Gun Laws should be Federal Laws
Debate Rounds (4)
Every airport has complete lock down security to make ensure the safety of all passengers. As a society, we all signed an unwritten agreement that we will sacrifice convenience for safety. Lets just say hypothetically, that one smaller airport has lackluster security, in order to be more convenient for passengers. They have very light security and basically anyone can just go on the plane with whatever they want. One day, Mr. Terrorist decides he's going to blow up some people. He's not going to go into the terminal of the low security airport and blow it up there because there is a low amount of people, he's going to get on a plane and fly to a larger airport and blow it up there. Now the larger airport that had perfect, lock down, flawless security has paid the price because of the lackluster security of another airport.
Do you think that criminals in NYC or Chicago get their guns from their state? No, they get them from states in which it is easier to acquire weapons. It doesn't matter what Chicago does to prevent criminals from getting guns because they are not coming from Chicago, they are coming from other states that have easy-to-get-around gun laws. Making gun restrictions federally regulated (with background checks, gun inspections, etc.) will prevent smuggling of guns across states and into the wrong hands while still allowing good citizens to own guns. Now given, it would not be easy to buy a gun but similar to with airport security, you are sacrificing convenience for safety.
The biggest issue in this debate is the rights of state government VS the rights of federal government. If you are unclear upon the vast conflicts that occasionally arise from this issue, kindly refer to the American Civil War. The Federal Government, as stated in the Constitution (I also advise reading it) gives individual commerce issues to the individual state. The federal level is therefore not really supposed to mess around in this affair. Doing so would violate the Constitution.
This is precisely why gun regulations are on the state level: each state can put into place as many or as few regulations as they feel make the state safe. Removing this right is in direct violation of the Constitution. Sure, the Federal Government could make regulations... if they wanted to break the highest law of the land.
P.S. Never break the highest law of the land. It is not appreciated.
While you make a good point that it doesn't make sense that Alaska would have the same gun laws as New York, I don't believe that is really a big deal. You can still get guns in Alaska and in New York, and meanwhile the laws will prevent people from bringing guns to New York from Alaska. How? One law I would implement is that every 6 or so months you have to present your gun to a police station to prove that you still have ownership of the gun. This way, guns stay in the hands of the purchaser. Of course, all fifty states would have to have this in effect because if just one state refuses, the whole thing is spoiled. Yeah, an Alaskan probably should own a gun while someone in NYC has little need for one, but the rules should be the same to prevent criminals from abusing easier gun regulations.
As far as the Constitution goes, you have to remember that the Constitution was not a perfect document crafted by god. There are cases where there are things on the Constitution and bill of rights that are just dead wrong. The documents were written hundreds of years ago and since then we have made revisions. Just because it is written in the Constitution that guns laws are state regulated does not mean that is the best way.
Unfortunately with the way America works I don't think we will see it become federal law any time soon, but I believe that if it did happen, it would be the best possible option.
Also, these regulations would in no way deter any determined criminal from getting a gun. There's this thing called the Black Market and Illegal Gun Sales that criminals are in no way averse to taking part in. They are criminals! They intend to shoot people! Ya think that they are going to be stopped by a feeble little regulation?
They aren't. In case you were wondering.
Instead, these regulations would put unneeded stress upon law-abiding people. Why should we punish the good and leave the bad fellers relatively unharmed?
Also, regulations should not be the same for every state. Unlike your claim, this is direly important. Getting a gun in heavily populated urban areas should be far more difficult to get than in little rural areas.
Would making it federal law completely end gun violence? No. It would however reduce gun death rates? You bet it would. With gun regulations being federal along with one of those regulations being annual gun inspections, citizens can no longer sell off guns to criminals. It would not eradicate guns from criminals completely but it would absolutely make a huge dent. Suddenly now a criminal would have to pay a hefty amount to get it from a black market dealer because there simply are less black market guns in circulation. Now street thugs that barely scrape by all of the sudden can't get ahold of guns, and organized crime can't afford as many guns as they could before.
Now, to your argument, this whole debate is about something in the Constitution that I believe needs to be fixed, so there you go.
This will deter criminals because it will destroy one of their major sources of obtaining guns. They don't care if they are breaking the law, but that illegal source of obtaining guns will be diminished.
Unneeded stress apon citizens?! This could save many lives, what do you mean unneeded stress?! Are you stating that the gun purchasing process being low-stress is more important than all the lives that are taken from gun violence each year? It would be stressful, but think about it, you are purchasing something thats purpose is to kill, I'd buying that is not a high stress operation than that is a problem!
And yes, the laws should be the same for every state because of they aren't than it would be solving nothing. The whole problem here is out of state gun purchasing. It has to be difficult to get a weapon everywhere. If it is not the same in every state, the efforts of one state to add gun regulations are completely nullified by another states' relaxed laws. A criminal can't get a gun in New York? Just go pick one up in Alabama.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.