The second point to notice is that Abby provides ample evidence with historical examples to support the idea that private ownership of arms have always been associated with personal freedom and political liberty. He says that oppressive rules in medieval Europe, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union, as well as other modern nations, keep their populations under control by forbidding ownership of firearms.

In contrast to these cases where political repression and an unarmed populace are facts of life, Abby notes that nations that have traditionally maintained political liberty have also had private ownership of guns, and among these is the United States.

Abby concludes the presentation of this contrasting evidence with the statement that "There must be a meaning in this." And the meaning he finds is asserted as his thesis. He declares that he is "opposed, absolutely, to every move the state makes to restrict my right to buy, own, possess, and carry a firearm. Whether shotgun, rifle,or handgun." His reason is clear: The final defense of liberty lies in the hands of an armed populace.

Placing the thesis near the end gives the essay an inductive organization. His thesis is based on the conclusion that he draws from the historical evidence: oppressive governments maintain control by denying their people the means to resist.

Finally, because Abby wants to present himself as a reasonable proponent of the right to arms, he makes a concession to opponents who favor gun control. He acknowledges that there should be "a few commonsense limitations" to gun ownership." Firearms "should not be sold to children, the certifiably insane, or to convicted criminals."

The last two paragraphs of the essay constitute its conclusion. Abby ends forcefully by associating the private ownership of guns with two great historical events. First he makes an allusion to the French Revolution of 1789 where the people chanted the motto of Liberte', Egalite', Fraternite'. Then he points out that in our own Bill of Rights, the founding fathers guaranteed the right of United States citizens to own guns because "an armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny." He ends the essay neatly by rewording the quotation in the introduction: "If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns."

Abby's conclusion is as effective as his introduction. He identifies his position with historical events that support the thesis that an armed populace is the last defense against tyranny, and he connects his introduction through the restatement of the opening quotation.

Thus, Abby successfully employs several rhetorical techniques to make a successful argument: He catches the reader's attention in his introduction, he presents sufficient and relevant evidence by way of historical example, he positions his thesis near the end of his essay, presenting it as a logical conclusion drawn from his evidence (inductive organization), he ends forcefully by alluding to historical events that support his thesis, and he refers back to his introduction in words that restate his position on the issue.