The Instigator
closedjaw
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DPettitt
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Assault weapon ban

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: 1/10/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,475 times Debate No: 29067
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

closedjaw

Pro

Assault weapons can shoot 30 to 100 rounds in less than 60 seconds. It only takes one bullet, (if you are a good shot) to kill an average person. The children in Newtown, CT, were so shot up the only way the coroner could identify them was through DNA of tissue samples. You cannot convince me that that type of weapon is what you need in your home to protect your family.
DPettitt

Con

You don't think you or I NEED such weapons. The key word in your argument is NEED. When our country starts redefining a RIGHT with NEED then we are headed down a very dangerous slope. The Second Amendment wasn't written to allow us to bear arms based on needing it for personal protection or hunting. The Second Amendment was written solely to guarantee the security of a free State & ensure that you & I remain free from government tyranny. They work for us remember, not the other way around.
Debate Round No. 1
closedjaw

Pro

closedjaw forfeited this round.
DPettitt

Con

Some say people progun individuals "hide behind the Second Ammendment" when in truth we are the only ones with enough sense to STAND UP FOR IT. If anything antigunners are hiding behind the First Ammendment. It's ok to say whatever you want weither there's any truth to it or not. You twist facts & figures to suit your NEEDS. The media doesn't report anymore; instead they tell you what you should think & many are abilged to go along with whatever they say. Look at FBI stats if you want PROOF.
Debate Round No. 2
closedjaw

Pro

I did not forfeit my round it simply did not post. I must have hit a wrong key. When the Bill of Rights was written our young nation had no standing military. We have a military now. My husband and both my sons own and collect guns. NONE of them own assault weapons. The freedom to own guns is the 2nd Amendment. The type of guns available to purchase is up to private enterprise, and both Houses in Washington ( they are the only ones who allow imports into our nation), RIGHT?
DPettitt

Con

The 2nd Ammendment reads "shall not be infringed." Yes our country was young & our founding fathers had British rule fresh on their minds. Britain had a military & we fought against them remember. One of those reasons was disarmament of its citizens. What types of arms would the founding fathers want citizens to have? Inferior or equal? The National Firearms Act of 1934 & expansion in 1986 took away true equality. Now legislation to ban scary looking semi-autos. What's next? When do they stop?
Debate Round No. 3
closedjaw

Pro

Scary looking? 30 to 100 rounds shot out in less than 60 seconds is not scary looking, it is murderous. An Assault Weapon Ban is not an infringement of the 2nd Amendment. As far as type of guns the founding fathers would want the citizens to own, probably not ones that can only identify their posterity through DNA from tissue pieces of their great, great, great grandchildren. I believe freedom is responsibility to moderate ourselves for the overall good.
DPettitt

Con

The mass shooters in recent news haven't performed their acts spontaneously; they have involved a plan. Even if these weapons never existed, what would have stopped Lanza from loading a duffle bag full of revolvers? They fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. That is POTENTIAL. So I ask is that a reason to ban revolvers? I respect your view & rationale. It's your belief that it would not have happened, but you can't guarantee that. What I CAN guarantee you is that there will ALWAYS BE EVIL.
Debate Round No. 4
closedjaw

Pro

I agree. There will always be evil. The most dangerous guns are those with magazines that hold 30 to 100 rounds. Revolvers you have to stop after 9, 10, or 15 shots? That would at least give a few seconds for the shooter to be stopped. The choice of weapon for the last 3 mass shootings was an assault rifle Ak-15. Ban them and ban the large magazines that are used for those. The National Rifle Association wants to have armed guards at our schools. That makes no sense. That is FEAR!
DPettitt

Con

You would rather still have some killed & ban an inanimate object than do something that would provide a way to stop an attack? That's GREATER GOOD? EVIL WILL ALWAYS EXIST so after the next tragic event a PERSON (not the weapon) commits your logic would be banning the next perceived most dangerous weapon after the next until we have no arms. You can't ban a black heart. I pray we never need to call upon the arms of private citizens because for the GREATER GOOD they will likely be long gone.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.