Blog stage five

Deep in the heart of Texas

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Sunday singed a bill that not only allows law enforcement to question the immigration status but this bill will also band sanctuary cites in Texas. This comes after president Trump announced that he would cut billion of dollars from sanctuary cities. The author of Texas governor signs bill banning sanctuary cities shows the drastic change form undocumented people.  this is alarming since Texas is such a close state to Mexico. This bill was aimed to create a safe environment to the public and to keep criminals out of Texas.  However this is not the way to stop criminal form Texas. This bill could potentially back fire. The reason is that many undocumented who are in Texas witness or are part of a crime, the likelihood of them seeking help from the police would be small.  In the article the author gives many examples f how this would not encourage undocumented people to seek help from the police because of fear of being deported. The article also talks about how any law enforcement who chooses not to ask a person who they think is undocumented will be penalized. This could also hurt the law enforcement to decrease its members. For example to be a police officer one of the requirements is to be a U.S citizen, but many citizen who were born here in the United States could have family or parents who are undocumented. This would put the person in a stressful situation for the officer who has to obey the law and if he does not then he will be punished. I agree with the author and believe that the bill violets many rights that the United States has. This bill will not decrease the amount of crime.

Blog stage four

Throughout the article the author uses emotional, logical and ethos appeal to establish his credibility. The author starts with anecdotes in his first attempt to compare cause and effect. The author uses Roy Hallum receiving as expert’s testimony to appeal to the audience for the article credibility. The second cause and effect can be found in paragraph two, where Memphis resident was kidnaped and taken to Iraq was link to an immigration fraud. The author uses facts to attempt to establish his credibility. The author does not address the opposition making his argument weak. He is bias and is trying to aim at the audience of conservatives because based on the events that the immigration fraud was linked to an ex kidnaper of an American will make conservatives more concern in the current laws. The article is aimed at citizens of America who feel the compaction of a citizen. This articles brings the question of how America is a “free country” and lets criminals in. This article is aimed at the audience that are opposed to immigration reforms and laws. The article did not address the opposition in the article making the audience believe he is also opposed to immigration. The author uses logic by providing the audience with Hallum’s testimony. He attempts to address the opposition in the last paragraph by comparing the system that let the kidnaper in America after what he did, calling it “Whatever system he had did not work.” This appeal to the audience as the United States having the knowledge to be able to link one and one. In my opinion the author is bias and in order to be able to agree or disagree the author needs to provide more facts, statistics and more expert’s testimony. However in my opinion I do think that the U.S has to create a policy that links criminals from other countries inside the U.S before it is too late and family and friends are at risk. caseof America kidnapped in Iraq