The Instigator
Randomknowledge
Pro (for)
Losing
22 Points
The Contender
Kleptin
Con (against)
Winning
53 Points

Guns and bullets are better than A bow and arrow

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2008 Category: Sports
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,271 times Debate No: 2486
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (19)

 

Randomknowledge

Pro

I am just arguing for the sake of arguing becuase i was in a debate with this topic and it was one round so I am copying the information and I am debating this for fun again. Once again im not a gun zealot, just arguing its case. Here we go.

this is a very interesting debate, and In good fun and pure opinion. I am not an avid gun supporter; no one I know even owns one. I am just advocating the case of the good old gun and bullet. (again)

Gun: bang bang bang bang bang bang. Click click. flip-click. Bang bang bang....

Arrow: woosh, woosh, woo--damn, the arrow wont get on. What the? how are you supposed to use one of thes- by this time you have shot an arrow through your instructor who is standing behind you.

It all boils down to simple, effective, cheap, and the weapon of today.

The gun.

If you have read the Odyssey, there is a scene where no one can string Odysseus' bow to win the heart of his faithful wife Penelope. No one can manage to do it, except Odysseus, who had had much practice. I personally have used a bow and arrow, and man is it fun but man is it hard to use and a physical strain. Imagine your local police department carrying around bows and arrows, with little children on the sidewalk calling them "Medieval Men," and the teenagers chuckling and calling them "Legolas Legs," or "Bow-legged bow stringer."

Bow and arrows are clearly outdated; moving out of the way of the more effective. It may not be as effective as a extremely well trained apple-off-the-head bow and Arrow shooter, but it sure does the job and is extremly simple to master. Besides, they have been around for ages, and everyone loves the good old bayonet, right?

Thank you for this fun opportunity. I await the person that accepts response. Good luck.
Kleptin

Con

My argument is simple.

A moral good is one that benefits society.

Guns and bullets account for a massive number of deaths in the country, whereas a single bow and a single arrow can do little harm.

Therefore, "guns and bullets" are not better than "A bow and arrow" in that the former can cause a substantial loss of life and social chaos.
Debate Round No. 1
Randomknowledge

Pro

Hello, and although your argument was short I will refute it.

First I want to criticize something you said:

"Guns and bullets account for a massive number of deaths in the country, whereas a single bow and a single arrow can do little harm."

Ehmm (clears throught). I hate to say you are wrong with the bow and arrow thing, but you are. Take a look at this picture for me.

http://cache.viewimages.com...

This proved you wrong on many levels. Bows and arrows can kill and are used in hunting quite frequently. They are used all over where guns or other weapons are not available.

I also want to say that guns are easier and are becoming more and more accesible.

And yes, guns and bullets do account for alot of deaths but bow and arrows arent exactly childrens toys either. And once again, I will take from my previous statement, do you see policeman walking down the street with a bow around their shoulder and some arrows on their back yelling halt to a running criminal while trying to string an arrow at the same time? I think not.

Thank you.
Kleptin

Con

"Hello, and although your argument was short I will refute it."

Short arguments are easy to refute.

"Ehmm (clears throught). I hate to say you are wrong with the bow and arrow thing, but you are. Take a look at this picture for me.

http://cache.viewimages.com......

This proved you wrong on many levels. Bows and arrows can kill and are used in hunting quite frequently. They are used all over where guns or other weapons are not available."

First of all, I am unable to view that image. It links me to a page of broken HTML text. But I will take your word for it that the picture was of a very scary-looking bow and a very scary-looking arrow.

However, it has absolutely nothing to do with my argument. Perhaps it was my fault for being unclear. Please reexamine, word for word and letter for letter, the issue at hand. You have chosen to word the topic thusly:

"gun(s) and bullet(s)" AGAINST "A" bow and arrow

This is what I meant by a bow and arrow doing little harm comparatively. When compared to many guns and many bullets, a single bow and a single arrow do much less harm.

"I also want to say that guns are easier and are becoming more and more accesible."

Yes, that is a problem. The easier it is to get a gun, the easier it is for people to kill other innocent people. Many people with many guns and many bullets will do a lot more harm than one person with "A" bow and "AN" arrow.

"And yes, guns and bullets do account for alot of deaths but bow and arrows arent exactly childrens toys either."

Yes, but death by gunshot is so frequent that it rolls off the tongue. It's heard on the news every night. I doubt you can even remember the last time you heard of a murder where the weapon was a bow and arrow.

"And once again, I will take from my previous statement, do you see policeman walking down the street with a bow around their shoulder and some arrows on their back yelling halt to a running criminal while trying to string an arrow at the same time? I think not."

No. But you must admit it would be nice if all guns and bullets were replaced with bows and arrows, yes? It would be a lot easier to save someone with an arrow wound than a bullet wound.
Debate Round No. 2
Randomknowledge

Pro

Hello, kleptin, and thank you for your response. here is another picture similar to the previous, one, just not of the magnitude and force. This one is a little more docile: http://www.mainehuntingtoday.com...

I will now refute some of your poitns from your round two argument:

"Yes, that is a problem. The easier it is to get a gun, the easier it is for people to kill other innocent people. Many people with many guns and many bullets will do a lot more harm than one person with "A" bow and "AN" arrow."

That is a complete and utter generalization. You are assuming that If people can better access a gun they will kill innocent people. I do not think this is the case, as 78% of all gun violence is provoked.

"Yes, but death by gunshot is so frequent that it rolls off the tongue. It's heard on the news every night. I doubt you can even remember the last time you heard of a murder where the weapon was a bow and arrow."

It doesnt seem that way to me. Gun violence is being cut down alot these days by the gun control subsidaries of america.

"This is what I meant by a bow and arrow doing little harm comparatively. When compared to many guns and many bullets, a single bow and a single arrow do much less harm."

When accurate, bows and arrows can be as harmful and devastating as a gun. Guns can misfire, backfire, and any fire in between.

"No. But you must admit it would be nice if all guns and bullets were replaced with bows and arrows, yes? It would be a lot easier to save someone with an arrow wound than a bullet wound."

Since when has it been a normal occurance to save someone with a gun, let alone an arrow? Please clarify this.

In conclusion, guns can be controlled and are on their way to being safer and safer. Guns can be more effective and alot less painful if a hit is made. Overall, guns are the way to go, and they have been since the early american wars.

Thank you and I await your final rebuttal.
Kleptin

Con

"That is a complete and utter generalization. You are assuming that If people can better access a gun they will kill innocent people. I do not think this is the case, as 78% of all gun violence is provoked."

Yes, provoked by other people with guns.

"It doesnt seem that way to me. Gun violence is being cut down alot these days by the gun control subsidaries of america."

Yes, it is being cut down a lot. But that's irrelevant. If you cut a giant monster cake 99%, and if you cut a cupcake just 1%, the piece of the giant cake will still be bigger than the cupcake.

Gun violence is so rampant in comparison to bow and arrow violence that it doesn't matter how much gun violence is cut. It is still obscenely more common than bow and arrow violence.

***************
"This is what I meant by a bow and arrow doing little harm comparatively. When compared to many guns and many bullets, a single bow and a single arrow do much less harm."

When accurate, bows and arrows can be as harmful and devastating as a gun. Guns can misfire, backfire, and any fire in between.
*****************

You still don't understand my point.

LOOK AT THE TITLE.

You are comparing MANY GUNS AND BULLETS (Gun and bullet is pluralized)
To a SINGLE BOW AND ARROW (Bow and arrow in SINGULAR FORM)

Thus, You are essentially arguing that many guns and bullets as weapons in this society is better than a single bow and a single arrow as a single weapon.

"Since when has it been a normal occurance to save someone with a gun, let alone an arrow? Please clarify this."

Doctors treat gunshot wounds daily. When do they treat arrow wounds?

"In conclusion, guns can be controlled and are on their way to being safer and safer. Guns can be more effective and alot less painful if a hit is made. Overall, guns are the way to go, and they have been since the early american wars."

Look at the language you use.

Guns CAN be controlled
Guns are ON THEIR WAY to being safer
Guns CAN be more effective
Guns CAN be a lot less painful.

A society with guns is by far much more dangerous and bloody than a society with just bows and arrows. You have not argued this point, you basically said that bows and arrows CAN do some damage, but you cleverly sidestepped around the comparison.

This debate is about comparing guns to bows. I am doing that very blatantly. GUNS KILL PEOPLE BETTER THAN BOWS DO.

You said so yourself in the first argument:

"Gun: bang bang bang bang bang bang. Click click. flip-click. Bang bang bang....

Arrow: woosh, woosh, woo--damn, the arrow wont get on. What the? how are you supposed to use one of thes- by this time you have shot an arrow through your instructor who is standing behind you.

It all boils down to simple, effective, cheap, and the weapon of today."

If everyone had such trouble shooting arrows, people would get hurt a lot less, and society would be safer. Making guns simple, effective, and cheap only means more deaths, more fatalities.

To make it even more simple:

A maniac wants to kill you. Would you rather he shot you with a gun, or would you rather he shot you with an arrow?
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Randomknowledge 6 years ago
Randomknowledge
Yes, venemous, it was a lot of fun. We should have another debate sometime.
Posted by VenomousNinja 6 years ago
VenomousNinja
Heyy.. Randomknowlodge, you were supposed to wait for me!!
Meh, it's okay! Did you have fun?
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 6 years ago
JBlake
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 6 years ago
Kleptin
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
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 
Vote Placed by Robert_Santurri 6 years ago
Robert_Santurri
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by wooferalot101 6 years ago
wooferalot101
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by cliffsofdover 6 years ago
cliffsofdover
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by eyeleapy 6 years ago
eyeleapy
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by booyaka 6 years ago
booyaka
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by massvideogamer 6 years ago
massvideogamer
RandomknowledgeKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03