The Instigator
Con (against)
28 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

A gun ban in the Us

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 1/10/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 490 times Debate No: 68106
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)




it s abad idea


No it is a good idea...
Debate Round No. 1


Resolved - A ban on all guns in the US

Negative Impact

Starting a complete and total ban on guns will not solve anything. The only effective way to actually implement this idea is by having a buy back accompanying it. A buy back or the removal of guns on a compulsory basis, would incite a great deal of harm in the US. People want to have guns, and they think it is their right under the amendments and the constitution. Forcing a removal of those guns, would have long term negative impacts that could lead to another civil war. Countless people have said they would not give back their guns if a buy back happened, and others said they would fight or defend their right to bear arms. The overall negative impact of trying to force people to give up their guns, or stopping their right to defend themselves is a net detriment in the US

0 effect

Banning guns would just result into a regression of other weapons. You ban guns, people go to knives. You ban knives they go to their fists. People will always find ways to hurt people and banning a catalyst for the harm will just result into another catalyst forming.

More regulation but not a ban

The more effective thing would be to issue stronger background checks, limit high capacity magazines, etc. It is something that would have a more positive effect without the fallout of a total ban. More regulation can be a good thing, but a total ban would result in citizens fighting back.

Guns reduce Crime

If you ban gun from civilians, they lose their self defense. Guns will still be around via under ground purchase. A citizen has the right to defend themselves and allowing guns in homes actually reduces robberies and other types of crime because it acts a deterrent. Allowing criminals to have guns, while removing them from civilians would actually increase the crime and murder rate by a significant margin.


It is all boring, so I'm going to try to reason with you.
Guns are against God's will, therefore they are satanic, therefore they are evil, therefore gun ban is good.
Debate Round No. 2


Your irrationality strikes me as odd...
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Valar_Dohaeris 3 years ago
first round acceptance
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Commondebator 3 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: pretty obvious
Vote Placed by ZenoCitium 3 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Pros point was far fetched and irrational. Is everything and everyone against God's will evil? Con provided valid points.
Vote Placed by JayConar 3 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Whilst I personally believe con is incorrect, pro completely ignored cons arguments because he considered them 'boring.' And instead started talking about a fictional character, which was quite bizarre.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 3 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Dropped cons case