The Instigator
NarutoUzamaki
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Jifpop09
Pro (for)
Winning
18 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 4 votes the winner is...
Jifpop09
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/4/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 463 times Debate No: 45199
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

NarutoUzamaki

Con

Guns in our community are a very serious problem in our society. Me myself believe that guns should not be in the hand of criminals and the wrong beings, but I believe the should be no gun control over firearms. It is going over the second amendment. Many people have said ' guns kill people so it should be banned' so do cars. McDonalds. and candy and should we ban those things. There are many benefits of not having guns in our society.

Cons for gun control
- Gun control takes control of all guns and takes it away from citizens who need it.
- It goes against the second amendment.
- People would not be able to hunt for what' they need
- Criminals would be able to spot and find weapons and citizens would be helpless.
People also like to say that ' people can call the cops and the cops catch the criminals' a point of a gun is for self defense and it is not the government's right. The cause of gun violence of criminals is society itself the society needs more stricter punishments and a better way of criminals not holding guns. I disagree with gun control because it takes away all guns from citizens and the poor and the helpless would be defenseless. Banning guns will mean cops would not be able to use a gun. Self defense is a key to stopping criminals from bothering you. Guns are growing rapid and crime rate decreases

No guns = more crime

Criminals will still cause crime no matte what no end to it.
Debate Round No. 1
NarutoUzamaki

Con

The amount of fallen crimes in states has fallen immensly.


Gun crime does decrease but gun sales go up. This means te more guns the less the crime.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com...

Also a scientific study at hardvard has shown that banning guns wont cause a solution to ending gun violence. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. There has been also assertions on how United states has the most highest amount of murders when there are other places with bans on guns and crime rate is higher than United state

http://www.ncpa.org...



Those countries have strict gun control laws and crime rate goes up. And United states has more guns and the crime rate is lower so the causes of that crime rate decreasing is by guns as showned in the harvard university research.



More rebuttals
Just because two things collaberate doesnt mean it is true.


Guns decreasing crime is true because gun sales increase and crime rate goes up and in certain countries there is gun control and crime increases. It also has been studied at Hardvard so ys it is true that guns can decrease crime.










Debate Round No. 2
NarutoUzamaki

Con

I am going to see what I can put and I think what I will put next will make me lose so you provide furthr argument.
Jifpop09

Pro

I can not understand what your saying. It's round 3, so there will be no further arguments. I am dissapointed that you have only brought up 2 rebuttals the whole debate, but we'll see.

Thanks for debating with me -Jifpop09
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
I'm getting a lot of hash for using Google drive, but it is the only way I can post my arguments.
Posted by NarutoUzamaki 2 years ago
NarutoUzamaki
It is for if gun control should stay or not I debate that it should not exist you do opposite
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
Is this a all out ban or just gun control. I will accept the latter.
Posted by samadkins29 2 years ago
samadkins29
Is this an debate for an all out ban? or simply further regulations? You say gun control but put in several parts about banning.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by AdamKG 2 years ago
AdamKG
NarutoUzamakiJifpop09Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had more and better sources as well as a more convincing argument. Con seemed to be somewhat unfamiliar with debating but at least had good conduct.
Vote Placed by Defro 2 years ago
Defro
NarutoUzamakiJifpop09Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided his argument in a google docs, which I think is not fair because he can easily break the character limit. Therefore, he loses points in conduct.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
NarutoUzamakiJifpop09Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: I'll start with conduct and sources - Pro, you should not be posting your argument in a Google Doc in each round. Not only does that let you theoretically go over the character limit, but it's generally not a good idea, as it forces work on your opponent and voters. I get that it's not much work, but you should be making it as simple as possible. So I dinged you in both areas. On S&G, Con's argument was often difficult to read, and misspellings were prevalent. I don't think Pro had much in the way of strong offense, but I found that he mitigated Con's arguments sufficiently to make them disappear, at least there appears not to be enough of a response from Con to bring them back into contention. The rest of the argument is just engaging in the same correlative argumentation as Pro, and doing a less solid job of it as well. So that's the reason for the vote.
Vote Placed by Hierocles 2 years ago
Hierocles
NarutoUzamakiJifpop09Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Overall - I agree with Whiteflame. Con gets the conduct point since pro can garner an advantage from posting all of his arguments in google-docs.