The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
8 Points

Guns should be allowed

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2014 Category: News
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,814 times Debate No: 53089
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)




Read the 2nd amendment


Read Lord of the Flies.
Debate Round No. 1


In the 2nd amendment says "right to bear arms". Why would anyone take away something our founding fathers wanted?


Then bear your arms and fight with the elbows on them.

Why would anyone care what the founding fathers wanted? They're dead and gone and irrelevant now. Too bad, they got disobeyed are they going to give you a spanking from the grave? There is literally no need to be loyal to the dead at all. This is a ridiculous notion by irrational people.

Now onto the good stuff; Lord of the Flies.

Imagine how much worse this would have been if they had had guns.

In the midst of a raging war, a plane evacuating a group of schoolboys from Britain is shot down over a deserted tropical island. Two of the boys, Ralph and Piggy, discover a conch shell on the beach, and Piggy realizes it could be used as a horn to summon the other boys. Once assembled, the boys set about electing a leader and devising a way to be rescued. They choose Ralph as their leader, and Ralph appoints another boy, Jack, to be in charge of the boys who will hunt food for the entire group.

Ralph, Jack, and another boy, Simon, set off on an expedition to explore the island. When they return, Ralph declares that they must light a signal fire to attract the attention of passing ships. The boys succeed in igniting some dead wood by focusing sunlight through the lenses of Piggy’s eyeglasses. However, the boys pay more attention to playing than to monitoring the fire, and the flames quickly engulf the forest. A large swath of dead wood burns out of control, and one of the youngest boys in the group disappears, presumably having burned to death.

At first, the boys enjoy their life without grown-ups and spend much of their time splashing in the water and playing games. Ralph, however, complains that they should be maintaining the signal fire and building huts for shelter. The hunters fail in their attempt to catch a wild pig, but their leader, Jack, becomes increasingly preoccupied with the act of hunting.

When a ship passes by on the horizon one day, Ralph and Piggy notice, to their horror, that the signal fire—which had been the hunters’ responsibility to maintain—has burned out. Furious, Ralph accosts Jack, but the hunter has just returned with his first kill, and all the hunters seem gripped with a strange frenzy, reenacting the chase in a kind of wild dance. Piggy criticizes Jack, who hits Piggy across the face. Ralph blows the conch shell and reprimands the boys in a speech intended to restore order. At the meeting, it quickly becomes clear that some of the boys have started to become afraid. The littlest boys, known as “littluns,” have been troubled by nightmares from the beginning, and more and more boys now believe that there is some sort of beast or monster lurking on the island. The older boys try to convince the others at the meeting to think rationally, asking where such a monster could possibly hide during the daytime. One of the littluns suggests that it hides in the sea—a proposition that terrifies the entire group.

Not long after the meeting, some military planes engage in a battle high above the island. The boys, asleep below, do not notice the flashing lights and explosions in the clouds. A parachutist drifts to earth on the signal-fire mountain, dead. Sam and Eric, the twins responsible for watching the fire at night, are asleep and do not see the parachutist land. When the twins wake up, they see the enormous silhouette of his parachute and hear the strange flapping noises it makes. Thinking the island beast is at hand, they rush back to the camp in terror and report that the beast has attacked them.

The boys organize a hunting expedition to search for the monster. Jack and Ralph, who are increasingly at odds, travel up the mountain. They see the silhouette of the parachute from a distance and think that it looks like a huge, deformed ape. The group holds a meeting at which Jack and Ralph tell the others of the sighting. Jack says that Ralph is a coward and that he should be removed from office, but the other boys refuse to vote Ralph out of power. Jack angrily runs away down the beach, calling all the hunters to join him. Ralph rallies the remaining boys to build a new signal fire, this time on the beach rather than on the mountain. They obey, but before they have finished the task, most of them have slipped away to join Jack.

Jack declares himself the leader of the new tribe of hunters and organizes a hunt and a violent, ritual slaughter of a sow to solemnize the occasion. The hunters then decapitate the sow and place its head on a sharpened stake in the jungle as an offering to the beast. Later, encountering the bloody, fly-covered head, Simon has a terrible vision, during which it seems to him that the head is speaking. The voice, which he imagines as belonging to the Lord of the Flies, says that Simon will never escape him, for he exists within all men. Simon faints. When he wakes up, he goes to the mountain, where he sees the dead parachutist. Understanding then that the beast does not exist externally but rather within each individual boy, Simon travels to the beach to tell the others what he has seen. But the others are in the midst of a chaotic revelry—even Ralph and Piggy have joined Jack’s feast—and when they see Simon’s shadowy figure emerge from the jungle, they fall upon him and kill him with their bare hands and teeth.

The following morning, Ralph and Piggy discuss what they have done. Jack’s hunters attack them and their few followers and steal Piggy’s glasses in the process. Ralph’s group travels to Jack’s stronghold in an attempt to make Jack see reason, but Jack orders Sam and Eric tied up and fights with Ralph. In the ensuing battle, one boy, Roger, rolls a boulder down the mountain, killing Piggy and shattering the conch shell. Ralph barely manages to escape a torrent of spears.

Ralph hides for the rest of the night and the following day, while the others hunt him like an animal. Jack has the other boys ignite the forest in order to smoke Ralph out of his hiding place. Ralph stays in the forest, where he discovers and destroys the sow’s head, but eventually, he is forced out onto the beach, where he knows the other boys will soon arrive to kill him. Ralph collapses in exhaustion, but when he looks up, he sees a British naval officer standing over him. The officer’s ship noticed the fire raging in the jungle. The other boys reach the beach and stop in their tracks at the sight of the officer. Amazed at the spectacle of this group of bloodthirsty, savage children, the officer asks Ralph to explain. Ralph is overwhelmed by the knowledge that he is safe but, thinking about what has happened on the island, he begins to weep. The other boys begin to sob as well. The officer turns his back so that the boys may regain their composure.

Debate Round No. 2


If people don't like guns, don't buy them! You have the right to own a firearm. Now, I will give you reasons that guns should be allowed. 1. Guns will help people in the fight against crime. Say a gang was shooting on your street, what do you do? You tell them to go away and leave them alone. Then pull out your gun and threaten them. They will scatter off. You just saved lives. It is not the guns that kill people, it is the people operating the guns. Regular people use guns for self defense. If guns were allowed in the city of Chicago (especially the South Side), I bet you crime would drop, because stupid gang members would be scared to enter the streets.


I wonder why the gang managed to get gusn int he first place. That's because of insufficient gun control.

Congratulations, we can prevent the problem it he first place by banning guns altogether.

Good game, well played.

Lord of the Flies has disproved you.

Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
As long as our government is armed, we need the second amendment. We are 4th in gun violence in the world. But if you take Detroit, Chicago,New Orleans, and Wash. D.C. out of the mix, we are 24th. If you notice these utopias have been run by democrats for decades.If that principal in sandyhook had a gun instead of a pencil, she could have saved the lives of the 20 kids mowed down. There should be no gun free zones. The constitution does not allow them.There is one school in Texas that put a sign that said some of their teachers are armed. There is a school near where I live that put up a sign saying they were a gun free zone.Now which of the schools out there that a crazy would go to to kill.The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. The first responders at sandyhook were not the police. They were the adults that had the responsibility of protecting those kids.They were ill prepared to do anything. The insane gun free zone at that school was the real culprit.
Posted by Dilara 2 years ago
Con isn't very smart. Banning guns won't make them go away. Criminals will still get them illegal or not...because they're criminals and they disobey the law and when those criminals steal from us, rape and kill us good people we won't have guns to defend our selves.
Posted by TL_the_consetvative 2 years ago
The constitution is still the law of the land and not irrelevant
Posted by Watchemoket 2 years ago
Um ... guns are 'allowed' to qualified adults with reasonable conditions and restrictions. If I were to accept the challenge, it would be ridiculous to take the position that "guns should not be allowed" as that is just as vague and undefined as the challenge statement. Please clarify if you want a real debate.
Posted by Bannanawamajama 2 years ago
You should have put alot more specifics in your opening round. You never even claimed this was in America, so the 2nd amendment doesn't even have to apply depending on where you are.
Posted by Jonbonbon 2 years ago
I don't think he actually knows.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
Who should guns be allowed for? Are you advocating against all methods of gun control, or just against gun bans? Are you being specific to the U.S. or are you trying to extend this right more broadly?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by iholland95 2 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I think that guns shouldn't be allowed. They just create more death. The only people allowed to carry guns should be police officers.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Both arguments were full of assertions, but only Con had any real points against before the final round. I could simply disregard Pro's arguments there, but even if I don't, Con provides a solid mitigating response. Given what's been said, I'm not sure I agree with either side, or really even know what was debated here, aside from some nebulous form of gun control. Pro didn't uphold his burden in the debate to s how that guns should be allowed, and therefore Con wins. Also, since Pro's S&G was terrible, Con gets a point there too.
Vote Placed by Jevinigh 2 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made a few grammatical errors that where noticeable ( and I don't typically spend much effort on that) While Con actually made an Argument... pro just made a few points, din't back them up or even go into them... Din't respond to Con's contentions . Con's arguments where a bit more ranty and less than what I was hoping for when I started reading. Con gets points but I am not impressed by either side at all.