The Instigator
Anishakc123
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
qf200011
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Should semi-automatic guns be banned?

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 4 votes the winner is...
Anishakc123
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,413 times Debate No: 30785
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

Anishakc123

Pro

I hope everyone knows about the Newton Shooting. The innocent kids were killed by a semi-automatic gun. Do you think the killer could have been able to kill so many people , if he didn't had a semi-automatic guns? Well,in my opinion if the killer had a handgun , then he couldn't have managed to kill so many people.

The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms. Its true that banning semi-automatic guns will violate our second amendment. However,its doesn't fully take our right away. In addition , the lives of people is more important than a amendment. Don't you think so.
qf200011

Con

First of all it wouldn't have mattered what gun he used. There was no cops all he had to do was keep reloading and then keep shooting people who were completely helpless. Plus his mom had a collection of guns if the assault riffles were banned he would go for the next best thing. Most likely it would not be a handgun but a hunting rifle or a shotgun. Plus if we had banned that gun, he would still have it. All the law could do is make it so you cant buy that type of gun not get rid of them. This would mean he still would have succeeded on killing many people.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
Anishakc123

Pro

A lot of people would want to ban semi-automatic guns. Including President Obama.

No weapon has more clearly illustrated the debate over gun control than the semi-automatic assault rifle.

The weapon has been used in many mass shootings, yet is also one of the nation's most popular among gun owners with estimates of three to four million in private hands throughout the United States.

President Obama today urged Congress to pass comprehensive legislation that restricts military-style guns and ammunition, beefs up background checks and increases funds for mental health and school safety.
qf200011

Con

Even if they have been used for many shooting banning them might not help. Some bad people will go and hide there guns causing even more problems. It would not help it will just make another law that some people will avoid. I have heard a saying before: laws will only stop good people not the bad ones. That is not the quote word to word but it is still the summary of the topic.

Second you made no new suggestions all you did was say what other thought. there opinion isn't important as much as some details.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by BigSky 4 years ago
BigSky
Just because a law is passed doesn't mean it will be followed. Do you honestly think that a psycho like that will be stopped by a law? Murdering is illegal but that didn't stop him.
Posted by lewis20 4 years ago
lewis20
Grammar on both sides was awful, neither side used sources, nor any strong argument.
Posted by qf200011 4 years ago
qf200011
Good luck by the way.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
Anishakc123qf200011Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro claims that semi-automatic guns kill more people faster. With a lower rate of fire, fewer people would be killed. Con didn't effectively refute that. He said that sometimes people will be able to get semi-automatic guns even if they're illegal, which is true. And he said that sometimes people will be able to kill as many people with slower guns because the situation will allow much killing with no time restraints, which could also be true, sometimes. But there will be other cases, cases in which a ban on semi-automatic weapons will save lives. Con offered no counter to that, no reason to avoid the ban even though it would save some lives.
Vote Placed by SANTORUM2012 4 years ago
SANTORUM2012
Anishakc123qf200011Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to meet the BOP of how banning gun will affect society and how the ban will cause less shootings.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
Anishakc123qf200011Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: +1 wiploc's vote. Neither side of the argument seemed to understand the topic they were debating, either that, or they were distracted. "if the killer had a handgun , then he couldn't have managed to kill so many people" - Most handguns are semi-automatic guns. "Plus his mom had a collection of guns if the assault riffles were banned he would go for the next best thing." - This debate wasn't about assault rifles. These misaligned arguments could've been the basis of a strong rebuttal, for either side. Still, Pro did make the stronger case.
Vote Placed by lewis20 4 years ago
lewis20
Anishakc123qf200011Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Was looking forward to reading this but man was it bad.