The Instigator
kingcripple
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
pimpmaster
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Texas' open carry law is a stupid idea

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 2 votes the winner is...
pimpmaster
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/4/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 637 times Debate No: 84522
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

kingcripple

Pro

I am from Texas and i think it's a stupid idea to allow open carry. I'm even skeptical about concealed carry.

State your reasons why youre for this and I will respond
pimpmaster

Con

It is not a stupid idea. It is a law.

Are there any other rights you think are stupid ideas?

The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to prevent the government from disarming the citizens. The founders of this country went to war Vs their country (England). They believed the first amendment to be the number 1 thing to cherish. If the first amendment was taken away, that leaves the people with the 2nd amendment as a way to fight back.
Debate Round No. 1
kingcripple

Pro

kingcripple forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
kingcripple

Pro

Saying the open carry is a stupid idea does not negate the 2nd amendment. Nor does concealed carry negate the 2nd amendment. Let's look at the difference:

2nd amendment: 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

Open carry: the practice of openly carrying a firearm on one's person in public.

concealed carry: the practice of carrying a concealed firearm on one's person in public.

As you can see, the 2nd amendment, requires neither open, nor concealed carry. My opponent is tasked with explaining, just how open carry is, as he put it, a right, given the above definitions. Simply Citing the 2nd amendment as a reason to support open carry, shows a complete ineptitude of the second amendment itsself

1. https://www.law.cornell.edu...
2. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
3. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
pimpmaster

Con

Thank you for disqualifying yourself by not showing up for round 2. I will give you my time, since you have given me the win.

1. My opponent states: Saying the open carry is a stupid idea does not negate the 2nd amendment.
She is missing my point. if it were an idea, then it would not be a law. If it were an idea, it would not be a practice. If it were an idea it would not be allowed. It is NOT an idea. It is a law. The whole premise of my opponents point is this is an "idea". It is not an idea, it is not a concept, it is not a thought, It is real thing legally allowed to be done.

2. My opponent states: As you can see, the 2nd amendment, requires neither open, nor concealed carry.

The right to do something requires nothing. The right is a choice. Any right is a choice. You can exercise that right, or not exercise that right. Any law that allows one to open carry gives that person more choices. avenues that allow for people to legal exercise their constitutionally protected rights are not stupid.

3. My opponent states: Saying the open carry is a stupid idea does not negate the 2nd amendment.
The 2nd amendment prevents the government from infringing on the rights to bear arms. Open carry is how guns were displayed 1820. People did not hide a holster in their ankle. If they had a rifle, it was in plane site. When pistols became an option, The gun was their hip in a holster. If you can accept the right to bear arms as stated in the constitution means the right to carry, then for historical reference that means the arms must have been on display. Constitutionally speaking, the displaying of arms is much historically accurate than having a pistol on an ankle strap above a sneaker but under a pair of jeans.
Debate Round No. 3
kingcripple

Pro

kingcripple forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
kingcripple

Pro

kingcripple forfeited this round.
pimpmaster

Con

NWA,
What can I say,
Use to be good wen they had DR Dre
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by pimpmaster 1 year ago
pimpmaster
There is a reason mass shootings happen in "gun free zones".
Posted by Rockozer 1 year ago
Rockozer
I for one think there should be less gun control laws. The bad guys get the girls either way. Don't see why people don't understand that.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
kingcripplepimpmasterTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.
Vote Placed by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
kingcripplepimpmasterTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con says that not having open carry violates 2nd amendment. Pro shows that a concealed carry doesn't either by quoting it and showing that there is no violation. Pro wins that point, but it doesn't matter because it does not show me that it is stupid. Dice Pro failed to give me any reason why it was stupid, and chose to merely negate what Con said, but then dropped Con's new points, Con wins argumentation. Pro also ff, so conduct to Con.