The Instigator
nignog2k
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
MasturDbtor
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Should certain types of firearms be banned?

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 1 vote the winner is...
nignog2k
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 967 times Debate No: 52736
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

nignog2k

Con

This debate will be about the creation of new legislation regarding the ban of certain types of firearms and modifications such as certain types of magazines, stocks, and et al.

Pro: You will be arguing for the creation of legislation to ban certain types of firearms/modifications

Con: I will be arguing against the creation of new legislation that would ban types of firearms as well as modifications.

I will provide unbiased, verified sources to support my arguments stating that the creation of new gun legislation banning certain types of firearms and modifications would not benefit the nation.

I expect that you will provide unbiased, verified sources to support your arguments stating that the creation of new gun legislation banning certain types of firearms and modifications will prove beneficial for our country.

Also, I will, and I expect you to define all jargon/buzzwords using a reputable dictionary or source.

First round is acceptance only
MasturDbtor

Pro

Challenge Accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
nignog2k

Con

To begin, I believe that the creation of new legislation to effectively ban styles, types and modifications of firearms would be unnecessary, useless, and also unconstitutional. Also, thank you for accepting my debate.

I'll lay out my debate in each response
Round 2 (this round): Legality of firearm/modification bans
Round 3: effectiveness of firearm and modification bans
Round 4: Necessity of firearm and modification bans (i.e. do we need them?)
Round 5: Summary of arguments, final statements

Definitions:
Styles of firearms include: assault weapons, semi-automatic long guns, and semi-automatic handguns, along with others
Modifications of firearms include: stocks, pistol grips (long guns), flashlights, laser sights, and suppressors, along with others
Assault rifle: As the United States Defense Department"s Defense Intelligence Agency book Small Arms Identification and Operation Guide explains, "assault rifles" are "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges [1]
Second Amendment of the United states of America, as ratified by the states: states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" [2]

Argument
To begin, I would like to state that it would be unconstitutional to ban, and would effectively suppress the right for civilians to keep and bear arms. By banning certain styles of firearms, such as semi-automatic rifles (often called Assault rifles, a misnomer [1]) the government is limiting the power of the American people to defend themselves and their property. By banning certain styles of firearms, you are infringing the rights of civilians to keep and bear arms. Unalike militarized weapons such as heavy explosives, fully-automatic weapons, and actual assault weapons, currently legal weapons such as handguns and semi-automatic firearms have legitimate reasons to own, they relatively safe to own, and sensible applications of the second amendment of the constitution of the United States of America.

Similar to the currently available styles of firearms, modifications of such do nothing to enhance the function of currently legal firearms. Modifications such as optics, stocks, and grips only provide increased support when shooting a firearm"they do not increase rate of fire or skill of the shooter. Some modifications like suppressors function to suppress the noise made by firing the gun. Unlike common portrayals in movies and video games, suppressors do not silence the weapons, nor do they make the firearm any deadlier...just somewhat quieter. By banning modifications, are you also suppressing the right of civilians to keep and bear arms by extension due to the application of such modifications to the firearms...also, it would be pointless to do so in the first place.

In short: Banning certain styles and modifications of firearms that are currently available to the public would be unconstitutional as a ban on such would suppress civilians' right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed unto all civilians in the second amendment of the constitution of the United States of America.

Citations:
[1] Defense Intelligence Agency, Small Arms Identification and Operation Guide - Eurasian Communist Countries 105 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1988).
[2] http://memory.loc.gov...
MasturDbtor

Pro

MasturDbtor forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
nignog2k

Con

nignog2k forfeited this round.
MasturDbtor

Pro

MasturDbtor forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
nignog2k

Con

nignog2k forfeited this round.
MasturDbtor

Pro

MasturDbtor forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
nignog2k

Con

nignog2k forfeited this round.
MasturDbtor

Pro

MasturDbtor forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ramramgeorge 3 years ago
ramramgeorge
I forgot to add in the first sentence of the post above me "would be a bad idea"
Posted by ramramgeorge 3 years ago
ramramgeorge
Banning ANY type of firearm with our current government (and I am NOT saying that because of Obama) and in what state it is in. The only time I would find it acceptable to ban certain firearms is when the people are given other ways to overthrow a corrupt government. Things such as bugging the president's office and releasing the recordings to the internet, making it law that a political party's platform must be FULLY FULFILLED by the time of the next election or face arrest for the president and large fines for all members in the party. Having more than two identical parties in the US would definitely help too... I would continue this list but I there is a character limit!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by NiamC 3 years ago
NiamC
nignog2kMasturDbtorTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Good argument, but too short. Pro forfeited first.