Stricter gun controls
Debate Rounds (4)
1. I am German, so I will use some facts from German websites but also from English websites (I hope that is not a problem for you!)
2. I am against stricter gun controls but I am for a background check, to prevent that dangerous people can legally buy weapons.
I hope we will have an interesting debate!
I will be playing devil's advocate (speaking out for the position normally against what I really believe).
I will start off simple.
1. Deterrence to crime and deaths
There have been many shootings in the pass years. [http://www.motherjones.com...] These are all due to guns, and if we control guns to a stricter extent, the criminals will be able to buy fewer guns, possibly leading to fewer shootings.
Here are a few more statistics that prove guns should be in stricter control: [http://www.bradycampaign.org...]
Stricter gun control would not only stop the criminals, it can also stop the unintentional shootings. It would be a warning to those who want to buy guns for good purposes, and allow them to be more careful. And even if the gun control isn't 100 percent, it arguably helps the civilians who do buy guns, since some people believe in defending themselves just in case. [Keep in mind that if gun control WAS 100%, criminals could obtain them illegally, leaving the civilians defenseless, while if it is just severe enough to hinder a good amount of criminals, with lots of security and checks, it still allows the civilians who are serious enough to both hunt for fun, and defend themselves in cases of emergency). The background checks, with sufficient increase in tighter control, will be able to deter much more crime than now.
That is all.
Here you can see the full statistics:
Preliminary crime statistics 2014: http://www.fbi.gov...
Most of the crimes committed are because of personal relationship, this means that if he wouldn't have got any access to firearms he would have used other objects like knifes or any other things you can find at home. People who want to suicide can find other methods than their guns (eg. jumping out of a window, from a bridge...).
Stricter gun controls only harm those people who want to use their guns for "good" things like self-defense or those who want to practice a shooting sport or go hunting. Criminals find other way to get to guns: this would massively increase the number of illegal weapons, and at the end some who is killed is dead, shot with an legal weapon or with an illegal weapons, he is still dead. A more restrictive gun law would only minimally decrease the number of weapons in hand of people that should not have them.
After a study of Prof. Dr. Heubrock, for the German Landtag Schleswig-Holstein, and other studies in the European Union, he comes to the conclusion that most of the gun related crimes are acquaintance crimes. Here the offender and the victim are clear only the object of the crime is not clear. This means, for example, if he would not have used a gun he would have used a knife or any other object that could be used as weapon. This means also if we would not have got a gun he would have used an other object for his purpose.*
We also have to remember that if you have weapons at home it does not turn yourself automatically into a crazy murder who is shooting in schools. Almost always is not the weapon that turns you into a murder but it is the murder who wants a gun and use it for criminal purposes!
*The full study (in German): http://www.landtag.ltsh.de...
A summarised version (in German)--look pag. 4, paragraph n. 4: http://www.ballistol.de...
9spaceking forfeited this round.
Vote for him. I did not play devil's advocate very well. :P
"A country is only so free like its gun control law!"-Triebel
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro conceded and forfeited.
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.