The Instigator
HunterJM
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
metalfingerz
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

gun rights

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 1 vote the winner is...
HunterJM
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/3/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 587 times Debate No: 24551
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

HunterJM

Pro

I believe that taking the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will only increase crime.
metalfingerz

Con

Good point, thanks for all the evidence and explanation to back it up. Alright, so I have many problems with the right to bear arms, but I'll simply respond to the statement at hand to start. I'd like to first ask, how so? I simply don't see this as a valid point. Guns make crime much easier to commit. Without guns, robberies and murders would be a great deal harder to pull off. Guns are meant for shooting, its what they do. Holding a gun (which I've personally done) makes you want to shoot something. They're cool, but they simply shouldn't be allowed in the hands of the public. If you want to shoot, go to a shooting range. Otherwise, there's no reason to have a firearm (other than defense, but if guns were banned, you really wouldn't need one for defense cuz you'd be up against blunt objects mostly, which you could also wield). Point is, I don't understand the argument's basis, but I disagree with the statement. I'd love some evidence to back it up though, I'm always open to new ideas.
Debate Round No. 1
HunterJM

Pro

I am new to this so I thought for the first thing you just put your general idea not an argument. You say guns make crime easier to commit which would be true if no one had a firearm. Just because you put restrictions on guns does not mean criminals will not have them. Drugs are illegal but criminals still get them through an illegal drug trade the same thing will happen with guns. But you just banned guns so now all of the good law abiding citizens are without guns and the criminals would still be armed. Also I have heard of many cases such as one from last month of a women whose husband had died of cancer 2 men thought that she probably had pain killers from her husband and 2 men armed with knifes were breaking through a window. She took herself and her 2 kids into a room with her 12 gauge shotgun and called 911. The police were on their way but it would take over 10 minutes for them to arrive. The men broke through the window and approached her she warned him to back off but he refused so she shoot and killed him. The other man ran away and was arrested by police arriving to the scene. If she had not had a firearm the man would have easily overpowered her and done unspeakable things to her and her family. A firearm is great equalizer. Not just with people I live in the woods and when I go on a hike I carry a pistol on me just in case I get attacked by a bear. Which also goes to your other point that having a gun makes you want to shot something I carry the pistol and occasionally forget I have it on me. If a bear started to charge me I would sure rather fight it off with a firearm that a blunt object. I you want evidence look at crime numbers put out by the DOJ and the ATF, gun ownership has went up and crime rate went down it could be that they are tied together. A robber may be less likely to rob a bank if he thinks someone inside has a concealed carry. Overall having a firearm in my home makes me feel safer that if someone was to kick through my front door I have the ability to stop them from harming myself and my family.
metalfingerz

Con

After reading your retort, I must say that while there is much truth in your argument, there are also many holes. You mention that drugs are illegal yet are still sold and used by criminals. However, the difference here is that drugs can easily be made or grown by someone in their own homes, which is not the case with guns. If gun manufacturing is shut down, guns cease to exist. It's a lot easier to grow a marijuana plant or whip up a batch of meth in your own home than it is to create a fully functioning fire arm, ESPECIALLY if the more dangerous needed materials to create said firearm are also prohibited to the public. As for your bear argument, I'd like to cite this article:

http://www.fs.fed.us....

Bear attacks are incredibly rare and pretty much never unprovoked. Carrying a gun with you to protect against bears is not really that fair to bears, because if I had a gun with me and saw a bear, I'd probably shoot the bear out of fear as soon as it got to close (as I assume many people would), though this article states bears are just curious. There are many, many ways to protect yourself against bears without killing them. Let's be nice to bears. Instead of stomping through the forest ready to cap some grizzlies, read the article buddy, and all your hikes shall forever be safe and bear-murder free. Now, I will admit your best point was the story of the women and her children. However, I have a story to prove MY point as well. It's called the Columbine High School Massacre. Or the Virginia Tech Massacre. Or tons of other school shootings, all of which occur because an angsty teenager finds a way to get a gun and goes to town with it. There are just too many stupid/unstable people in the world to allow guns to be given out to the public. If any of the kids who performed these school shootings had come in with knives instead, they would've been stopped much more easily and quickly, causing far less destruction and death. If that lady didn't have a gun, yeah, she would've gotten some stuff stolen. But if Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold DIDN'T have a gun, 34 students and teachers would've been left unharmed! How can you argue with that? You can tell stories about guns as self defense all day, but there are just as many stories for why guns are bad. So to sum up my points: A. Guns are not drugs, having an illegal firearm market would be MUCH harder to pull off, one cannot just assume it will happen for sure (you said "the same thing will happen with guns", which you have no proof for by the way). B. Be nice to bears. C. There will always be violence in this world; we can't stop that. However, we can lower it by preventing the use of guns. Thank you, I eagerly await your response.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by HunterJM 4 years ago
HunterJM
I do suggest we fight fire with fire the best way to stop a gunman is with a gun. I believe the overwhelming majority of Americans are not stupid and have a healthy respect for firearms and they don't need the government coming in and telling them they are to stupid to own them. As for accidents with firearms one thing you can do which I do after every time I shot is safety check the gun before putting it back in the gun case. I drop the clip out and open the chamber to see it there is a bullet. As for your friend he was probably storing the firearm with shells in the tube with I would not recommend for that reason. You said guns are only used fr killing there are many guns that are designed for uses other than killing. There are competition guns, I have a Jennings .22 which is is specifically designed to target shot also there is a gun called a 20mm which is specifically designed to bring down avalanches on sky resorts.
Posted by metalfingerz 4 years ago
metalfingerz
so you suggest we fight fire with fire? Look, talk all you want about illegal gun sales and bear attacks (incredibly isolated events). The point is is that giving a bunch of stupid americans (I'm not saying all americans are stupid, but there definitely are stupid ones) guns is like giving a bunch of kids knives. Nothing good can come of it. It would be better to have a small amount of violence than everyone being able to take lives at the pull of a trigger. Tons of accidents happen with guns, my friend's neighbor had a shot gun that went off accidentally and severely injured someone. And cars are practical for other uses! guns are meant for killing. That argument doesn't make sense, it's like you're comparing knives and candycanes. Sure, I could suck on a candy cane until its sharp and stab some people, but that's not what it's for, meanwhile guns are for stabbing.
Posted by Jessalyn 4 years ago
Jessalyn
@ Con:
Bulding a firearm is not difficult; how do you think gunsmiths have been successful for so long?
You claim growing marijuana is easier? What if the plant went extinct?
It won't, that's the point...Just like guns will never be entirely confiscated. Those who are willing to commit the crime of murder are not likely to abide by a gun-ownership law.
Posted by HunterJM 4 years ago
HunterJM
this is HunterJM I can not respond in the debate area so I will leave my argument on here. you said it is hard to make a firearms like they do drugs which is true but it would be near impossible to collect all guns, the DOJ lost track of guns given to drug cartels so I beat they don't have a good track of every legal gun in the country. Especially most criminals would be the ones who would not turn them in. The drug cartel own firearms some of them being assault rifles that they could sell along with drugs. I support hunting but I don't hunt because I would feel bad after killing an animal so I would not just shoot a bear because I see it because like you said bears are usually harmless. But bears are some territorial or protecting their young here is a video of a man who was attack while hiking . So just walking on a path could set them off and be attacked. It is not likely but it could happen so I would rather be safe than sorry. As far as school shootings a way to prevent that is more guns. I am not talking allowing students to carry a weapon but having more armed security guards or allowing administrative workers to carry a firearm. If someone inside one of those schools had a firearm one shoot could have ended it all. You want to take guns from good people just because of the actions of a few. Does that mean we should take cars away from people because a some people drive recklessly. Guns have prevented attacks on the country such as in Word war 2 when the Japanese Navy Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said - "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass" So people owning guns prevented a land attack on the United states. Finally the Founding fathers had believed that owning guns would maintain a well rounded militia and protect the United States. They founded this country and I believe we owe it to them to respect the right to own firearms.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ScarletGhost4396 4 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
HunterJMmetalfingerzTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: I gave conduct to PRO for CON's bit of sarcasm at the beginning of his R1. CON assumes that by cutting off manufacturing of weapons, all arms will cease to exist. If only PRO had more time, I would've loved to hear arguments about police corruption, government scandals (*cough Fast and Furious), and other ways that arms can end up in the hands of criminals. The illegal market argument was simple enough for me, and there really wasn't any reasoning on the part of the CON in that rebuttal.