The Instigator
Spottedfireify
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
robodebate
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Stricter gun laws

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/26/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 554 times Debate No: 49937
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Spottedfireify

Pro

The stricter the gun laws are the less likely another school, movie theater, or any other public shooting is to happen. Just look at all the school, mall, movie theater, and public shootings that have happened. Just since 1980 there have been over 297 people killed in school shootings. And those are only from 137 schools. So if we have stricter gun laws then the possibility of another school shooting goes down by a lot. The stricter the gun laws are the less likely it is that an innocent person will die from being shot.
robodebate

Con

CX:
Do Believe it 100%?
Why should we have a Stricter Gun law?
What about our Bear rights in the Bill of Rights?
Do you have a Source that 297 people get killed in school shootings?
Case
I beleive that It is our duty to Assist our citizens. We can do it by not having a Stricter gun control. we can do it by banning Video Games and movies.
I stand Resolve that We shouldn't have Stricter Gun Laws.
Value: Ban Video Games and Movies
Debate Round No. 1
Spottedfireify

Pro

I do believe this one hundred percent. We should have a stricter gun law so that the families of those who have been killed by people who decide that they want to just stroll into a mall, school, movie theater, or any other public building just to shoot at innocent people can't do that as easily as they can now. I am not saying that nobody can have guns just that when we go to public places there should be a sense of peace and the only way to do that is to make sure that only police officers carry guns in public places but at home we can have them to protect ourselves or even be able to hunt our food, which is fine. I am not saying that no one can have guns I am just saying that the police should be the only ones with guns in public places. I do have a source that says that 297 people have died since 1980. It is www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/12/sandy_hook_a_chart_of_all_196_fatal_school_shootings_since_1980_map.html
Video games and movies should not be banned because there are other reasons why they do it. 1.) People who come from positive homes are just as likely to do it as students who are raised in a negative family environment, 2.) bullying at school, 3.) personality, 4.) cyber bullying, and 5.) depression.
robodebate

Con

robodebate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Spottedfireify

Pro

Spottedfireify forfeited this round.
robodebate

Con

robodebate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Spottedfireify

Pro

Spottedfireify forfeited this round.
robodebate

Con

robodebate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Spottedfireify

Pro

Spottedfireify forfeited this round.
robodebate

Con

robodebate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JohnFrazer 2 years ago
JohnFrazer
Many "experts" disagree.
policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-lessons-from-officers-perspectives/
Quite clearly, the majority of officers polled oppose the theories brought forth by gun-control advocates who claim that proposed restrictions on weapon capabilities and production would reduce crime.
In fact, many officers responding to this survey seem to feel that those controls will negatively affect their ability to fight violent criminals.
Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.
- - - - end quote

Motion: partially as a response to mad mass shootings, we should end most if not all "disarmed victim criminal safe zones" now.
You do realize that all these mass shootings happen in "gun free zones"? Even military posts.
Sure these nuts go into it wanting to die, but they don't want to get captured or shot down like a mad dog in the road by a citizen. Police and security guards are predictable, easily identifiable and locatable.
If nuts & crooks know that any average good citizen may and many do go armed, they won't know. Deterrence still works. Just about ever time one of these nuts has encountered armed countervailing force, they've immediately suicided or surrendered, crying like the loser whining cowards who can't get a girl they are.
I argue that only allowing police or "security guards" to have means of defense is also erosive to egalitarian society. You and I and all your family & friends and neighbors & co-workers are untrustworthy, unreliable, too slow & stupid to learn & retain skills, and prone to going on murderous rampages over parking spaces. But get a government job and uniform, and they've got nerves of steel and the judgement of
No votes have been placed for this debate.