The Instigator
Con (against)
4 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
5 Points

Complete Gun Control

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 426 times Debate No: 82668
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)




Complete gun control. A good idea? I don't think so, telling people that they can't own or use guns will not lower the crime rate but raise it because there is no doubt that criminals will illegally obtain any gun they can get their hands on. Complete gun control only affects people that follow the rules.

I expect that my opponent , whoever it may be, will already know what complete gun control is.


more guns correlates with more homicide

i can find plenty more of those types of articles. so shouldn't we at least consider getting rid of guns, if we could reduce murders by say eighty percent?

not everyone will stop at nothing to get a gun. most people if they dont have a gun, aren't as likely to kill. they dont just get a gun cause they dont have one.
Debate Round No. 1


I disagree that we could reduce murders by 80 percent, maybe 20 percent but not 80. Guns are not the only way to commit homicide.

Also (hypothetical) if a man broke into my house with an illegally obtained firearm and he was intending to kill me, how could I defend myself? Sure, I guess I could throw kitchen knives but when has that ever worked? Like the old saying goes; "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight.".


the main reason we need guns for defense is because we have so many guns to begin with. i concede not everyone will be able to defend themselves without guns, but we could signiicantly curtail overall murder.

you concede it might be twenty. you dont know. i dont know. we are both thinking with our gut. but we can say it'd be something. austrailia got rid of just their worst guns, and cut their murder rate in half. i dont see why we can't do that.

plus your thesis is vague. 'compelte gun control'. so to add to the generality, i'll also say that ninety percent of gun researchers think more gun regulation is better than none when it comes to homicide. you can find various studies to say various things, but similar to gloal warming, the consensus is there amoung scientiets,
Debate Round No. 2


Australia's murder rate may have gone down but have you ever been to Australia? Do You know that Australia is still one of the most dangerous countries in the world? Less guns means less murders except for the ones that do happen in which no one can defend themselves and they get cut down without even having a chance. You have to put yourself in the shoes of someone who is about to be murdered and they know that they cannot defend themselves because they have no gun in their house. And sure some people know martial art forms but you can't make everyone learn karate.

And what about hunters who rely on guns to LIVE. We are talking about LIFE and DEATH here. If a hunter cannot have guns then they can't live, yes there are hunters who kill for sport but I am talking about all those who hunt to live.


even strict gun control countries allow exceptions for hunting. no reason we can't too.

australia is pretty low on the count. the USA is over four times worse just by comparison. australia is pretty far down the list.;

it is ashame we can't protect ourselves if w got rid of guns. but most of the time we need a gun cause we have guns to begin with. most peopl would say they'd be willing to get rid of guns if we could get teh rate down eighty percent. at fifty percent we should still be considering it. australia shows it might be doable.
Debate Round No. 3


EvangilisticOmega forfeited this round.


dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Maccabee 10 months ago
@sssomeone. What about North Korea, nazi germany, soviet Russia, china, Cuba?
Posted by Robkwoods 11 months ago
You missed the point of your reference. It states nothing about murders, it just says gun related deaths. Sword, ninja star, and spear related deaths were probably is huge problem 400 years ago.
Posted by Sssomeone 11 months ago
I don't think any nation to date has had nor proposed complete gun restriction, as in no-one ever owning a gun for any reason. I live in Australia and we have very strict gun control but you can still own a gun if you have a valid reason such as being a farmer and needing it to kill animals (self defense is not a valid reason most of the time). Could you clarify what is meant by complete gun control?
Posted by EvangilisticOmega 11 months ago
XD, I like it!
Posted by Maccabee 11 months ago
I'm for gun control. Just hold it steady and aim true. ;)
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by wipefeetnmat 10 months ago
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's statement "even strict gun control countries allow exceptions for hunting. no reason we can't too." seems to contradict his position of "Complete Gun Control" which is why I am inclined to give Con the points for argument.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 10 months ago
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The only clear consensus I get from either side is that with some element of gun control that homicide rates will decrease by some amount and there is empirical proof of this in different places in the world. That seems to go relatively uncontested throughout the debate. Since both sides seem to be arguing that we need to reduce the death rates, then the lowering of homicide rates seem to be the best way to get there.