The Instigator
debatingequality
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Adam2
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Ban on Assault Weapons in United States

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
Adam2
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,004 times Debate No: 56313
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (2)

 

debatingequality

Pro

I believe assault weapons should be banned in the United States.
Adam2

Con

Assault weapons should be banned for home use (for safety reasons as one can drop one by accident and rounds could go off causing unnecesarry accidental deaths; I believe guns for home use should be allowed in the house). However, automatic guns for the military and armed forces should never be banned. It's necessary for the job. For that reason I don't think automatics should be banned in America.
Debate Round No. 1
debatingequality

Pro

Thank you for excepting my debate.

Over the last few years, we have seen a growing number of gun massacres in the United States. From 1982-2012, sixty-two gun massacres were committed. Amongst those sixty-two mass shootings, fourteen of those massacres were committed with an assault weapon. Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora and many other massacres caused many deaths due to assault weapons. Banning these guns would have saved many lives. For example, at the Sandy Hook shooting, a Bushmaster M4 Type Carbine was utilized. This gun holds thirty rounds of ammunition, fully automatic. Adam Peter Lanza took the lives of twenty seven people with that gun. If assault weapons were banned, he wouldn"t have had the opportunity to murder twenty-seven people. Civilians in the the United States shouldn"t have access to Assault Weapons.

http://www.motherjones.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Adam2

Con

Thank you for excepting my debate.

Over the last few years, we have seen a growing number of gun massacres in the United States. From 1982-2012, sixty-two gun massacres were committed. Amongst those sixty-two mass shootings, fourteen of those massacres were committed with an assault weapon. Sandy Hook, Columbine, Aurora and many other massacres caused many deaths due to assault weapons. Banning these guns would have saved many lives. For example, at the Sandy Hook shooting, a Bushmaster M4 Type Carbine was utilized. This gun holds thirty rounds of ammunition, fully automatic. Adam Peter Lanza took the lives of twenty seven people with that gun. If assault weapons were banned, he wouldn"t have had the opportunity to murder twenty-seven people. Civilians in the the United States shouldn"t have access to Assault Weapons.

http://www.motherjones.com......

http://en.wikipedia.org......

http://en.wikipedia.org......

http://en.wikipedia.org......


There's one key problem with this... you're talking about people committing these crimes. Guns in themselves are not inherently bad. It's the people behind the crimes who commit this. Let's take a look at where crime sours the most.
http://www.forbes.com...
And guess what: it's one of the biggest gun control havens
http://www.nydailynews.com...

By banning guns all together, you are putting citizens in a vulnerable spot.
as they say, guns don't cause crime, criminals do.
Debate Round No. 2
debatingequality

Pro

There's one key problem with this... you're talking about people committing these crimes. Guns in themselves are not inherently bad. It's the people behind the crimes who commit this. Let's take a look at where crime sours the most.

If the person didn't have the assualt weapon, he wouldn't have been able to kill so many people.

By banning guns all together, you are putting citizens in a vulnerable spot.
as they say, guns don't cause crime, criminals do.

First of all, you said banning guns altogether. I'm talking about banning assault weapons. Secondly, I'm tired of people saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people." If they didn't have acces to those kinds of guns, then no one would get killed.
Adam2

Con

I apologize. What I meant to say was that by banning automatics you are decreasing the power of police, military and other armed forces that are supposed to protect us from all types of bad folks. The police in Chicago for instance are historically thought of as insufficent and ineffective and it causes the crime rates to be very bad. The same with crime rates in Detroit, and similarly, rates in similar cities like Cleveland and Philly. Automatics have a purpose in our armed forces. By banning them, we put our country at risk.

Automatic bans do no good.

Debate Round No. 3
debatingequality

Pro

I understand the military needs them, I'm talking about civilians. Civilians don't need them.
Adam2

Con

Unfortunately, you never specified that. How would I know that's what you were talking about? You said "ban on assault weapons in the USA." What that could mean and translate to is ban on them for any reason.
Debate Round No. 4
debatingequality

Pro

Banning assault weapons for civilians has been an issue in the news. I thought with some common sense it was implied.

Sorry, missunderstanding.
Adam2

Con

I apologize for having posting about guns in general, myself.
May the best win
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
RFD:

This debate suffered from far too many problems to be scored properly. In the first place, Pro doesn't seem to actually know what they're advocating for. As has been noted, fully-automatic guns (Assault Rifles) are presently banned. "Assault Weapon" is a nebulous term that does NOT indicate fully-automatic operation. The gun used in Sandy Hook wasn't fully automatic. Now, Con did not rebut on those grounds. Con's grounds for rebuttal were on a literalist interpretation of the resolution.

I might have been more sympathetic to Pro for Con's literalist interpretation, except that since neither debater seemed aware of very basic, fundamental aspects of the things they were discussing, I can't really give ANYONE credit for their argumentation.

And after the beginning, the debate quickly fizzled into extremely short rounds, lacking substance from both sides.

As such, I'm casting a ballot--but a ballot nulled.

As always, I'm happy to clarify this RFD.
Posted by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
You are welcome to message me and we can discuss gun politics. I don't think our opinions are really that different though.
Posted by debatingequality 2 years ago
debatingequality
Maybe we should try another debate.
Posted by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
I figured it out. I had clicked on Con's quoting of your sources.
Posted by debatingequality 2 years ago
debatingequality
thats wierd
Posted by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
I apologize. When I posted that comment, my computer must have had some type of glitch that took me to those respective pages. I'm not quite sure how that happened.
Posted by debatingequality 2 years ago
debatingequality
I checked my sources, they do not go to Hilary Clinton and wikipedia home page.
Posted by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
You might want to read this article before you continue with either of your assault weapons debates: http://smartgunlaws.org...

It essentially defines automatic firearms and states that under federal law, automatic firearm transfer and manufacturing were to cease in 1986. The existing automatic firearms created before May 19, 1986 are the only automatic firearms eligible for public possession and transfer at this point in time.

That being said, google the Bushmaster M4 Type Carbine, and the Bushmaster site itself says that the weapon is semi-automatic. This means that one pull of the trigger will fire one round. No more.

Finally, the Virginia Tech shooter used two perfectly legal, not "Assault weapons," handguns to kill 32 people and wound 17 others. So you can't really say that assault weapons are the real problem here. The real problem is that people fall through the cracks of our mental health system and do unthinkable things. The assault weapon is a tool, but rest assured, there are plenty of other options.
Posted by Craighawley215 2 years ago
Craighawley215
Also, your wikipedia links go to the wikipedia home page and your motherjones link goes to a page about Hillary Clinton conspiracies.
Posted by debatingequality 2 years ago
debatingequality
I don't think they're banned from public ownership.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Shadowhuntress 2 years ago
Shadowhuntress
debatingequalityAdam2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made only one major point, which con rebutted. Conduct to con due to pro's lack of explanation as to who the ban applies to.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
debatingequalityAdam2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.