The Instigator
bampowslap
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
dwill557
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Should people be able to carry firearms, if they are 16 years of age or older ?

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 1 vote the winner is...
bampowslap
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/26/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,253 times Debate No: 26607
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

bampowslap

Con

I don't think that you should be able to carry firearms until you are 21 years of age or older. If this wasn't so, then gang related activity would be happening all of the time, and the crime rates would be way higher.
dwill557

Pro

I believe that you should be able to carry fire arms at the age of 16. I believe that 16 is the age when teens begin to mature and learn how to act. My opponent sais there would be more gang related activity and that the crime rates would be "way" higher. That is an exaguration of the truth. Many would say that guns have caused deaths all over the United States. GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!! You may have heard that saying before and that is because it is the truth. A gun cannot pick itself up, pull it's trigger, and kill a human being. If that was possible we would all live in a world that would not be to far from hell. So once, GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!!! This is why I would have to say that you should be able to carry fire arms at the age of 16.
Debate Round No. 1
bampowslap

Con

Well, that is not always true either, considering the fact that most teens hear the guidelines and rules of carrying weapons, and just ignore them (thinking that they know everything). And plus crime rates would be higher. Teens may mature at that age, but most of them rebel against everybody, especially against their parents and teachers. When they are rebellious (angry at the world), then they will probably do some stupid things. And if they have that weapon, murder will come in.
dwill557

Pro

You cannot say that murder will occur when you don't know. Most teens do not rebel. They may not listen but they do not rebel. Like I said, teens will mature at that age. You say they will rebel, I am going to have to disagree. So many teens are arrested for just carrying guns. They have'nt even done anything. Why should they get in trouble for carrying a weapon that could be used for self-defense. What if they were attacked on the streets. Then they wouldn't be able to protect themselves.
Debate Round No. 2
bampowslap

Con

They do have violent thoughts, studies show that in 2000 about 1,561 youth under the age of 18 were arrested for homicide. And In 2000, nine percent of the murders in the United States were committed by persons under the age of 18. One in ten teens arrested has been engaging in a violent activity that could have resulted in the serious injury or the death of another person.
dwill557

Pro

Firstvi would like to ask my opponent a question. You said that in 2000 nine percent of the murders were commited by men and women under the age of 18. What about the other 81 percent of those murders. Your saying that you should not be able to own a fire arm until you are an adult when 81 percent of those murders were commited by adults. You are basically saying that we should not be able to own a fire arm at any age. You said that the reason you think teens should not be able to own fire arms is because they have homicidal thoughts. Well, as i have proven, there are far more adults that have homicidal thoughts than there are teens. I believe that you just believe that teens are more dangerous than adults, especially with a gun. Well you are wrong, and your research has proven this. I just wish that you could see what ihve said is true and that you will agree with me. If not, then I will continuebto argue until I have proven you wrong.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by bampowslap 4 years ago
bampowslap
You are a slow freaken typer willlims
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Torvald 4 years ago
Torvald
bampowslapdwill557Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: The Pro made several references to having proven the Con wrong. The Pro never did such, and was in some cases unnecessarily adversarial, which is why I have given the Conduct point to Con. Pro's grammar and spelling were also faulty. Otherwise, neither side made very convincing arguments for the issue at hand, and seemed more intent on squabbling than conducting a debate. Furthermore, both sides made references to studies, but did not cite those references.