The Instigator
vserena09
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
whiteflame
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points

Gun Control

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...
whiteflame
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/31/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 618 times Debate No: 45013
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

vserena09

Con

Can gun control reduce crime in American? Is it a necessary battlle in trying to curb American's fatal attraction to firearms?
whiteflame

Pro

Sure, why not? Let's have it, been meaning to do this debate for a while. I'll be arguing in support of gun control.

As The Instigator has not posted any arguments in the first round, I will leave it to him to post them starting in the second round, so that we can both have an equal number of arguments in this debate. However, I will make an effort to define how this debate should be judged, and explain my case, since that will be the basis upon which the round is evaluated.

The burden of proof is on me in this debate. I must prove that gun control is likely to be effective in some regard if implemented on a national level. This is not limited to a specific form of gun control, but rather all forms, so any form that I argue for will have to be debated by my opponent. If I can prove that any of the forms of gun control I argue are more beneficial than harmful, then I have earned the vote of our judges. Alternatively, if Con proves that each of these forms is more harmful than beneficial, or if he proves that gun control in any form is at least a net 0, then he wins this debate. If Con has any concerns with this, he can feel free to express them in the comments, and we can work out a suitable arrangement there. With only 2 rounds to debate this, I would rather that we not waste time doing this in our arguments.

Since I'm providing him the opportunity to make arguments first, I will provide four subsets of the gun control debate that I will be arguing:

1) Gun bans are net beneficial. I feel this is pretty straightforward, and it is commonly understood. I will be arguing not for a complete ban, but a partial ban of certain subsets of guns, mainly focused on national bans of semi-automatic and assault rifles. This would not be retroactive, and as such, no guns will be removed from current ownership.

2) Gun restrictions are net beneficial. This warrants a little explanation: we currently have laws that make ownership of automatic weapons in many states possible, but make them significantly more difficult to acquire. They require advanced permits that are significantly more expensive and time consuming to acquire, making their owners more knowledgeable in terms of how to wield a firearm. The weapons themselves are also made far more expensive by current regulations. As such, this system would inherently reduce access to these weapons. This would function retroactively, though there would be a 10-year time span during which this could be accomplished. Weapons' owners that cannot achieve this can sell back to the government at cost.

3) Universal background checks do more good than harm. Again, pretty straightforward, and as it's universal application of current background checks (which means closing currently available loopholes), I feel this doesn't require much explanation. Background checks would be made free, covered by the federal government, in order to make them easily accessible to private gun sellers.

4) Gun registries are similarly beneficial. This would apply retroactively (everyone would have to register their guns within 5 years), with any newly purchased gun being added to the registry following background check approval.

Any uncertainties here can be addressed in the comments, so I'm hopeful that Con will bring them forward at any point between now and his next post. With that, I leave it to him to begin the debate by posing responses to my case, along with any non-gun control alternatives he wishes to present.
Debate Round No. 1
vserena09

Con

vserena09 forfeited this round.
whiteflame

Pro

Well, I'm extremely disappointed. I guess I'll just have to wait to have this with someone else.
Debate Round No. 2
vserena09

Con

vserena09 forfeited this round.
whiteflame

Pro

You know what? In this case, I'm going to dispense with kindness. My opponent has been online at least once since this debate started. He has obviously had the opportunity to see my argument. Whether he took that opportunity or not, I really don't care. There is no justification for ignoring his own debate completely. If vserena09 found himself strapped for time, then he should have posted a concession, a comment stating that there was a problem, or sent me an email. Con has chosen not to engage in his own debate, and that is to both of our detriments.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
I realize that I didn't mention on my #2 which guns I plan to restrict. They are the same as in #1: semi-automatic and assault rifles.
Posted by Masonh928 2 years ago
Masonh928
I've already done this topic and I support gun rights. Hate gun control
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
vserena09whiteflameTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gets points for conduct because of FF. No arguments were made.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
vserena09whiteflameTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit by Con.