The Instigator
OverLordSandwich
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
coolkid1231
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The arming of teachers with tasers.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 780 times Debate No: 70713
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

OverLordSandwich

Pro

I will be arguing for the arming of teachers with tasers. Con will argue against. No arguments must not be posted on the final round.
Clarifcations from me or questions from others will be posted in the comments prior to the debate

Cheers.
coolkid1231

Con

teachers should not be armed with tasers because they could go rouge and start killing people or they could do way worse than that. so no i dont think that they should have tasers.
Debate Round No. 1
OverLordSandwich

Pro

OverLordSandwich forfeited this round.
coolkid1231

Con

Permitting concealed handguns increases crime. States that passed "shall-issue" laws between 1977 and 2010 had a 2% or more increase in the murder rate, and at least 9% increases in rates of rape, aggravated assault, robbery, auto theft, burglary, and larceny, according to an Aug. 2012 paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. [66] A 1995 peer-reviewed study of five urban cities, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, concluded that gun homicide rates increased "on average by 4.5 per 100,000 persons" following the enactment of "shall-issue" laws. [12] A May 2009 peer-reviewed study in Econ Journal Watch found that "shall-issue" laws were associated with increased numbers of aggravated assaults between 1977 and 2006. [33] Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck said, "I have seen far too much gun violence in my lifetime to think that more guns is a solution... a gun is more likely to be used against you than you use a gun in self-defense." [83]

Carrying a concealed handgun increases the chances of a confrontation escalating and turning lethal. A Nov. 2009 peer-reviewed study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that someone carrying a gun for self-defense was 4.5 times more likely to be shot during an assault than an assault victim without a gun. [11] According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, "members of the public who carry guns risk escalating everyday disagreements into public shootouts, especially in places where disputes frequently occur"in bars, at sporting events, or in traffic." [67] For example, on Jan 13, 2014, a retired police officer with a legally concealed handgun shot and killed another man during an argument over text messaging in a movie theater. [84]

Second Amendment rights have limits. The entire Second Amendment states: "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." It does not mention concealed handguns. [71] US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court's 5-4 majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited" the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues." [70] In May 2014 the US Supreme Court declined to hear Drake v. Jerejian, a case challenging New Jersey's issuance of concealed weapons permits only to citizens who can prove a "justifiable need." [85]

Concealed carry application requirements and background checks do not prevent dangerous people from acquiring weapons. Between May 2007 and Mar. 11, 2014, 14 law enforcement officers and 622 other people were killed nationally (not in self defense) by private individuals legally allowed to carry concealed handguns. [14] Between 1996 and 2000, the Violence Policy Center states that concealed handgun permit holders in Texas were arrested for weapon-related offenses at a rate 81% higher than the rest of the Texas population. [34] In 2007 the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reviewed a list of concealed gun permit holders in Florida and found that 1,400 had pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony, 216 had outstanding warrants, and 128 had active domestic violence injunctions. [72]

Criminals are more likely to carry a gun if they suspect that victims may also be armed. Felons report that they often carry firearms to deter victims from resisting. According to a survey of incarcerated felons by the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, 75% reported carrying a gun while committing a crime because "there's always a chance my victim would be armed." [73]

Public safety should be left to professionally qualified police officers, not private citizens with little or no expert training. Some states, such as Georgia and Maryland, do not require any training before receiving a concealed carry permit. In Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming, and Vermont, a permit is not necessary to carry a concealed gun. [75] In states that do require training, it can be inadequate. For example, while Wisconsin requires that concealed weapons permit holders have training, there is no minimum training time requirement. [76] Mark Schauf, Police Chief of Baraboo, WI, said, "as police officers, we're required to have training before we get our weapons and a certain number of training hours throughout the year. If we have to be trained, it would only make sense that a person in public would want to be trained, as well." [74]

Concealed weapons laws make the non-carrying public feel less safe. A Mar. 10, 2014 poll of Illinois citizens concluded that 52.3% of the public felt less safe following the July 2013 passage of a law allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns in public. [77] A July 2013 peer-reviewed study of 1,649 students at 15 colleges published in the Journal of American College Health stated that 79% would not feel safe if faculty, students, and visitors carried concealed weapons on campus. [78] An Apr. 2010 poll of registered voters across the United States found that 57% feel less safe after learning that concealed guns may lawfully be carried in public. [79]

http://concealedguns.procon.org...
Debate Round No. 2
OverLordSandwich

Pro

OverLordSandwich forfeited this round.
coolkid1231

Con

coolkid1231 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
OverLordSandwich

Pro

OverLordSandwich forfeited this round.
coolkid1231

Con

THEY COULD HURT PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GOOD DEBATE NICE JOB.
I THINK I WIN

:D :D :D :D good luck
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by springfield 2 years ago
springfield
Since i can't take part in the debate itself i would just say my piece about coolkid1231's reasons here..

You argument against it based on you fear the teachers will be able to abuse said tool this debate is about, but let me assure you that would not be possible, there exist hundreds of different kind of mention tool and made for different purposes in both the offence and defense category, some are simple ones while others which would be the kind which would be deployed to teachers would be similier if not the same type as the ones police and such uses that would have build in logger, camera, and shoot wired dart like projectile that would stick the clothes and such to deliver the payload, once that device is used it will not be able to be reused easy as it will be stuck to the person's clothes and such, and every use will be logged and filmed to be checked later so it would be hard to abuse it...

also, overactive use are easy to prevent by having the right rules in place which would include but not limited to use of said tool will give grounds and cause of pink slip being issued to the user if it can not be proved justifiable which would mean a lethal weapon should be visible and all other attempts to deal with it non-violently have been exhausted or proven not possible....

If the teacher's and parents can not feel safe sending the kids to school and to teach then it would only make it worse down the path and end up no-one can feel safe anymore knowing any day someone can pop up and do harm without they can do anything about it, is better to make the parents a little worry about a device that shot electricity that can on the tiny off-chance be abused then fearing their kids will not come back again at any given day....
No votes have been placed for this debate.