As with my previous reflections, correcting minor errors and awkward sentences that Mrs. Hays has pointed out are my first concern. Passive voice showed itself a few times, which I agree did sound worse in my paper than the active and more detailed voice I’ve now put in. After correcting this, I added a citation for police response time in Detroit to give validity to my statement as she suggested as well as I put in a more appropriate quote from my source at the CDC that I felt addressed her concerns about the quote being vague and not inclusive of accident statistics. For other citations, I moved them around to make sure they were now at the end of their paraphrase instead of slightly before as I had mistakenly put them. Next I changed my sentence concerning the handgun ban’s effect, Mrs. Hays felt my sentence sounded a bit like a cop out and that delving into the issue would be better, however I edited the sentence to not mention the debate at all to sound less like backing out. I did this instead of debating the issue as I feel that it is not relevant to my topic and not what I’m trying to argue, so debating this would be irrelevant and not important to my overall topic. Later, I further explained what I meant by unnecessary in relation to the standards for concealed carry in that they are too high not that they must be done away with entirely. I did this because I wanted to be clear in what I deemed too tough, and not make other readers think as Mrs. Hays had that I was arguing training isn’t beneficial.

For my last and biggest change, I added a new line of argument. For this I found two new sources, and my argument was based around public transportation’s ban on concealed carry affects the poor much more than anyone else. This part was my favourite change for the revision as I felt that I had found my new ‘nugget’ as Mrs. Hays says and allowed myself to expand my topic a little more.