Samuel Munoz

Rae Norton

Nardi Southwick

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/13/virginias-extreme-sentences-dont-make-us-safer-they-hurt-communities/

Who is arguing? 

• Juanita Belton, a co-founder of Sistas in Prison Reform. 
• Sistas in Prison Reform is a group of prison reform advocates
• Her best friend, Sincere, is sering a 45 year sentence in Virginia 
  • Virginia has one of the harshest state legal systems in the country.  

What purpose(s) is/are the writers trying to achieve? 

• Reduce extreme sentences
• For second chance and for prisoners to be integrated into society

To whom are they directing their arguments? 

• The argument is being directed at state officials so that they may take a second look at harsh sentences because of the possibility of people being wrongly accused.
• “I am hopeful that state officials will give all extreme sentences a second look.”

Then decide whether the argument’s purpose has been achieved and how you know. 

This is a ceremonial argument. We said the argument’s purpose hasn’t quite been achieved because what the author is addressing is too specific. The author was clearly emotionally attached and passionate about the subject of reform, unfortunately her message was clouded by her emotions. We would’ve liked to hear more from Sincere, since the purpose of their inclusion in the article was to appeal to ethos, but we were unable to fully emotionally connect to their story as we were not given as much detail as we would’ve liked to see. Although the author has a strong purpose, inclusion of more concrete evidence as opposed to emotional appeal would’ve made for a more impactful piece.