The Instigator
Aned
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tmar19652
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The NRA infringes our democracy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
tmar19652
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/18/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 20,223 times Debate No: 28390
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Aned

Pro

I will be submitting this debate to learn and express my inquiry in light of so many innocent victims being massacred in recent shootings. I only hope my debate help prevent more carnages. No misconstrued man-made right can outweigh the importance of our children's peace and harmony. Sending our kids to school should not become a frightening task.

Does the NRA influence our government to a greater extend than ordinary citizens can? If the answer is yes, then our democracy is in danger. Democracy (demo for people, cracia for power) is not limited to the polls where we get to pick one of two given candidates for the presidency. Actually, there were six candidates altogether this time, but only two promoted in national debates. Democracy takes place when we the people are able to participate in our government through our elected representatives. Otherwise, we will be subjected to a corporate dictatorship, something not intended by our founding fathers. Should we allow the NRA to lobby for its own interests instead of interests that benefit our entire society including children?
tmar19652

Con

I will debate you from the con standpoint, and good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Aned

Pro

I will be submitting this debate to express my concern in light of so many innocent victims being massacred in recent shootings. I only hope my debate will help prevent more carnages by illuminating those who favor the use of assault weapons among the citizenry. No misconstrued man-made right outweigh the importance of our children's peace and harmony. Sending our kids to school should not become a frightening task.

Does the NRA influence our government to a greater extend than ordinary citizens can? If the answer is yes, then our democracy is in danger. Democracy (demo for people, cracy for power) is not limited to the
polls where we get to pick one out of two given candidates for the presidency. Actually, there were six candidates altogether this time, but only two had been promoted on national debates. Democracy takes place when we the people are able to participate in our government through our elected representatives. Otherwise, we will be subjected to a corporate dictatorship, something not intended by our founding fathers. Should we allow the NRA to lobby for its own interests instead of interests that benefit our entire society, including children? Can the NRA undermine the will of so many mothers and fathers worried about their children's safety at schools?

If the only obstacle is the misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment (which refers to a "well-organized militia," no individual citizens and let alone about AR-15s, but muskets), so let's amend it like when we granted women the right to vote or allowed interracial marriages. Or, are we going to wait until we double the number of assault weapons in the hands of citizens not associated with law enforcement agencies or the military.

Relying on background checks and psychological exams do not guarantee a successful resolution, especially because no one is born with a criminal history and there is always a first time. Likewise, people become insane and crazy overnight. When authorities have checked the behavior pattern of former active shooters, all they have found is a lack of evidence concerning unusual behavior and criminal history. Furthermore, record checks on the majority of active shooters have revealed a clean history.

For the benefit of our children, all assault weapons should be relinquished. That is the only way we can start building a more peaceful world for new generations to come and for the present one. Our children deserve the best environment to prepare themselves and be ready to compete in this globalized world. That is what should be a right, not assault rifles.

I wish my con exercise his best judgement as he develop his counter argument. Good luck!
tmar19652

Con

Though I respect Pro for their argument, I have to state that I flat out disagree with their entire argument.

First, The NRA has about 4.3 million members. So If these people feel that a ban on assault weapons is unconstitutional, Is it not their right to be members of the NRA and use democracy to support their opinions? This is the epitome of democracy, people voicing their opinions through peaceful voting and donating to causes such as the NRA that they believe in. I may not agree with assault weapons, but I would defend to my death the right of these people to state their opinions peacefully, which is what the NRA does.

Second, If the NRA had no support from the people, It would not be able to influence our laws at all. The NRA relies on grassroots funding efforts for its funding. If millions of people did not support the NRA, it would have no money to fund its lobbying efforts.

Refutations
"Should we allow the NRA to lobby for its own interests instead of interests that benefit our entire society, including children?"
This argument does not hold water for many reasons. First, the NRA lobbies for the interests of its supporters, much like the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, Green or Constitution Parties. If the NRA did not have a wide base of civilian support, it would not have funding or power to argue its beliefs. Second, there is no evidence that tighter gun control laws would solve the problem of school shootings. Criminals buy illegal handguns and rifles just like any other commodity, so why wouldn"t school shooters do the same. In addition, the columbine shooters, Eric Harris, and Dylan Klebold, planned to use 20lb propane tanks as bombs to kill even more students. So should we ban propane tanks even though they have peaceful purposes such as grilling and heating, much like guns that have peaceful uses such as hunting, or target shooting. The constitution gives the NRA the right to make points like this, and it improves democracy by giving the people both sides of an argument before they vote.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Relying on background checks and psychological exams do not guarantee a successful resolution, especially because no one is born with a criminal history and there is always a first time. Likewise, people become insane and crazy overnight. When authorities have checked the behavior pattern of former active shooters, all they have found is a lack of evidence concerning unusual behavior and criminal history. Furthermore, record checks on the majority of active shooters have revealed a clean history.

For the benefit of our children, all assault weapons should be relinquished. That is the only way we can start building a more peaceful world for new generations to come and for the present one. Our children deserve the best environment to prepare themselves and be ready to compete in this globalized world. That is what should be a right, not assault rifles."
This argument does not pertain to the NRA nor democracy. I will say however that if the majority of the country wanted to ban assault weapons they could, and the NRA would be powerless to stop them. The NRA can only voice its opinions and use money that "the people" have given to them for causes that "the people" believe in, is this not democracy. I will say I agree with you on a ban of assault weapons, but the people who do not agree with us have a right to voice their opinions, exactly what the NRA does.

With that I pass the ball to pro and wish them good luck.
Debate Round No. 2
Aned

Pro

First, I appreciate my contender's civility despite his failure to refute my argument

According to my opponent, "Criminals buy illegal handguns and rifles..., so why wouldn't school shooters do the same." Obviously, they will start doing it until certain point, until the black market runs out of illegal guns. When criminals turn to the black market, their chance of being caught by undercover agents will be high; as a result, many will refrain from engaging in such activity, while others will end up in jail and cooperating with law enforcement.

Regarding my opponent's claim about using other methods such as propane tanks, it is obvious that it would be much easier for a school clerk to stop someone walking into the school carrying a heavy propane tank than stop someone spreading rounds with an AR-15 or AK-47.

Another flaw in con's argument is stating that "the NRA may feel that a ban on assault weapons is unconstitutional." Not even the second amendment mentions assault rifles; it does mention, however, a "well-regulated militia" and not even individual citizens. At that time the founding fathers wrote the Constitution thinking on muskets, not tanks, mortars, granades launchers, or bradleys. Therefore, why should we apply the Constitution to weapons of mass killing?
tmar19652

Con

I have refuted my opponents point that the NRA infringes on democracy, but they have now tried to turn it into a debate on gun control.
Pros arguments about the NRA have been refuted and therefore I should win. Vote con!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
You should have expressed that opinion in the debate, not the comments.
Posted by Aned 4 years ago
Aned
Actually, the NRA receives most of his money from gun manufacturers, not from NRA members. Moreover, constantly the NRA would blackmail senators and would threaten them by telling them that the NRA would stop supporting them with money if they vacillated in their pro gun stance. Those senators know that the NRA is ready to replace them with another pro gun contender in the event the NRA does not get what it wants.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wishing4Winter 4 years ago
Wishing4Winter
Anedtmar19652Tied
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: Con successfully negates the resolution