The Instigator
cjmousseau
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
govchapman
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

Right-to-Carry

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: 1/16/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,549 times Debate No: 1833
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (8)

 

cjmousseau

Pro

States with right-to-carry laws have lower overall violent crime rates, compared to states without right-to-carry laws. In states whose laws respect the citizen's right-to-carry guns for self defense the total violent crime is 13% lower, homicide is 3% lower, robbery is 26% lower and aggravated assault is 7% lower. (Data: Crime in the United States 1996, FBI Uniform Crime Reports)
Right-to-carry license holders are more law-abiding than the general public. In Florida, for example, the firearm crime rate among license holders, annually averaging only several crimes per 100,000 licensees, is a fraction of the rate for the state as a whole. Since the carry law went into effect in 1987, less than 0.02% of Florida carry permits have been revoked because of gun crimes committed by license holders. (Florida Dept. of State) Research reports printed in "More Guns, Less Crime", John R. Lott, Jr., the John M. Olin Visiting Law and Economics Fellow at the University of Chicago, examined data ranging from gun ownership polls to FBI crime rate data for each of the nation's 3.045 counties over a 1977 too 1994 time span. Lott's research amounts to the largest data set that has ever been put together for any study of crime, let alone for the study of gun control. Among Prof. Lott's findings:
While arrest and conviction rates being the most important factors influencing crime.... non discretionary concealed-handgun laws are also important, and they are the most cost-effective means of reducing crime.
Non discretionary or "shall-issue" carry permit laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. They reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals can't tell which potential victims are armed, being able to defend themselves. Secondly, victims who do have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves. Concealed carry laws deter crime because they increase the criminal's risk of doing business.
States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest decreases in violent crime. And, it is high crime, urban areas, and neighborhoods with large minority populations that experience the greatest reductions in violent crime when law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry concealed handguns.
There is a strong relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate--as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates.
For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3%, rape by 2% and robberies by more than 2%.
Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but the effect is especially pronounced for women. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about three to four times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the rate for men.
The benefits of concealed handguns are not limited to those who carry them. Others get a free ride from the crime fighting efforts of their fellow citizens.
The benefits of right-to-carry are not limited to people who share the characteristics of those who carry the guns. The most obvious example of this "halo" effect, is the drop in murders of children following the adoption of non discretionary laws. Arming older people not only may provide direct protection to these children, but also causes criminals to leave the area.
The increased presence of concealed handguns "does not raise the number of accidental deaths or suicides from handguns."

thanks
charles h mousseau jr
NRA member
govchapman

Con

If you believe that being able to carry a weapon makes us safer, consider this statistic; Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill a family member or friend than to kill in self-defense.
[ Kellermann and Reay, N.E. Journal of Medicine]

It is also noteworthy to take a look at this chart that clearly shows that the escalation in weapons causes more deaths, not fewer

Gun ownership Homicide Gun homicide Suicide Gun suicide
rate per 100k rate per lm rate per lm rate per I m rate per lm
USA 85,000 9.3 6.40 12.0 7.1
Switzerland 43,000 1.5 1.40 20.4 5.8
New Zealand 29,000 2.6 0.49 14.5 2.5
Canada 24,000 2.2 0.67 12.8 3.
Australia 19,000 1.8 0.36 11.6 2.5
Britain 3,000 1.3 0.14 8.6 0.4
Japan 400 1.2 0.06 19.3 0.14
France (23,000) 4.9 2.32 20.0 4.9

-Thank you
Debate Round No. 1
cjmousseau

Pro

Data released by the FBI on Monday showed that in 2005, the nation's total violent crime rate was 38% lower than in 1991, when violent crime hit an all-time high. Rates of the individual categories of violent crime were also much lower in 2005 than in 1991. Murder was 43% lower, rape 25% lower, robbery 48% lower, and aggravated assault 33% lower. The FBI's report came on the heels of a Bureau of Justice Statistics crime survey that found that violent crime was lower in 2005 than anytime in the survey's 32-year history.

Defying the anti-gunners' claim that more guns means more crime, from 1991-2005 the number of privately owned guns increased by more than 70 million.

The news media often characterize violent crime as a primarily gun-oriented problem, but the FBI's report showed that only one in every four violent crimes in 2005 was committed with a gun. In 2005, as in previous years, most violent crimes were robberies and aggravated assaults, most of which were committed with knives or bare hands.

Recently, anti-gun politicians and activists have intensified their rhetoric over the "lack" of bans on handguns, so-called "assault weapons", and .50-caliber rifles; gun registration, gun owner licensing, and mandatory background checks on sales of guns between friends and family members; and limits on the frequency of gun purchases, all of which they say are necessary to reduce the nation's murder rate. But for the last seven years, the murder rate has been steady�in the 5.5-5.7 per 100,000 population range�at all times lower than anytime since the mid-1960s. In 2005, for example, the murder rate was 5.6.

Naturally, anti-gunners will downplay the downward trend in violent crime since 1991, and focus on the fact that the FBI's report showed a 1% increase in total violent crime, and a 2% increase in murder in 2005, compared to 2004. But those changes are miniscule, compared to the huge decrease in crime over the last 14 years.

The FBI's report once again confirmed that violent crime rates are lower in states with Right-to-Carry (RTC) laws. In 2005, RTC states had, on average, 22% lower total violent crime, 30% less murder, 46% lower robbery, and 12% lower aggravated assault rates, compared to the rest of the country.

As usual, Washington, D.C., which leads the nation in anti-gun laws, led the nation in murder, with a rate six times higher than the rest of the country. Neighboring Maryland, where gun control advocates have been particularly active recently, once again had the highest robbery rate among the states, but also tied for the unenviable distinction of "first place" in murder among the states. However, despite Maryland's high crime counts, CeaseFire Maryland, the local Brady Campaign affiliate that recently released a paper demanding an "assault weapon" ban, was unable to point to any crimes in the state involving such a gun.

The FBI's report must have displeased New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg (R). Despite the mayor's recent posturing on the gun issue, and his self-laudatory comments about fighting crime, the Big Apple's murder rate was more than double that of the rest of the state. Similarly, in Philadelphia, where anti-gun politicians are calling for a statewide one-gun-a-month law, the murder rate was more than seven times higher than the rest of Pennsylvania.

Adding to the reasons why voters should "Dump Doyle" in Wisconsin's upcoming gubernatorial election, their state had the greatest total violent crime rate increase (15.1%) between 2004-2005. Murder was up 25.2%; robbery up 11.2%; and aggravated assault up 20.2%. Wisconsin is one of only two states that prohibits Right-to-Carry entirely, but in 2005, 11 of the 12 states that had the greatest decreases in total violent crime, and 12 of the 14 states with the greatest decreases in murder were Right-to-Carry states. The seven states with the lowest total violent crime rates in 2005, and 11 of the 12 states that had the lowest murder rates, were Right-to-Carry states.

Last, but not least, is good news from Florida, the state that during the last 20 years has been most often attacked by anti-gunners, for (among other reasons) setting the Right-to-Carry and "Castle Doctrine" movements in motion. In 2005, Florida recorded a murder rate 13% lower than the rate for the rest of the country (4.96 per 100,000, vs. 5.67 for the rest of the country). For the record, Florida's 2005 murder rate was 58% lower than it was in 1986, the last year before the state's landmark Right-to-Carry law took effect.

thanks
charles h mousseau Jr
NRA Member
govchapman

Con

I would like to congratulate my opponent for successfully copying and pasting his first two arguments directly off two different web sites, he didn't even bother to give those sites credit for this information, so I will do it for him, the first argument came from; http://www.azccw.com..., the second argument came from;http://www.gundealersonline.com..., I strongly encourage my opponent to come up with his own argument for a change.

Anyway, here is the deal, lower crime rates are not necessarily caused by concealed weapons laws. Even if it did lower crime rates, it would just be slightly lowering violent crimes caused by guns in the first place! If it is actually lowering the crime rate it is because of one reason, fear, is it really freedom to be walking around in constant fear of what nut job around you is packing heat? Vigilante justice is the wrong way to go!
Debate Round No. 2
cjmousseau

Pro

cjmousseau forfeited this round.
govchapman

Con

Well, it looks like my opponent has left the building, seemingly because he cannot make his own arguments. I am just going to wrap this debate up by saying that the amount of guns we have in this country is ridiculously high. This is not good for our citizens, especially children when we have crazy or intoxicated people caring guns around.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Cobjob 9 years ago
Cobjob
I don't see a need to get personal in the comments section. If you have never debated a viewpoint that you don't agree with, your not a real debater. This guy could be in the NRA for all you know. This is what separates us from liberals, our beliefs can stand up to a little objective criticism.
Posted by govchapman 9 years ago
govchapman
I don't know what being able to carry a firearm has to do with hugging trees but ok
Posted by Themaverick 9 years ago
Themaverick
Ok why are we even having this debate? don't we remember what happened when we weren't allowed to have guns? Have we forgotten history? Guns don't kill people, people kill people get your head out of sand and stop trying to hug trees. Govchapman fight for green peace your place is not in a decision room or debate hall.
Posted by Cobjob 9 years ago
Cobjob
Con, you won the debate by forfeit. You were wrong, but that isn't what debate is about is it.
Posted by Mikegj1077 9 years ago
Mikegj1077
Free people need guns to remain free and to protect themselves from violent felons. Police don't protect people. They show up after a crime has already been committed.

People who use firearms to repel violent assaults are half as likely to be injured or killed than those who use all other methods (mace, knives, keys...) or who don't resist at all. (Dept. of Justice crime statistics).

I'll debate you....
Posted by Daxitarian 9 years ago
Daxitarian
"I am just going to wrap this debate up by saying that the amount of guns we have in this country is ridiculously high. This is not good for our citizens, especially children when we have crazy or intoxicated people caring guns around."

Well, I really wish I could have taken this debate because there are a few points being left out.

1. The intent of the right to bear arms in the constitution was so that one day we may need to violently overthrow our government.

2. Similarly, the right to bear arms keeps us safe from foreign enemies. No country will ever be able to occupy America with an armed citizenry.

3. America has always had the right to bear arms, so just making guns illegal wouldn't do much. As we have seen with the war on drugs, as long as there is an active black market, prohibition laws don't do anything.

4. Your statistics leave out latin america and south america which have stricter gun laws, but more gun crime. So there is more to gun crime than just guns.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by griffinisright 9 years ago
griffinisright
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Themaverick 9 years ago
Themaverick
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Cobjob 9 years ago
Cobjob
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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 pazmusik 9 years ago
pazmusik
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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 C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Rlancer55 9 years ago
Rlancer55
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by righty10294 9 years ago
righty10294
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by govchapman 9 years ago
govchapman
cjmousseaugovchapmanTied
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