The in-depth commentary by Greg Hampikian utilizes the key rhetorical device of irony within its writing in order to persuade its readers into seeing the absolute absurdity that would go behind allowing firearms onto Idaho’s college and university campuses. Greg Hampikian first introduces irony into his commentary in an attempt to outright mock the actions of his state legislation for their passage of an unnecessary and useless bill. Hampikian begins his commentary with the completely obvious unconvincing congratulatory remark to those is charge of passing the bill. The author then goes on to provide examples where the allowance of weapons would “help” him in the future. He continues to mock the powers at be by deliberately explaining and…show more content… Hampikian first introduces this concept by simply asking the question, “When may I shoot a student,” supporting the passage of the bill to such an extreme degree that he might off put potential supporters through his over eagerness over the possibility to inflict harm upon a student. Equally important in the development of the author’s ironic defense of the opposite point is his description of possible instances where he might be forced to fire at a student such as “encounters with disgruntled students…packing heat” providing readers with an absurd and rather unlikely possibility where the bill would save the author in attempt to discredit the support for the allowance of firearms. Hampikian continued to ironically support the opposing position through the means of thanking the legislature for their decision even going so far as to “applaude the Legislature’s courage.” Greg Hampikian’s strong and ironic support for the opposite point he is attempting to make allowed him to effectively take apart his opposing position by simply standing by
