The Instigator
hk1510
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Golfer16
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Possession of handguns should be made illegal

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/20/2015 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 276 times Debate No: 77901
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

hk1510

Pro

Possession of handguns should be made illegal. This is because there are many crimes these days that involve people shooting victims for no reason. Handguns should only be made illegal to the civilians. Police officers can have handguns because they are the ones that prevent crime. The civilians cannot have a possession of handguns because they can do harm to anybody which is bad.
Golfer16

Con

Hello! I am excited to be debating against you on this :) Best of luck! Please state your entire argument and proof with it.
Debate Round No. 1
hk1510

Pro

If all civilians own handguns there can be many possible threats:
1) A civilian might shoot someone else by mistake. Which can happen anytime.
2) Teenagers may start shooting as many people as possible on a school campus. This can happen when the parent has bought a gun and the teenager has stolen it. If guns were banned, it wouldn't have come to this situation.
3) People buying guns can use them for the wrong purpose.
If selling guns was made illegal then there would be minimum risk because then nobody would be able to buy a gun other than police officer. The police can use them to catch thieves.
Golfer16

Con

I wish that were the case/scenario, but it's not. If we could take away all the guns and nobody could get them that would be perfect, but we can't.

Over 40% of weapons used by criminals are bought from illegal gun dealers who get their weapons from shady overseas gun producers. These guns have no serial numbers and aren't even known to be of existence to the United States.

Enough about the bad side of guns though. Let's look at some statistics about why guns are good.

1. Guns prevent over 2.5 million crimes every year or 6,849 every day.
2. Felons report they avoid entering houses where people are at home because they fear being shot
3. 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are "hot burglaries" which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a "hot burglary" rate of only 13%.
4. In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% the following year.

I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 2
hk1510

Pro

I agree with you.
Golfer16

Con

Golfer16 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
hk1510

Pro

hk1510 forfeited this round.
Golfer16

Con

Golfer16 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
hk1510

Pro

hk1510 forfeited this round.
Golfer16

Con

Golfer16 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by parkerg27 1 year ago
parkerg27
Very basic scenario:
You are a violent criminal who wants nothing more than to hurt as many people as possible.
Do you:
A) Acquire a weapon and start attacking people in a place where there are likely to be people who also have weapons with which to fight back with?
or
B) Acquire a weapon and start attacking people in a place where there are not likely people who are able to defend themselves with?
Posted by parkerg27 1 year ago
parkerg27
In favor of civilian gun rights (both in home and on person on public property):
1a)Studies prove there gun violence where there are more gun rights;1b) most public shootings occur in places which are classified as "gun free zones," which can basically be read as "defenseless victims zones" because that what a criminal looking for easy targets will see when they read the words "gun free"
2) There aren't enough cops to ensure a quick enough response time to ensure maximum safety of innocent civilians. Basic example: Criminal breaks into the house of a family without guns in the house, family calls 9-11 and waits at least a few minutes for them to get there, in that time the criminal has already killed off the entire family and is off the property, thus putting the chances of escape in favor of the criminal; Family with guns: response time of seconds, chance of criminal getting away scotch free little to none, chance of entire family being injured or killed relatively low (especially if the entire family is armed and trained), Family without guns: response time of minutes, chance of criminal getting away scotch free relatively high, chance of entire family being injured or killed relatively high
3) The constitution gave us the right to bear arms not only to defend ourselves from violent citizens, but also from tyrannical governments (i.e. the people in charge of the police we are told to place our lives into the hands of)
4)The basic nature of life gives us the right to have and use weapons to defend ourselves. Any basic analysis of nature will reveal that we live in a violence-filled world and seeing as the predators will always go for strongest weapons possible the non-predators must have access to the same weapons to ensure a chance of not becoming victimized prey to the predators

Against civilian gun rights (anywhere, since guns from home can easily be brought anywhere):
None which don't have a blatantly obvious counter argument to go with it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.