The Instigator
Xantog
Pro (for)
The Contender
fh29
Con (against)

The Second Amendment Is Still Important And Should Not Be Repealed

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
fh29 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/4/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 525 times Debate No: 105518
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (32)
Votes (0)

 

Xantog

Pro

First round is for acceptance.
fh29

Con

I accept your challenge, but keep in mind in reality I do support the 2nd amendment, I'm debating on the opposite side just to practice my persuasive writing skills.
Debate Round No. 1
Xantog

Pro

Thank you for accepting the debate. Hopefully, we both can learn something.

I'll be trying to prove 3 points:

1.The Second Amendment is meant as protection against a tyrannical government and is still important today.

2.The debate over gun rights vs abolishment of that right is actually Gun owners vs Non-gun owners...and I would like to make the case that this turns into an Informed vs ill-informed.

3.The legalization of gun ownership is actually in benefit of society, this does better than harm.

Argument:

1. 'The Second Amendment is meant as protection against a tyrannical government and is still important today.'
A. The quote "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." of the constitution has two connotations. The USA can keep a well regulated Militia for the safety and security of the people and the ability for a common citizen to keep and bear (use) arms.
B. The people who wrote the constitution added the second amendment for they feared America would become another tyrannical state as was with Great Britain. This is a rational fear as though the 20th century many dictatorial countries have taken away the right for a certain ethnicity or opponent to the state to bear arms, as was with Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. (REF. 1,2) The 20th century was not long ago, and it is not too hard to fathom a dictatorship forming in the US. It happened with Rome which was democratic and Nazi Germany which was also democratic, which is why this matters today.

2. 'The debate over gun rights vs abolishment of that right is actually Gun owners vs Non-gun owners...and I would like to make the case that this turns into an Informed vs ill-informed.'
A. The vast majority of people against gun rights are those who have never gone through the process of buying a gun, let alone owning one. Talk with anyone who supports gun control and they will tell you that while they don't own a gun, they know a lot about guns. This is complete nonsense, as with anything, to learn about it you need to have gone through a process of understanding how gun control and guns work. In a video on youtube, a man poses as a pro-gun control advocate and asks the people who come up to his stand to identify which guns are more dangerous than others. The thing is the hunting rifles are all the same and one was painted to look like an evil gun, and those who've never handled or used a gun called the evil looking one wrong then the same yet differently colored hunting rifle. This goes to show majority of non-gun owners are ill-informed (REF. 3,4)

3. 'The legalization of gun ownership is actually in benefit of society, this does better than harm.'
A. Guns are used hundreds of thousands of times every year in self-defense. Tens of thousands of rapes and sexual assaults are prevented and even more lives and personal property. Anyone with any basic knowledge of firearm statistics would absolutely see them as a benefit. People say that firearms cause 30,000 plus deaths a year. This is a major fallacy because 20,000 of these are suicides and 2/3's of the remaining deaths are gang or drug-related. (REF. 5)
B. I go on to say that gun control causes societal harm as well. In Britain where guns are outlawed and only special police forces can use them, the crime statistics show that thieves and burglars actively seek more often to invade people's houses while they are home because 1. they residents have no defence and 2. since they have no defence it is more productive to also steal the belongings on the person(s) who are home.(Ref. 6) Not only this but if a woman were to be carrying a gun on her, there would definitely be a less likely chance of her being raped compared to pepper spray and rape whistles.

References:
1. http://www.nationalreview.com......
2. https://www.youtube.com......
3. https://youtu.be......
4. https://youtu.be......
5. https://en.wikipedia.org......
6. https://www.rsgsecurity.co.uk......

Again I thank my opponent for joining me in this debate.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ILikePie5 4 months ago
ILikePie5
He forfeited
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
hmm, is con going to post his argument?
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
2/3 of those 30,000 were suicides alone...
Posted by ILikePie5 4 months ago
ILikePie5
@Backwards

I love how you use Salon, Washington Post, CNN, and Huffington Post as "sources."
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Btw, did you know that suicides are factored into "gun violence" that you claim is so rampant?
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
I recommend you watch this video as it shows what happens when government has control over citizens.
https://www.youtube.com...
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
A mass banning of guns would only go to take guns out of the hands of those who are innocent. Criminals don't care if its illegal to own a gun then, they are already criminals.
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
I own a marlin 60 .22 ...i know enough to use it responsibly...I usually use it for hunting but if need be i would use it to defend myself or anyone else against an attacker. Usually this debate is between gun owners and the ill informed.
Posted by backwardseden 4 months ago
backwardseden
@Xantog - How would you know that guns saves lives? You don't know one god damned f--king thing about them. You are a pathetically pathetically stupid punk kid who thinks he knows more than he actually knows, which is nothing. Good! Keep it that way for your sake. Don't get involved with guns! All they are is violent pieces of s--t which never does anybody any good. And when someone close to you dies, you learn your lesson. So why learn its when its NOT NEEDED? So you really think guns saves lives? Here's something for you that is 100% true...
* The Huffington Post "Amend The Second Amendment To End Gun Violence" http://www.huffingtonpost.com... 7/12/16
Last year the Violence Policy Center found that a gun owner is 32 times more likely to use their weapon in criminal homicide rather than in self-defense. Usually the first reason a gun advocate says there is a need to own guns is the self-protection myth. Now that that myth has been debunked and it has been proven that justifiable homicides are rare, we must move past the old self-defense narrative and think with clearer heads when discussing gun ownership.
Now read it again... "32 times more likely to use their weapon in criminal homicide rather than in self-defense." Got it? "Usually the first reason a gun advocate says there is a need to own guns is---the---self-protection---myth." And here's why it takes you how long for you to take out your gun, point, aim, probably miss and shoot someone or something else, maybe yourself, that you do not want to shoot, and by then the perpetrator is on top of you when you should have been concerned about proper safety, like something like RUNNING. Granted it most certainly depends on the situation. Some, but remarkably few situations require a gun.
Posted by backwardseden 4 months ago
backwardseden
https://www.salon.com... - The failure of the Second Amendment: Our founders got this one wrong in every respect
"However, the question remains as to whether or not this aged bit of legislation has actually accomplished its goal. Have militias effectively contributed to the defense of the nation and has a freely armed private population made America fundamentally safer and more secure society where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness exist by virtue of a well-armed populace?"
"The fact that the United States has and continues experience staggering levels of gun-related deaths, despite presently having well over 330 million guns in the country, is clear demonstration that being well armed as a society does not equate to being safe in a broader sense.
This makes for a strong argument that the Second Amendment is a failed amendment " a hopelessly entrenched piece of legislation that has continually fallen short of its expectations and has contributed more to depriving Americans of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than to protecting those same rights."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com... - Don"t Bank On The Supreme Court To Clarify The Second Amendment Anytime Soon (have fun with this one)
Posted by Xantog 4 months ago
Xantog
Don't stand on child's shoulders to get your political point across. Guns have saved lives aswell.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.