The Instigator
ConservativePolitico
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
Poachi
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Gun Control is Unconstitutional

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 2 votes the winner is...
ConservativePolitico
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/2/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,518 times Debate No: 20176
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

ConservativePolitico

Pro

I will be debating that gun control is unconstitutional.

Gun control - any law, policy, practice, or proposal designed to restrict or limit the possession, production, importation, shipment, sale, and/or use of guns or other firearms by private citizens. Most commonly the guns in question are personal firearms, typically handguns and long guns.

While this is the traditional definition I would like to focus on the "limit possession" and "use of guns or other firearms by private citizens" since the other parts of this definition bleed over into interstate trade and other facets of commerce.

Unconstitutional - not constitutional; unauthorized by or inconsistent with the constitution

constitution - the constitution of the United States of America

This debate is not about whether or not gun control is good for crime etc but strictly whether or not it is Constitutional to implement gun control.

First Round - acceptance
Second Round - main points
Third Round - final points/conclusion
Poachi

Con

I accept and hope to have a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
ConservativePolitico

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

P1)

The Second Amendment -

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. [1]

The Second Amendment clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Infringed - to encroach or trespass [2]

bear - to hold up; support [4]

So this clearly states that the right of the people should not be encroached upon, the right of the people to hold up or support arms.

If a person has a right to bear arms, they therefore have the right to bear as many arms as they deem fit. The Constitution does not read 'the right to bear a safe amount of arms' or 'a neccissary amount of arms'. It just says the right to bear arms, and this right cannot be infringed upon. Gun control usually moves to set up permits, limits on guns, age etc and if any of these things prevent a person from owning a gun then it is infringing upon their right to bear arms and is therefore unconstitutional.

P2)

The Supreme Court

A]
The Supreme Court has struck down many instances of gun control.

Presser v Illinois
* Upholds citizens right to bear arms and participate in state and personal militia activities.

Columbia v Heller
* People have the right to bear arms outside of a connection to a militia.

McDonald v Chicago
* Said the Second Amendment applies to both state and local government as it does to the federal government.

[3]

These cases continuously hold up the people's right to bear arms. And in cases such as McDonald v Chicago said that controlling gun ownership is unconstitutional because it infringes upon that person's right to do bear arms.

Conclusion

The Constitution clearly states that we have a right to bear arms and that any infringement upon this right is unconstitutional.

Gun control infringes upon the people's right to bear arms.

Therefore gun control is unconstitutional.

[1] http://www.law.cornell.edu...
[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4]http://dictionary.reference.com...
Poachi

Con

Poachi forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ConservativePolitico

Pro

My opponent was online during the three days he was due to post an argument and failed or refused to do so. Since he was the one who accepted my debate I believe he forfeits a win to me.

Extend arguments.

Conduct point at least.

I am disappointed...
Poachi

Con

I do. I apologize to Con for my withdrawal.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
ConservativePoliticoPoachiTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
ConservativePoliticoPoachiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious