The Instigator
nitrogen85
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
rwebberc
Pro (for)
Losing
25 Points

gun control

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,496 times Debate No: 2829
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (16)

 

nitrogen85

Con

Gun control: By definition, gun control does not work because of this reason. The thug down the street who robbed a bank more than likely, did not get his gun legally. He probably does not have a gun liscence, and most likely got his gun from the street corner or black market.
Let me give an example:
A man goes crazy, and decides to go on a shooting rampage, as the media would describe. He doesn't have his gun liscence, never has owned a gun, but because of his situation like so many others, he is bound and determined to get that gun. He could go to a pawn shop, not all ID or proscess. He could try and find someone on the street corner, who will more than likely sell him a gun for a price. Or, he could go online and get one off of the black market, which yes, does exist. Either way, his detemination and mental illness will allow him to succeed. He will get that gun, and will more than likey go on a shooting rampage, unless someone takes action, which so far no one has in past cases.
Here's another scenario:
The man has never had a history of mental illness, doesn't have a criminal background, and decides to go the long but safe way in getting his weapon. He get's his liscence, a long drawn out process, but he does it just the same like every one else who gets a gun legally. He goes to buy a gun, it takes a few days, and he has to have it registered. He needs a background check, but nothing comes of it because he has a clean history. So now, he has his gun, he has it legally, and he goes on a shooting rampage.
Security:
Look at the last shooting. They had detectors, but somehow, using a guitar case, he brought a shotgun up on to the stage in a lecture hall.
While you may say it's taking a step, the truth is, that step is an imaginary step, as it doesn't exist because it is impossible for gun control in the slightest way. The criminal doesn't have to be the guy who went on the shooting rampage, he could be the guy who sold it to him, the one on the corner. He could be the guy that robbed your local bank in a hold up. No matter the situation, they're all criminals, and they can all get, or already do have a gun.
If you have some 'theory' about how gun control does or will work, I would like to hear it. Or maybe it's security.
rwebberc

Pro

I thought I was going to have more time to post than I do so I will have to be brief, I apologize in advance.

My opponent claims that gun control does not work for the simple reason that guns are still accessible through illegal means. But this alone is not a reason for abolishing gun control laws. Gun control works, at the very least, to some degree. While we are constantly perfecting the legislation on the books, the laws we have produce positive results. In the past decade, more than 1.3 million criminals have been blocked from buying guns at licensed dealers (http://www.bradycampaign.org...). It may be true that we can't prevent crime from happening, but these laws do make a difference, and the benefits are worth the restrictions.

Assault weapons bans are another valuable gun control law. There is no good reason for anyone to possess a gun that can shoot that many rounds. This is another example of a positive gun control law.

Gun control does work, the United States has one of the highest rates of firearm ownership and, as a result, one of the highest rates of homicides in the developed world. Guns cause more problems than they solve.

Unfortunately I have to go, sorry for the short post this time.
Debate Round No. 1
nitrogen85

Con

http://www.justfacts.com...

The 6more people who own a gun, crime rate drops. Fact.

More next round
rwebberc

Pro

rwebberc forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
nitrogen85

Con

http://www.worldnetdaily.com...

http://www.opednews.com...

I'm sorry I wasn't able to post more, I've been busy with mid terms. But no excuse, I will try to post something with what time I have left.

As studies have shown, the only connection there is with tighter gun control is that the more people who own a gun, the more lives are saved. You can choose not to believe this and let the media think for you, but I will be thinking for my self. Our own soldiers fought, starved, froze, and burned to death for our right to bear arms, and I intend to do just that.

I also found this sight, though it really isn't on gun control, the person seems to thing like I do.

http://www.flismfilms.com...

Thanks
rwebberc

Pro

These are the three arguments my opponent has given against gun control:

1.Criminals can still find guns on the black market
2.The more people that have guns, the less crime there is
3.The Second Amendment grants citizens the right to own guns

I will now respond to these arguments in turn.

1.While the fact that criminals have access to guns is certainly a problem, it is one that is actually helped by gun control. According to the FBI, roughly 340,000 firearms are reported as stolen each year. These guns, almost all of which have been manufactured and purchased legally, inevitably end up being sold on the black market and end up in the hands of criminals. Had these guns never been made or sold, that would be 340,000 less guns owned by criminals in the US. Obviously, there will always be a way to illegally purchase firearms, but if buying a gun becomes much harder, then the price of illegal guns will skyrocket. For those of us who know economics, we know that this will then drive the demand down. Thus, gun control makes buying guns much more difficult for criminals.

2.This one is just blatantly untrue. My opponent attempts to provide it as fact, and then accuses those who choose to question this fact as sheep who blindly follow the media. Well it appears he's the one trying to pull the wool over our eyes. As this chart shows, "Gun death rates are highly correlated to the rate of gun ownership in a given area" (http://www.guncontrol.ca...). People often cite self-defense as a reason for owning a gun, but as it turns out someone who owns a gun is 43 times more likely to use it on a family member or friend than an intruder (Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm Related Deaths in the Home." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 314, no. 24, June 1986, pp. 1557-60.). This same study also determines that someone who owns a gun is 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than someone who doesn't. Have I debunked this one enough yet?

3.First of all, simply because someone died for a cause does not make it some sort of absolute maxim. Our soldiers also fight for freedom of speech, but I can't yell fire in a crowded theater or publish a newspaper article that says that Britney Spears eats live puppies for dinner. The first example is more relevant. The right of other people not to be trampled trumps my right to free speech. If your right to own a gun interferes with my right not to be placed in the danger that that gun presents, then you can't own one.

Secondly, as was determined in Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 1982, "construing [the language of the Second Amendment] according to its plain meaning, it seems clear that the right to bear arms is inextricably connected to the preservation of a militia." This, like many other sections of the Constitution, no longer pertains to modern society. Over the last 200 years, our system of checks and balances has shown that no one person or agency can have too much power. We are not at risk of tyranny at the hands of our own government like our founding fathers were. Finally, even if we were at risk, I can assure you your Winchester won't help you fight off that tank coming down the street.

Now here are my reasons why gun control is necessary:

1.Guns are too lethal
a.Approximately 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. According to estimates, firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled. In 1985 (the latest year for which data are available), the cost of shootings--either by others, through self-inflicted wounds, or in accidents--was estimated to be more than $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death. (Editor's note: the number of gun victims has increased since 1989 to 15,456 gun homicides in 1994. Source: FBI UCR report.)
b.In robberies and assaults, victims are far more likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a gun than when he or she has another weapon or is unarmed.

2.Gun control CURBS violence
a.As the statistics I provided above show, the more citizens that own guns, the higher the violent crime rates is likely to be in a given area
b.Gun control also curbs lethal domestic violence, the presence of a gun makes it easier to kill, makes the killing more instantaneous, more detached, and makes the killer have to think not at all about what he or she is doing. In short, people are not always thinking rationally, and when there is a gun
around, it is easier for an irrational person to do greater damage.

3.Guns make suicide too easy
a.Households with guns are 5 times more likely to experience a suicide than household without (http://sun.soci.niu.edu...). Enough said.

4.There are very few good reasons to own a gun
a.As I have shown, self-defense is a poor reason to cite for gun ownership as one is not likely at all to use it in such a manner. Guns are designed for one thing and one thing only: to kill human beings. This makes them nothing but a danger to public safety.

5.Gun control prevents criminals from obtaining guns
a.See my previous arguments regarding background checks and the black market.

Unfortunately, that's all the time I have. Like I said in my comment, I sincerely apologize to my opponent for my forfeiture and assure him that I had every intention of posting, I just got a little overwhelmed with midterms, golf, etc. Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by elawson 8 years ago
elawson
I come from Vermont. We have no gun control. You can carry a side arm without a permit as long as it is not concealed. My home town passed an ordinance requiring all able bodied people to posses a firearm. Vermont has a strong gun culture as well as firearm safety education. It prides itself in its great hunting and hunters. We have no gun violence and very few accidents.
Posted by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
"Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 22 times more likely to be used to kill somebody you know than to kill in self-defense."
From: Kellermann AL. "Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home." Journal of Trauma, 1998; 45(2):263-67.

So it seems gun control laws could well save the lives of law-abiding people.
Posted by willhenry20 8 years ago
willhenry20
I disagree with gun control but the Pro side of the argument is better.
Posted by elawson 8 years ago
elawson
Gun control vorks very well in countries like Communist China and Russia!
Posted by MoonDragon613 8 years ago
MoonDragon613
To rwebberc: All excellent points. Very convincing. Especially convincing because Pro did not have a chance to rebut. My favorite part? "That someone who owns a gun is 2.7 times more likely to be murdered than someone who doesn't." I loved the implied cause and effect over there.
Posted by rwebberc 8 years ago
rwebberc
Son of a gun, I thought I had a day and I had an hour. I'm really sorry, I've had absolutely no time lately. I promise to post for the next round.
Posted by nitrogen85 8 years ago
nitrogen85
I said 6more. My bad, simple keyboard error.
"The more people who own a gun, crime rate drops. Fact."
As it was supposed to read.
Posted by Conspicuous_Conservative 8 years ago
Conspicuous_Conservative
Hey rwebberc, bro you got skills, really got to agree with the person below but I think your winning so far. I was reading your profile and you said you believe in a higher power but don't have a church that satisfies you. I suggest reading some sort of spiritual book I am in the same realm as you but I believe in the Judeo-Cristian God and consider myself non-denominational Christian. I know it is none of my business but thought I might add my two cents, SEE YOU AROUND.
Posted by takethat209 8 years ago
takethat209
Rwebberc I really respect your view point and am very impressed with your debating talent but I disagree with you that the fact that US has the highest number of firearms is the reason we are such a violent country. If that senario was true why is the US over the last few years dropped from the highest murder rate countries. Take a look at the following link for some stats.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

I vote in your favor about 85-90% of the time even when I ademantly disagree =), who knows might vote for you here. Good Luck.
Posted by nitrogen85 8 years ago
nitrogen85
I'll be waiting. I'm interested in what you have to say.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by rwebberc 7 years ago
rwebberc
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by claytone 8 years ago
claytone
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by futuresuccess 8 years ago
futuresuccess
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by venicio22 8 years ago
venicio22
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by bnewman8629 8 years ago
bnewman8629
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by PreacherFred 8 years ago
PreacherFred
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by wazup 8 years ago
wazup
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
nitrogen85rwebbercTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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