Showing A Speech

This Rhetoric unit tied together with our last one. We learned more about visual rhetoric and how to apply our rhetorical elements towards artwork. The main purpose was to make a visual representation of our speech. The political issue that my speech focused on was police brutality. I’m proud of being able to effectively transfer the main arguments of my speech into an art form.

AG: Cover (2014)

I am a highschool student and have lived my whole life in Chicago; the topic I chose for my speech and artwork was police brutality. I chose this topic because police misconduct has increasingly gotten worse in Chicago, and because it affects me personally due to the death of one of my good friends at the hands of our city’s police. The message I want my artwork to send is that police brutality must be put to an end and for new regulations need be put in place. All of us should feel angry about what is happening. We all need to care, especially, about our youth! If we let this abuse of power go on we are saying that it is okay for police to kill the children in our city.

Some of the things I learned when doing research on this topic were that:

• In 2012, the Chicago Police Department shot 57 people, killing 8 of them.
• Between 2002 and 2004, 10,149 complaints were made accusing Chicago Police Department, but only 19 of these complaints led to any suspensions. 85% of the officers weren’t even interviewed about the complains that were made about them.
• In Rialto, California, officers are now obligated to wear tiny cameras that film all of their interactions with the public. This resulted in complaints against Rialto police officers decreasing by 88%, and use of force by officers falling by almost 60%.

I chose a pamphlet as my visual representation, which required the use my computer and a printer supplied with paper and ink. The reason I chose to make a pamphlet was because it allowed me to not only give a visual, but to also give a lot of information that people should know about the topic. If people don’t know the facts, they won’t care to make a change because they won’t understand why it’s so crucial.

In my pamphlet I used description and narration in the personal story section when I wrote about and described an instance where police brutality occurred in my life. My pictures are an example of exemplification because they show rather than tell evidence. I also used process analysis in the solutions section when I outlined what steps must be taken in order to help resolve the issue. I also used amplification, for example, when I stated that police brutality “occurred in 14 of the 25 Chicago Police Districts, that is more than half of the districts.” to emphasize the severity of the issue.

If I could share my pamphlet I think the best place for them to be is at police anti-violence rallies, at funerals or memorials of victims of police brutality, or even just on busy street corners, in order to spread the word more and inform people who normally wouldn’t be so aware or involved in the issue. If I can get people to care about the issue, maybe I can get them to stand up and make a change, which then hopefully will put an end to it.

AG: Outside (2014)

AG: Inside (2014)

Sources

Erye, Pete. “Infographic: A Neutral Look at Police Brutality | Cop Block." Cop Block RSS. N.p., 3 July 2012. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. <http://www.copblock.org/17484/infographic-a-neutral-look-police-brutality/>.

Hulsey, Emily. "California Town's Simple Solution To Police Brutality Has Lowered Use Of Force By 60 Percent." Independent Journal Review. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://www.ijreview.com/2014/07/153997-california-towns-simple-solution-police-brutality-lowered-use-force-60-percent/>.

"IPRA Releases Report on 2012 Chicago Police Shootings | People's Law Office." Peoples Law Office. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. <http://peoples lawoffice.com/ipra-releases-report-on-2012-chicago-police-shootings/>.

Enough is Enough

     This unit in Rhetoric was about what types of speeches inspire and mobilize people. We learned about what elements are essential for a good speech, and the types of language that attract people. Our final project was to use this new knowledge ourselves, and write our own speech on a change we want to see in our city, Chicago. I chose to write about police brutality, for many reasons, the main one being that one of my close friends was a victim of this. Writing this paper made me feel proud because I felt that I honored that friend by writing about this topic.

     I have lived in Chicago my whole life. Over that time I have seen so many amazing things in our city, the diversity, the cultural attractions, the food; but lately I have been hearing about many terrible things as well. One of those terrible things that has continually increased over the years is police brutality. Lately, I’ve been hearing story after story on the news, seemingly every day. And I believe it is time to say enough is enough.

     In 2012, the Chicago Police Department shot 57 people, killing 8 of them. Officer-involved shootings occurred in 14 of the 25 Chicago Police Districts, that is more than half of the districts. An author for the People’s Law Office website described the situation perfectly: “...it is important to recognize that police officers, government employees who are sworn to protect all of us, are far too often responsible for the gun violence against civilians.” (IPRA Releases Report on 2012 Chicago Police Shootings, 2012). This statement reveals the main issue, which is that the police are abusing their power. This has become a fight for equality, like previous fights for racial and gender equality, but this time it is for the equality between people in power and the average citizen. Just because someone is a police officer, does not mean he or she shouldn’t have to follow the same laws as everyone else. And if a regular citizen goes to jail for shooting or torturing someone, police officers should go to jail for this as well. Instead, many times they are let off the hook because it was just “a mistake”. On August 9 this year, in Ferguson, Missouri, an 18 year old boy named Michael Brown, with no priors, was shot and killed in broad daylight, and the police officer, Darren Wilson, received no disciplinary action against him, in fact his killer is still walking freely after two months having never been arrested for the murder. Apparently, Wilson shooting the unarmed boy was another instance of an officer “just doing his job” (Swaine, 2014). So is that what police jobs now entail? Shooting people? Shooting unarmed, not dangerous people? Shooting unarmed, not dangerous youth?

     A national poll taken by police officers in 2012 showed that 42% of officers believe that “Always following the rules is not compatible with getting the job done”, meaning they think they are exempt from following the rules and laws. They should not be. 84% admitted that they have witnessed other officers use more force than necessary to make an arrest and 61% admitted that they don’t always report serious criminal violations that involve the abuse of authority by fellow officers (Erye, 2012). This shows how many officers use excessive force, and how many other officers allow it by being bystanders. They should not be. Between 2002 and 2004, 10,149 complaints were made accusing Chicago Police Department officers of excessive force, illegal searches, racial abuse, sexual abuse, and false arrests. Only 19 of these complaints led to any suspensions. 85% of the officers weren’t even interviewed about the complains that were made about them. This shows how little is done about police abuse, and that officers are given the impression that breaking the rules is okay and goes without consequence. They should not be.

     Our own mayor is ignoring these issues. Some police officers were sued for torturing two prisoners, Ronald Kitchen and Marvin Reeves. During the trial, the defendants claimed that over 120 men were tortured. And what was Rahm Emanuel’s response? “I’m sorry this happened. Now let’s move on.” (Wisniewski, 2013). Let’s move on? Let’s move on? This isn’t some small unimportant issue, this is a matter of torture and the abuse of power. We will not “move on”. We refuse to “move on”.

     While some of you may think this issue wouldn't, or even shouldn't, touch me personally, it isn't small and unimportant issue to me. My good friend Dominique Franklin Jr., “Damo”, 23, was a victim of police brutality. He was a good person who made a mistake just like the rest of us. He did not come from a wealthy family, and didn’t always have the money to afford what he needed. So one day, he went into a Walgreens and yes, he stole something; yes, he broke the law. But was taking away a few dollars from a big company worth his life? I don’t think it was. When the police found Damo they handled the situation by tasing him, not once, but twice in what was clearly an unsafe area, because when they did, they caused him to fall against a pole, and be knocked unconscious. For around 15 or 20 minutes, no medical attention was provided for him. Instead, the police stood there, with no remorse for their actions. This unconsciousness became permanent because what the officers had really done was put this young man into a coma. And that cost him his life two weeks later. This was a clear case of police misconduct, and that is why Damo’s father is pressing charges against the Chicago Police Department. He says he is suing to “try and ensure that what happened to his child, doesn’t happen to anyone else.” (Puccinelli, 2014). And that’s all any of us want at this point. We are sick of the deaths all around us at the hands of police officers, the people who are paid to protect us. Our youth should not be meeting such early deaths. Rahm Emanuel talked a lot about safety in his inaugural speech and had said “The police cannot do it alone”, but he seemed to forget that often times, the police are the cause of the violence. He talks about the police as though all they do is help stop and solve crime, but too often are they the cause of the crimes in the first place. If Emanuel wants to make our streets safer like he claims, he should start on the inside- the police.

     What is happening is not okay. Now is the time for a solution. In Rialto, California, officers are now obligated to wear a tiny camera that films all their interactions with the public. The result? Complaints against Rialto police officers fell by 88%, while use of force by officers fell by almost 60%. (Hulsey, 2014) This change is amazing and it is a change that needs to happen in Chicago as well. And for any brutality that continues after cameras are placed on the officers, there must be a NO TOLERANCE policy. The repercussions for the police's abuse of power are not nearly good enough. Most officers aren’t even suspended when complaints are filed. What message does that send? That they can do something extremely wrong and just get a break and still get paid? That is not the message we should be sending. Police brutality must not be tolerated or accepted at all. If a police officer is involved in brutality, sexual abuse, excessive force, or the killing of an unarmed person, they must be discharged, with no pay. They should not be allowed to return for at least three years, during which they should be required to go to therapy and anger management or other classes of such type. We need to stop making excuses for what is done and stop tolerating it; from now on if this happens, there must be an assurance that that officer will not make it happen again.

     If we do not make a change, those who care about these issues will begin to fight back; there will be more riots in the streets such as the ones in Ferguson, and maybe eventually even a war. There will be more deaths, and it will come to the point where the deaths aren’t just those of civilians but of the police as well. There will be an uprising, because what is happening can only be tolerated for so long. And that time has ended. We demand an end to police brutality. Enough is enough. Chicago has to step forward and make the change. And then maybe we can be an influence to other cities. To the entire state. And hopefully then to the entire nation. But we must first start in our own backyards. So it is time for Chicago to enter a new era, one where police receive the same treatment as everyone else, and one where they are not allowed to go unpunished for killing our citizens.

     I would like to see the day when there is no police misconduct and brutality. I would like to see the day when people see police as helpful and on their side, as they are supposed to. I would love to see the day, when I turn on the news, and hear nothing about a youth dying at the hands of an officer. And until that day comes, I will not rest, and I hope neither will you.

Sources

Erye, Pete. "Infographic: A Neutral Look at Police Brutality | Cop Block." Cop Block RSS. N.p., 3 July 2012. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. <http://www.copblock.org/17484/infographic-a-neutral-look-police-brutality/>.

Hulsey, Emily. "California Town's Simple Solution To Police Brutality Has Lowered Use Of Force By 60 Percent." Independent Journal Review. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://www.ijreview.com/2014/07/153997-california-towns-simple-solution-police-brutality-lowered-use-force-60-percent/>.

"IPRA Releases Report on 2012 Chicago Police Shootings | People's Law Office." Peoples Law Office. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. <http://peopleslawoffice.com/ipra-releases-report-on-2012-chicago-police-shootings/>.

"Prison Culture » Damo’s Dead & Other Reasons to Fight…." Prison Culture RSS. N.p., 24 May 2014. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://www.usprisonculture.com/blog/2014/05/26/damos-dead-other-reasons-to-fight/>.

Puccinelli, Mike. "Father Suing Police After Son Dies Following Use Of Stun Gun - CBS Chicago." CBS Chicago. N.p., 18 June 2014. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/06/18/father-suing-police-after-son-dies-following-use-of-stun-gun/>.

Shen, Aviva. "Chicago Police Cannot Keep Complaints Of Brutality Secret Anymore, Court Rules."ThinkProgress RSS. N.p., 12 Mar. 2014. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/12/3393421/chicago-police-misconduct/>.

Swaine, Joe. "Ferguson police officer was 'doing his job', say supporters." The Guardian. N.p., 17 Aug. 2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2014. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/18/ferguson-supporters-police-killed-teenager-protest>.

"Timeline: Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo.." USA Today. Gannett, 25 Aug. 2014. Web. 11 Oct. 2014. <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/michael-brown-ferguson-missouri-timeline/14051827/>.

Wisniewski, Mary. "Chicago Police Torture: Mayor Rahm Emanuel Apologizes, Says 'Let Us Now Move On'." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 12 Sept. 2013. Web. 14 Oct. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/chicago-police-torture-mayor_n_3910197.html>.

Gender Inequality

    Gender inequality has been around so long it is rooted into our history. Women in the United States finally took a stand against it and started the first wave Women's Right Movement between the years of 1848 and 1920. There were many important factors in this movement and many people who were crucial to making a change. One of these individuals was Susan B. Anthony. Alongside Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Anthony formed the National Women Suffrage Association in May of 1869, based in New York City. The organization’s main goal was to achieve voting rights for women. Anthony herself made many speeches for the cause; being a teacher for 15 years, she was very educated and knew how to write exceptionally well. One of her most famous suffrage speeches was delivered in June 1873, while Anthony was under indictment for “the alleged crime of having voted at the last Presidential election, without having a lawful right to vote.” Anthony used her words in this instance, to prove that what she did was not a crime and that it was unconstitutional to consider her actions criminal. In her defense, Anthony makes strong appeals to logos, pathos, and ethos, which is why I believe this speech should be included in the Rhetoric course library.

National Women's Suffrage Association.(1913) Internet: Wikipedia 

    Anthony begins her speech by explaining why she is under indictment. Her crime was voting unlawfully due to the fact that she was a woman. She makes the argument that to be incarcerated for this is unconstitutional. Providing the background that she does in the beginning of her speech adds to her ethos. Anthony states “I stand before you to-night, under indictment for the alleged crime of having voted at the last Presidential election, without having a lawful right to vote.” As a famous speech maker and writer she is already considered credible, and her fighting for such an important cause makes her morally likable. Anthony actually practiced what she preached, and fought for justice by fighting against unjust, sexist laws. She was someone who fought for the basic rights of everyone.

    Furthermore, Anthony offers rationale for her cause by quoting directly from the Constitution, which states in the preamble: "We, the people of the United states...". Anthony focuses on this plural pronoun that clearly includes us all explains how “we” means that whether male or female, the people who make the Union are citizens including, her and all other American females. It shows how the Constitution should apply to women in this country as well. Anthony goes to make the point that women weren't specifically excluded from the laws. She quotes the Constitution again, referring specifically to a section that makes special mention of all those tho whom the laws do not apply. Those excluded are individuals who have been or may be convicted of bribery, larceny, or any infamous act. Anthony's argument is that, nowhere in that list of exclusions does it state "women", which shows that women are full citizens who should be able to excerside their right to vote. Anthony defends herself using a logical, text-based argument.

    Anthony's tone in her speech is demanding; she fearlessly does not back down in her demand that she and all women of America are given their basic rights and allowed to vote. At the end of her speech Anthony proclaims "we propose to fight our battle for the ballot...persistently through to complete triumph, when all United States citizens shall be recognized as equals before the law." This statement and her strength in defending herself and women’s rights is really powerful, because it shows that she, alongside many others, will not stand down and will continue to fight until they get what is rightfully theirs. As a fighter for women’s rights, her words likely inspired her peers and gave them hope, I imagine that when she read this last line the audience felt all sorts of emotions, from sadness to joy, which appeals to pathos. She gave so many emotional examples throughout the piece as well as multiple anecdotes, such as her talk with Senator Sumner, where she asked him for his help in protecting women in their right to vote. Anthony really showed how women are strong and deserve to be treated as such.

    Throughout the speech Anthony employs multiple rhetorical modes, including exemplification and process analysis. Anthony aims to prove the unconstitutionality of denying women the right to vote. She quotes Senator Sumner in her analysis of diction in the Constitution, as he had also helped protect African Americans in their right to vote and was now helping Anthony do the same for women. The Senator had stated that if you deny women the rights given by the Constitution just because it is written with masculine pronouns then you must also "exempt women from taxation...and from penalties for the violation of laws". This is a phenomenal point and proves that you can't make the argument that the Constitution only applies to men just because of the use of masculine pronouns. Anthony also uses process analysis, her speech itself is a step taken to reach the outcome: the right for women vote. Moreover, achieving the right to vote will bring them a step closer to ending women's suffrage. She shows that everything is just one step after another in a long process. Her political activism and her speech, along with others, are the steps being taken to be allowed to vote, which in turn is a step to reaching gender equality.

    Gender inequality is still an issue today, but if it weren't for women like Susan B. Anthony we might not have come as far as we have. People question whether gender equality will ever be attainable. There are many articles on the issue, for example “Gender Equality” in the New York Times, where different people discuss their views on whether or not equality is a possibility one day. One of the women stated "I am always baffled as to why these concepts could ever be contentious." referring to gender equality and feminism. This shows how the issue still isn't revolved and is believed by people to just cause arguments. People still don't know whether or not this issue will ever be resolved. But the progress that women like Anthony have made gives us hope. The Rhetoric library needs this speech in order to show others what a good piece of writing looks like and to remind us that gender equality is an ongoing struggle.