School shootings are a significant social issue
Debate Rounds (5)
My stand: School shootings are a significant social issue.
Propose:I challenge my opponent to this debate because of his claim. while looking at a debate he was debating with someone I came across a point he made that "I really don't see the need to be '"significant" because our government can't do any thing affective to change this problem." My opponent has put assertion before reasoning and doubt that no change can be made.
School shootings: Have you forgotten those that have die in columbine shooting, sandy hook shooting, Taft Union shooting, movie theater shooting, and you come out to make the assertion that our government can't do anything to affective change this problem.
If there's one thing that history has taught us is that change can be made. What about the great depression, what about WW1 and WW2, haven't we as a world have being working together for a better world.
Our government can do something to change this problem. As a respect to the second amendment of the constitution I believe we shouldn't abolish the right to have armed as a mean to protect yourself from harm. But what we see today is people picking up guns and shooting people .Those with mental problems, those who have enemies at school, those go through alot of things in life. Though it may not be the quick fix, our government can do universal background. Do not issue guns to those who are under age, failure to do so will result in closure of business and time in prison. Our constitution state to have possession of gun, it didn't mention what gun we have the right to have, so our government can abolish weapons used in wars.
Rules: No rules. Play by your own rules.
Debate:- Let's debate!
4. Arguments (rebuttal)
5. Conclusion. (why you should be voted for.) or why you win. summarize your points if you want to.
*you do not have to follow by my format.
MY opponent has the burden of proof.
My opponent has the burden of proof because he must explain why gun laws are a significant social issue.
My argument is there is nothing that the government can change to reduce crime rate. Because the gains will be outnumberd by the losses of new gun laws. My opponent must first prove why gun laws are significant before i can further continue.
so I turn the debate over to my opponent.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Thank you for accepting this "'wolfman4711.' " I look forward to having a great debate with you.
Definition: Social issues are matters that can be explained only by factors outside an individual's control and immediate social environment which affect many individuals in a society.
-Now you state "My opponent has the burden of proof because he must explain why gun laws are a significant social issue." and i will certianly do that. Over the past few decades, months, and year we have seen alot of school shooting. This has cause tragedy for our nation, and the family of those that have lost their lifes, because of some guy that just walk into a school and start shotting everyone. Gun laws are a significant social issue because it affect the nation and it affects people. Its a constant debate in our government and in our society as a whole. We have people who are urging our government to ban guns, and than we got those who are saying that we shouldn't because its part of our consitution. And the main player of guns is the National Rifle Association (NRA) who have been fighting to keep guns.
- "My argument is there is nothing that the government can change to reduce crime rate." really, there is nothing our government can do to reduce crime rate? If the government can detain Americans without reason than why can't they take away your gun with any reason.. If the government can take away your freedom than why you think they can't take away the right to gun. If the government can reverse the great depression than why can't they reverse this shottings issue.
-States that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons violent crime decreases doesn't it? Several of the school shootings in recent years have been stopped by law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits haven't they? There would have been more dead students if it were not for those law-abiding Americans and their firearms!
-Well we could use common sense in place of knee-jerk reactions. First, allow teachers to carry guns if they have a concealed carry permits. Secondly, allow any parents to carry and patrol the halls as well. No one will have anything to fear from this, except anyone who would have evil intentions that is.
-Our government can change to reduce crime rate by putting police around on schools. Our government can reduce crime rate by having secure school doors where one with an weapon cannnot simply go through the door. Our government can reduce crime rate by having our schools guard carry weapons with them within a building. (only truested one's) what we see today is school guards who do not carry anyone weapon in the case of an emergency. School guards are only weapons to take students out of classrooms or stop fight. But we don 't think about outsiders.
-what others things we can do..."It is important that threat assessment inquiries involve efforts to gather information from anyone who may have contact with the student in question. It also is important to decrease barriers that may prevent students who have information from coming forward. In addition, both schools and investigators need a thoughtful, effective system for handling and
analyzing any information that is provided."
-"A significant problem in preventing targeted violence is determining how best to respond to students who are already known to be in trouble. This study indicates the importance of giving attention to students who are having difficulty coping with major losses or
perceived failures, particularly when feelings of desperation and hopelessness are involved."
"Let’s not place the entire emphasis on protecting children on an extraordinary crime, and, in the process, ignore the enormous number of handguns that are so often employed to take lives. If we choose to move against assault weapons, we should also not neglect efforts to get handguns out of the reach of teenagers, criminals, and troubled individuals who, every year, harm thousands of children and adults."
"10 ways to put brakes on mass shootings in schools"
(1)Strengthen gun laws
(2)Keep gun regulations the same or relax them
(3)Arm the schools
(4). Improve school security
5. Cut down on violence in the media
6. Improve mental health care
7. Think about the families, not the shooter
8. Focus on parenting
9. Bolster kids' social skills
10. Watch out for one another
-Though all this may be costly, it is worth our future. Both for today's and tommorrow's generation. There is nothing better than our human beings.
School shootings are not significant because there is simply nothing the government can do.
First off I would like to claim a few things my opponent has written on this debate false.
1. This will back fire because if we out law guns only outlaws will have guns.
2. Relaxing them will make attaining firearms easier calling for more death. And keeping it the same does not lower crime rate or make school shootings a significant issue.
3. Arming the schools will cause more death because teachers are not trained for that kind of duty and may take there anger out on the kids.
4. By what putting out a metal fence checking back packs? Elaborate on this and I will post my argument about it later.
5. Cutting out violence won't stop someone with mental sickness or an intent to kill someone.
6. Improving mental care will just be more like imprisonment jailing up mental people for life because of there issues does violate freedom.
7. ??? Not sure what you mean by that.
8. How do you plan on doing this? Elaborate on it and I will put my argument on it later.
9. That does not limit shootings or humanity but teaches kids useless gimmicks to try and get friends but when your a social outcast that dosent help.
10. Has and is already being done.
There will always be sick people and mass shootings but as I said earlier if we change something with our gun laws the cons will out due the pros. Sorry for taking so long and doing so little was a little busy for a while.
1. I'm not saying we outlaw guns. I'm only saying we strengthen gun laws. The constitution state to have possession of arm to protect yourself from harm but didn't state what weapon. So we can outlaw the one use in military.
2. (skip)-Cnn point it out. I don't know how to explain it further.
3. I'm not just saying we should just put guns in teachers hand. we will train the teacher. but the teacher is to keep it in a special spot. Our schools security guards are our first responders so we must arm them in the case of emergency just as we would with a police in a school. Except we should train them.
4. There are certain stores that when you go to it and steal something and try to run out theres a *beep* or even in a library if you take something and don't check it out. So these doors for act as the *beeper* if it senses a gun it shouldn't open to the intruder.
5. Cutting out voilence would stop someone with of intent to kill someone. Poeple today fall into things other people do. And that is not a lie, as some kids try to fit in in school. So the voilence that person see will they want to practice.
6. Improving mental care does not mean we imprisonment them but help them out. not having to put them in a special place to improve their mental care.
7. Whenever theres a massive shooting the shooters is usually at the center of intention. The news usually focus on him/her when it should really be focusing on the family of the deceased one.
8. Theres alot of things we could do to "focus on parenting." help the family! the child of the parent. but i'm not going to name all of them.
9. bolster kids' social skills we enable them to get along with others. So they won't feel left out. Study shows that kids that lack social skills usually gets bully and the kids try against the bullies.
10. "It has and is already being done." but its not being done enough. we see kids get bully and others see and walk pass. We need kids to look out for one another because those others kids may be going through alot.
-There is always a light at the end of the tunnel. Start now could do a little, while it may not be the most, it could be atleast the start on a path for change. School shootings will always running through this nation and until we find the root and look for change we will always be stuck in the soceity in which we live of kids/family living in fear of another school shooting.
1. not really understanding what my opponent means by that argument..
2. my opponent conceded this part of the argument.
3. training teachers to use a weapon wont make them less likely to shoot a student but make them more skilled at the art of shooting itself.
4. How would it censor a gun? metal detctors? If so then cell phones and other electronic devices used for saftey will be outlawed. It would also be takin out of the schools budget.
5. A video game wont want to make a kid practice use his weapons in real life.
6. Improving mental care is like telling someone then can never be normal and that you will always be kept away from the real world because you are diffrent. That being said... most mental people dont kill because they are mental but because they are treated diffrently and are bullied in every day life.
7. I find that claim irellavant.
8. helping the family does not make the kide more or less likely to kill with the intention.
9. I am not sure what bolsters social skills is... but i am going to take a wild guess, it is where bolster or whatever is the narrator tells you how to be normal or "civilized"? Programs like that ushually make kids feel more diffrent and secluded in the process. It also makes them a bigger target for bullying.
10. My claim is there is only so much you can do, i agree that we should be watching outfore eachother but that does not nessarily make the issue "significant".
My opponent has not made the claim that even if these solutions are inafective then school shootings are still signifacant. So i tink the debate has shifted to whether or not doing something about school shooting is affective. But i would like to remind the audience that even if some of these claims are affective that does not make the issue at hand "significant". I pass the debate over to my opponent.
what is significant?
"First off doing very little as my opponent has stated does not make the issue a significant one." i said doing little because it's where we start, the little thing we do now, for a bigger change tomorrow. thats wht i met by doing little. i'm not saying doing little as if the isssue isn't an significant problem. "My opponent agrees with me completly when he says " we will always be stuck in the society" except im going to change the to This. " yes i said we will always be stuck in this society, because if we don't find a path for change than we will always be stuck in this society. i'm not saying that because we have guns we will always be stuck in this society. i said if don't find a path for change we will always be stuck in this soceity. "But" little things"does not make an issue significant." as i stated above, doing little thing for a bigger change.
1. Most of the weapons used in school shootings are military style weapons. Outlawing it will it lower the amount of people kill. A pistol can only kill a few but it stops. A military style just keeps on shooting. Killing alot of poeple than would a pistol.
2. Yes i did.
3. i never mention that training teachers will make them "less likely to shoot a student." The reason for training teachers is to be skilled enough to shoot the prepator. because you said "Arming the schools will cause more death because teachers are not trained for that kind of duty" and the duty you are mentiong is to protect the school. now you argue that "Arming the schools will cause more death because teachers are not trained for that kind of duty" so that's why i mention we should train them and now you opposing the idea. are you going to make up your mind of what position you are?
4. How does a Library censor someone going out the library without checking a book. How does a supermarket censor someone trying to run away without buying the stuff. " metal detctors? If so then cell phones and other electronic devices used for saftey will be outlawed" than why haven't cell phones an dother electronic devices used for safety haven't been outlawed for those trying to run out of a supermarket without buying the stuff? "It would also be takin out of the schools budget." our kids safety (us) is more important than "taking out of a school budget" as you state. our safety should be a top prority. because we are the reason there is a school. if it wasn't for us than there shouldn't be any school.
5. Why would "video game won't want to make a kid practice use his weapons in real life" when the things we say today are the one we want to do. As my previous arguement above "Poeple today fall into things other people do. And that is not a lie, as some kids try to fit in in school. So the voilence that person see will they want to practice." so wht about gangs isn't what the gang member see doing will it member want to do?
6. Improving mental care isn't telling somone they can never be a normal and that they will always be kept away from the real world because they are different. It's trying to help them to be able to fit into the real world. Just leaving them mental forever will only leave them to leave the struggling lifes to have always been living. "That being said... most mental people dont kill because they are mental but because they are treated diffrently and are bullied in every day life." now why are they bullied everyday? isn't it because something is wrong with them or people just bullying them?
7. "Whenever theres a massive shooting the shooters is usually at the center of attention. The news usually focus on him/her when it should really be focusing on the family of the deceased one." you find that irrelevant? you don't see it on the news? you don't watch the news? who is the news really focusing on when theres a shooting?
8. "helping the family does not make the kide more or less likely to kill with the intention." oh, is that true? what makes people go out to shoot people? what makes a person steal? because he does not have wht he want so he steals. Now lets apply the help to kids and the problems they are having wouldn't that make them less likely to kill with inention?
9. "I am not sure what bolsters social skills is... " search up the definition and you might know. i'm sure you already know what social skills is, how you communicatie with people. so all you need to search up is bolster. " but i am going to take a wild guess, it is where bolster or whatever is the narrator tells you how to be normal or "civilized"?" wrong but good try. it means to "Support or strengthen" their social skills. not tell them to be normal or civilized. "Programs like that ushually make kids feel more diffrent and secluded in the process. It also makes them a bigger target for bullying." it enchance them to be able to get along with the kids. it doesn't make them a bigger tartget for bullying.
10. " My claim is there is only so much you can do, i agree that we should be watching outfore eachother but that does not nessarily make the issue "significant"." so you telling me that school shootings isn't a significant issue?
"But i would like to remind the audience that even if some of these claims are affective that does not make the issue at hand "significant". I pass the debate over to my opponent." let me restate my question above, wht is significant? And why "school shooting" isn't consider significant? I pass the debate over to my opponent to rebuttal.
wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.