friend who "...taught [me] firsthand about the effects of buying local".

2. Spriggs addresses counter arguments by stating that although buying locally will inevitably cause a change in global market, it will open doors to conversations about environmentalism which Spriggs then briefly explains that the U.S. government follows behind the European Union in environmental legislation. Spriggs also brings forward how those who argue that decentralization of food production is bad are also ignoring positive outcomes of small farms in local economies such as cheaper shipping costs, permanent local jobs, and higher local retail sales.

3. I find that Spiggs’ essay is more effective when she explains why polyculture farms are more sustainable than industrial sized farms since the variety of crops do not exhaust the land. Spiggs explains how rotating crops and using land in a cycle keeps it healthy and fertilized which industrial farms lack. Spiggs gives a first hand witnessing of how one farmer she knew used his pigs to plow his blueberry field by setting up the pigpen around the area so that they would walk over the field. These characteristics of evidence and experience make her essay more powerful to viewers who might be skeptical towards the idea of buying local.

4. Fig. 1 features mixed squash at a farmers market with a sign inbetween them that reads “Organic winter squash $.60…” Spriggs uses this photo to give an example of how to support a local economy and to also show one of the many things that are sold to the public at a farmers market. Figure two shows a small polyculture farm with several people working in the field. The photo shows several types of crops grown in the foreground and then greenhouses in the back. Spriggs most likely wanted to exploit the fact that there are multiple uses of a single parcel of land in the picture which shows how much more efficient small farms are than large, industrial farms like the one shown on figure 3. Figure three shows an aerial view of a large, single crop farm. There is nothing more shown than a large field of one crop and a small landing where a few cielo’s and a home are. Lastly, figure four shows tractor-trailers on the interstate with the caption, “Interstate trucking is expensive financially and ecologically”. This photo appeals to the part in Spriggs’ essay when she explains that shipped food is much more expensive and the amount of fossil fuels used is creating too much green gas.

Strong opinions brainstorm activity

- Banning guns is not the best solution to gun control

- Taylor Swift is not country

- Luke Bryan's new music sucks

- Sandwiches are better when they are cut in triangles

- College is too goddamn expensive

- Global warming is real

- so is the struggle

homework response lab

We all chose three different videos.

Someone dies in every video.

Pathos:

All use emotional appeals of people who were close with the victim(s) like their parents.

Sad music which hits your emotions

They all had close ups.

Logos:

They all involved driving accidents and the driver doing something they shouldn’t be doing.

The statistics of their age, being in their late teens, appeals to logic.

In one of the videos there was a doctor speaking.

Ethos:

They all built up the victim’s character and the credibility of the speakers.

To identify the relationship the speakers had with the victims they had labels.

In Class Lab - Position Paper

• Album Covers: The Eminem/Jay Z, Jay Z is looking straight at the audience while eminem is looking above the camera, possibly pointing to different personalities. Contrasting colors between the two artists possibly conveying a “conflict” in the audience. Also possibly showing the color of the two artists. Pixie Lott, the album cover shows her(Pixie Lott) seductively looking at the audience, possibly presenting that the album is going to be suggestive. Appealing towards both female and male audiences because of the “seductive” look and the albums look mirroring that of a makeup magazine cover.
• Rolex & Hello Kitty watches: Wealthy/mature vr Poor/childish. The Rolex is the picture of wealth, it’s got diamonds, fancy watchwork, it’s an elegant design. Compared to the hello kitty watch which lacks detail and finesse, it’s lacking the design and materials of the Rolex showing that it was thrown together with less care. It’s suggested through general design and color choice, the color of the Rolex ranges from white to gray at most while the hello kitty watch is mostly pink. This divergence in color choices shows a difference in maturity between the audience of the two watches.

Intro:Album covers are ways in which artists prequel there pieces of music.

BP1: Symbolism in Jay Z/Eminem album cover

-Colors

-Eye position

BP2: Symbolism in Pixie Lott album cover

-Eye position

-Hand position

BP3: Contrast between the depictions from the symbolism in the album cover

-The contrasting eye positions and picture qualities imply that the Pixie Lott album is more seductive and flirtatious due to its smooth edges while the Eminem/jay z album is more pixilated and rough which implies a blunt and direct form of music.

Conclusion paragraph

Tim Wise - Reading Sources Critically

• The speaker, presents the positions of saying the “N-word” from the perspective of a white man and a black man, he also brings up the perspective of saying redneck jokes while being a redneck and while not being one, he then mentions jewish jokes from a non-jewish perspective and a jewish perspective. The speaker only really argues from the position of a white man and he’s arguing expecting a white audience.
• Our group found it pretty persuasive, he represented both sides fairly well, he refuted the other side. You can jokingly call someone a redneck without them getting angry, then said that he’d get in a fight if someone outside of south Texas said redneck. He mentioned his past and his book, that’s it. Our group felt like it was pretty thorough, he considered the opposing side, thus improving his arguments.
• No, he does not he states from the beginning that saying the “N-word” is wrong for a white man, his language reinforces that. Special interest might be to get his book to sell. He does consider opposing views, he uses the views of someone born outside south texas, and as non-jewish. He is his own source thus it reflects his own viewpoint.
• Our group interpreted the publisher as the Boston College that the speaker was lecturing at. We determined that this could’ve influenced his speech, thus influencing him to use words and statements more tuned to a younger yet educated audience. He was acting liberal.
• No, our group did not have any outstanding sources other than our own personal opinions on the subject.
• Our group believed that it did both, most of us believed that in the right context it could be seen as a friendly joke, and we all agreed that you wouldn’t say it to someone you had just met. We believe that it mostly supported our thesis. It represents a point to mainly acknowledge.
• The speech seemed to be focused on a mainly white audience, stating “Let the blacks figure it out on their own…”. Our group was definitely a part of that audience. The main point was to argue should white people say the “N-word”

Writers Blog post p.62

Every time i took a position:
1. did i want to keep watching parks and rec or start my homework? this position i had to take could possibly effect my grades and self motivation.
2. How much food to take at dinner to fill me up and not have leftovers. i didnt want to have half-eaten, extra food that i would have to throw away because it would be a waste and i aint about wastin good food, fam.
3. What would be the benefit of getting a job now as opposed to getting one over winter break? I decided that i want to transfer to a 4 year university next year so I'm starting to look at more schools and i need to spend time on applications and scholarship apps, but at the same time, I need money to pay for gas and things like that, so where should i put most of my time? Or when would be a better time to apply for a job? After I send all my applications?
4. did i want to pick up my car from the shop before math class or after? I was in a position where my car was at a repair shop and i had time between my math class to pick it up, but i didn't know if I had enough time.

Group Activity p.66

"Scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal."

- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Even this short sentence provides more support than Trumps claim. It uses support by citing a quote on climate change from a website dedicated to evidence on global warming.

"The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century. Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. There is no question that increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response."

"Earth science communication team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Labratory". Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. California Institute of Technology. Nov 4, 2015.

Sources group project

In-class Sources Group ProjectVERA. Addicting info, 7 Of The Dumbest Things Trump Has Ever Said To Disprove Global Warming. June 18, 1015. Nov 5, 2015.

"The Concept of global warming" Trump directly states here that he disbelieves in global warming, a global phenom that is warming up the planet due to the increase of greenhouse gases because of the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Scientists around the world all agree that this is happening and we need to find a way to stop it.

"Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It's becoming clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Called greenhouse gases, their levels are higher now than in the last 650,000 years."

This quote from National Geographic's "What is Global Warming" article is talking about what global warming is, Trump believe this isn't happening and he apparently blames the Chinese for the "concept". But it is happening, the reason I chose this tweet is because there is a plethora of sources from scientists around the world talking about this subject. This research paper talks about global warming and the sources that go into the study of it. It is my belief that global warming is real, and I've come to this conclusion from the sources I've read/heard and from the changes I see around me, now it's just up to others to do the same.

"What is Global Warming."National Geographic. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Nov. 2015

A. V. Karnaukhov "Role of the Biosphere in the formation of the Earth's Climate: The Greenhouse Catastrophe" Institute of Cell Physics. Russian Academy of Sciences, Pushino, Moscow Region.

This position does not appeal to me and I find it irritating because Trump does not support his claim with any facts, stats, or reasoning in his opinion. It is a non-supported claim which I find irritating.

"Earth science communication team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Labratory". Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. California Institute of Technology. Nov 4, 2015.

"How green is a Tesla, really?" slate. n.d Web. 9 May. 2015.

"How 'Green' is Lithium" kitco. n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2014.

"Tesla Motor's Dirty Little Secret Is a Major Problem" fool. n.d. Web

The aforementioned articles regarding Lithium mines and their impact on the environment create an interesting discussion regarding our efforts to create a "greener" environment that we live in today.  The articles stress the impact that Lithium Ion Batteries have on the the planet and how much CO2 they truly emit.

Writers blog post Polished paper #2

Matt LaValle

Theme: Riding an American made motorcycle is the ultimate sense of freedom and independence.

Thesis: The word freedom is defined as, “The state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint”. In three ads made both by Harley Davidson and Indian Motorcycle Co., the idea of freedom in America is used to convey the idea that there is no better sense of freedom then riding an American made motorcycle which is how they persuade you to buy their products.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, American motorcycle companies target your sense of freedom and independence when trying to sell you their products. It’s almost as if they all use an either/or strategy to draw you in and say, “Either you can be a free American and ride an American motorcycle, or you can live a dull, tasteless life driving a cage like everyone else, and wonder what it’s like to be on the outside”.  Both companies objectify those who live within the rules of the world and persuade you to be independent. Each of the 3 ads serves to make you “different” from everyone else.

This 2012 Harley Davidson ad represents the freedom and rebelliousness that (supposedly) only Harley Riders experience when they purchase a motorcycle hence the phrase "The meek inherit nothing". They are saying that the ones who sit back and blend in with life will not get anything out of it. They are saying that in order to have a good life, you must break away from the routine and stand out in a crowd.

This particular ad is for the 2012 Harley Davidson Night rod. A custom blacked out or "murdered out" cousin of the Harley V-rod. The company was targeting a younger audience when they made this ad. They feature a younger looking rider in an urban environment as you can see from distant building in the background and just from looking at the motorcycle you question yourself, "Is that a Harley?” It is much different from the stereotypical Harley Davidson motorcycles such as a Road King or an Electra Glide so you almost don't believe it is made by that company. The motorcycle itself features a very modern and street-like look. Like a street bike more than a cruiser. In the bottom right of the picture you see the Harley Davidson logo and the words "No cages" below it. They use the word "cage" instead of car to represent how free you are when you ride a motorcycle. You are not cooped up in an enclosed vehicle with seat belts and pedals and everything, you are as close to freedom as possible when you ride a Harley Davidson motorcycle but not just because it’s open, Harley Davidson is also 1 of only 2 American Motorcycle companies, so they associate the freedom of riding their bike with the freedom of your country. When you ride a Harley Davidson you represent the home of the free.

Freedom of choice

Freedom in America

Freest of the free

Harley- rebellious reputation, clubs, freedom with the sense of rebellion, black sheep

Indian- free, choice, difference, and wolf is the top of the food chain

This picture was an ad for the comeback of the Indian Motorcycle Co. in 2013. Indian Motorcycle Co. was America’s first motorcycle company. The ad features two pictures side by side. One is in black and white and the other is in color. The black and white picture features a group of people riding in formation on black motorcycles down a road with the words “black sheep” written across the front. It is not said anywhere in the ad, but this picture is meant to represent the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Company in the way the picture is built. The colored picture features a close up of one man on a motorcycle looking to his right with the sun coming up over his shoulder and only half of the front end of the motorcycle is shown. The word “Wolf” is written across this picture and beneath that is the IMCo. logo and a few words that say “Choice is coming to American motorcycles.”

 As you can see, both sides of the ad represent freedom and independence. They are both American made, they both use motorcycles to symbolize freedom, and they both give you a “stand out in the crowd” feeling. But the labels they use over each side of the picture are meant to make you think about what is being said. Let’s start with the left side.

 The term “black sheep” is used to describe an outcast, one who does not naturally fit in or want to fit in with others. This term is used to describe the riders on the left of the picture but is not meant to be an insult to HD. Harley Davidson is all about standing out and being free which is why it works. But when you look at the other side of the picture and see one person and one bike with the word “wolf” over it, you see that the Indian Motorcycle Co. wanted to display their company as being at the top of the food chain in terms of who is the freest. They want you to feel like you have more free will than their competitor because now you have choice on top of freedom.

“May wind be the only product in your hair.”

                This Harley Davidson ad targets the way the country is changing and going “soft”. Another black and white picture is shown from HD, this time featuring a close up of an older gentleman’s beard. They target the beard and lower part of the face to show you the character of the man. At first glance of the entire ad, your eyes are directed toward the left-center of the picture. You can see that this is an older person by the color of the beard, but you also see a few strands of long hair coming out from behind the beard. You see their mouth is shut, and no eyes are shown, but you know this picture is telling a story of some kind. Almost as if the man is speaking to you through the picture. Then you read the small words to the left of the person, “May wind be the only product in your hair.” It is then that you realize this man is an example of freedom and independence, and the picture tells a small story.

The viewer is then persuaded to feel obligated to stand out in a crowd much like the first HD ad by not conforming to modern day customs like using hair products. They want you to take a stand for yourself and live freely, away from the grasp of the mainstream crowd and choose the path you want to follow. This form of freedom and independence from the rest is what Harley Davidson’s reputation stands for and by purchasing one of their motorcycles, you are then on your way to being one of the minorities or “black sheep”.