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

Adults, without violence related felonies, should have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 482 times Debate No: 67135
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




To start out carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states as of 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation. Some states require gun owners to obtain permits while others have "unrestricted carry" and do not require permits.

Proponents of concealed carry say that criminals are less likely to attack someone they believe to be armed. They cite the 2nd Amendment's "right of the people to keep and bear arms," and argue that most adults who legally carry a concealed gun are law-abiding and do not misuse their firearms.

Opponents of concealed carry argue that increased gun ownership leads to more gun crime and unintended gun injuries. They contend that concealed handguns increase the chances of arguments becoming lethal, and that society would be safer with fewer guns on the street, not more.

The only state/district in the USA that prohibits carrying and concealing firearms (Washington DC) has more than double the highest violent crime rate in the US.

This does not include American Samoa and the north Mariana islands.



I see what you're saying, but even if they don't have violence related felonies, they could still do damage. They could use that concealed fire arm that they carry, to force someone to do something, to scare someone or even get carried away with that power. Sure criminals might be less likely to attack the person with the gun, if they knew it was there, and even if they don't know that it's there they might take it from the gun owner. And if the gun owner actually got to the point where he had to use it, most likely it would go wrong. Police take weeks, maybe even months to train with their guns, while gun owners usually train for a day or two.

Also what would happen if that gun went off accidentally? Someone or some people could be seriously injured or worse killed. Leave the gun handling to the professionals. This is why I believe that Adults, without violence related felonies, should not have the right to carry a concealed firearm.

Debate Round No. 1


There are an infinite amount of scenarios that could go wrong.
Just because something can go wrong does not mean that it will. You can not say that something should not happen simply because it could go wrong, unless there is proof that it will go wrong more times than not, which is not the case.

30-34% (70-80 million people) of adult Americans in the USA admitted to owning and regularly carrying a gun at some point.
4,346 murders were committed with a legally owned firearm in 2010. .0054% of the murders were committed by legal gun owners
That is not anywhere close to a problem.

That is like saying gasoline should be controlled and only kept available to certain qualified people because there are arsonists that will uses the gasoline to start fires potentially killing people.

Qualified citizens having guns is not just a right but the opposite of a problem. Taking away the right to keep and bear arms will only cause more crimes to be committed. People will start illegally importing guns at much more of a vast rate and continue selling them to everyone including murderers or people who should not own guns.

Statistics show that when gun control is implemented violent crimes increase. Example: Washington DC



Honestly you really can't compare gasoline to a firearm. For an arsonist it takes a longer time to kill someone, but for a murderer it's just hit and boom the person's seriously injured or dead. Plus to be an arsonist you have to place the gasoline, which plenty of people can see them while they do it.

The fact that we can't prove that something will or will not happen, scares people. When people are scared or worried, we do what seems right and to people, banning firearms is the right thing to do. Washington DC is where the president lives, not everyone likes the president. Which can lead to higher violent crimes, people trying to kill the president, people just showing their hatred, and etc.

The .0054% of murderers that were committed by legal gun owners, is a problem. People still have to watch their backs where ever they go, they have to wonder:
Does that guy have a gun I can't see?
Will he kill people?
What if he does?
It is a huge problem!
Debate Round No. 2


Dagen forfeited this round.


BrightStream forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Vajrasattva-LeRoy 1 year ago
Everybody ALREADY has the right to keep & bear arms.
Nobody needs a "permit" , "permission" , etc.
Study the Second Amendment.
"Gun control" , basically speaking, is Unconstitutional.

"Crimes" , "criminals" , "felonies" , "misdemeanors" , "illegalities" , etc. , don't exist.
Such concepts Violate BASIC Legal & Constitutional Principles, such as
Presumption of Innocence, Legal Due Process, etc.
(Since people are Presumed to be Innocent of "crimes" ,
there can't be any such thing as "crimes" .
No votes have been placed for this debate.