Some of the most heated and talked about arguments of this time have been regarding gun control. After any type of shooting occurs in the country, it seems as though our first action is to abolish any type of personally owned weapon. People act as if it's easier to blame the gun for the killing than to ensure that a mentally psychotic doesn't get his or her hands wrapped around another weapon. Would you blame the pencil for writing a misspelled word? The 2nd amendment ensures our right to bear arms, but is that enough? We have a law that puts a gun in our hands but we have no law to keep a gun out of a monkey's hands. If they wanted, any person could get their hands on a weapon and that is the downfall of weapon control. Background checks are the key to keeping the guns in the right hands. Small measures like this will ensure our ability to own guns in America.
I thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate. Because you have begun to speak for your side, I shall do the same. My argument is that there really is no need for us to own guns. Firstly, some of the reasons the second amendment was created don't apply to us. At that time, America had just freed itself from Great Britain. We were afraid of the government becoming corrupt, and so, to be able to protect the people, they were given weapons so that if the government was to become corrupt or even harm it's people, the people would have a defense. Also, another reason was because of how close the people were to animals at the time. If a bear came and attacked, guns offered protection However, nowadays, society and animals are more separated than before. If the government turned on us, which there is a low chance of that happening, we'd lose anyways. Our weapons couldn't beat the military's weapons. So, there's no need for regular citizens owning weapons.
Well, my opponent has once again forfeited. To avoid looking bad, I have decided to "post an argument" so that I will not get a forfeit, which won't look good. I have stayed with this debate, where my opponent, the instigator might I add, did not. Perhaps, he could not argue my words. With that, I implore all to vote for me when voting time comes, as my opponent, based on his performance in this debate (no offense) does not deserve a victory for this debate.