The Instigator
Chaotiklown
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
Tavadon
Con (against)
Losing
13 Points

right to bear arms

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 5/11/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,559 times Debate No: 3989
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (9)

 

Chaotiklown

Pro

I see you're set up as being against gun rights. I wonder why that might be, and how you'd imagine that would help anyone-

Awaiting explanation...
Tavadon

Con

First off i am not agaisnt the right completely , I just believe that compromises need to be made.

My beliefs and reasons:

1)Waiting periods of 1-3 days for handguns and hunting rifles and 2-3 weeks for assault weapons.
A)Handguns are self defense weapons, so therefore the shorter waiting period
B)Hunting Rifles are for a past time
C)No one actually needs and assault weapon
D)The whole reasons for a waiting period are so if an angry person wants to kill someone they have to wait to buy a gun, giving them the chance to cooldwon

2)Strict background checks
A)Check for a criminal record, felonies mostly.

3)Require all guns to be registered
A)Helps solve murder cases
B)Prevents someone of holding a weapon without registering it, like if he goes to a gun range he has to show his registration.

4)In regards to the constitution
A)It does not say not to have safeguards, yes you still have the right, but we aren't going to be irresponsible and allow a convicted felon to hold a gun that could kill dozens of people.
B) The founding fathers said that we would have to adjust the constitution to our time and conditions. They did not have as amny people to worry about and did not have assault type weapons. They had to worry about native american raids and the British. The colonial gov't was poor and could not afford guns for every sodier, there fore the amendment solved that problem.

5) Guns help to increase the murder rate
A) I agree that guns do not kill people, people kill people, but guns are there tools that we can prevent them from having. Many countries that have gun controls have a much smaller murder rate then the United States.
Debate Round No. 1
Chaotiklown

Pro

Thank you for taking this one up Tavadon, and I do agree with you on several points. However, I do see a few issues with the logic of your stipulations behind buying and owning firearms...

Waiting periods, I will not argue about- it makes sense. Someone should not be able to run out and get a gun when he's still hot about some guy sleeping with his wife(Not trying to be sexist here, it could very well go the other way around:-)... good logic.

Criminal records should definitely be run prior to buying a gun, for obvious reasons.

"Require all guns to be registered":

This, I have an issue with---- Suppose the government decides to ban firearms? They might make that decision, and if they do- They know where every single one is. The Government should fear the people, the people should NOT fear the government. Otherwise it's not a democracy- It's communism.

An old movie brought up a concept pertaining to registered guns- Not saying that movies are real of course, but the concept is there and true. In the movie "Red Dawn", America is invaded by Soviet forces. In attempt to guarantee their occupation, they go to the local police dept. and instantly know where all the guns are, and who their owners are.

A background check to buy the guns- Yes. We need to keep them out of the wrong hands if possible. But giving the public a list of every arm in the country is not a good idea...

And please don't forget, that criminals do not bother to register their guns- If a criminal wants a weapon, they will find one.

"In regards to the Constitution"
Your "A" point- True enough, but that's why we have background checks- So a convicted felon does not get a weapon.

Your "B" point- Where exactly in the constitution does it say that exceptions can be made, and that it can change? Regardless of the circumstances at the time, the Bill of Rights is a document that was created to detail the most basic rights of American citizens- rights that could not be infringed upon by the federal government. If these change, the balance of power starts to sway toward the government. If this is to remain a democracy, that cannot be allowed to happen.

"Guns help to increase the murder rate"

This is simply untrue. It is true that some countries that have many gun restrictions(especially in Europe, where handguns are outlawed in most places) have lower crime rates. But these rates were low long before any restrictions were put into place. In factuality, places which require homeowners to own guns lower crime rates dramatically... They did this in Georgia, here's some info on it... http://www.worldnetdaily.com...

Now think about this for a second. A criminal(who probably got his gun on the street, and very likely didn't get his background checked before the purchase), is looking at a house, thinking about robbing it. If he knows that the owner of the house is defenseless, he's going to be much more likely to march right in and do his thing...

However, if he knows there's a good chance that the owner of this house has a gun next to his bed, he's going to think twice about going in. He might even think 3 times, but he'll likely end up walking away- Probably to hit somebody he knows is vulnerable.

Here is more info on the subject- http://www.gunowners.org...

Awaiting the return:-)
Tavadon

Con

Ok, when i was talking abou the constitution being flexible, i didn;t mean it weas written in the constitution, unless you count the part about amendments, i meant that the founding fathers recognized that times change, weapons change. I simply meant that we need to review and adjust(not a whole lot) the constitution.... again that is where amendments come in.

On registration of guns... I've seen red dawn(great movie, and agree that a public list is not a good idea... also i see the problem with the gov't also having a list. But I trust the gov't(not a popular idea i know). I believe a secure list would be a great idea, only because criminals, generally are stupid and may not use thier own gun, but may steal a friends or someone connected to themt aht may allow the police to trace them down... honestly here i think we are both correct and a compromise here would be the best soulution.Because I agree that the Gov't should fears the people, so i am conficted betweent that ideal and solving murders and giving solice to victims families.

Murder rates... I am saying murder rates, not crime rates, because i agree that a thief would think twice, but most likely not a murderer. Simply put a gun makes a murder easier.

I am sorry if i am not the best opponet for this debate, i am not hardcore opposed to guns myself, but i am trying....:D
Debate Round No. 2
Chaotiklown

Pro

Sir, the constitution cannot be bent. If the people start allowing it to give way a little bit, it is wide open for the government to mold it to their interests, when it was meant for the people's. We have to defend our rights, or we will end up with none...

As far as the registration goes Sir, I think it's a better alternative to concentrate on perfecting forensics- True enough, if a criminal wants a gun, they will not use their own, they will steal one- Leaving the owner of the gun susceptible to being falsely accused. Fact remains, more crime will be prevented, given that everyone has an equal opportunity to defend themselves. Samuel Colt called the gun "The Great Equalizer". Lets all stay on an even playing field, and focus on preventing as much crime as possible before it takes place.

"Murder rates... I am saying murder rates, not crime rates, because i agree that a thief would think twice, but most likely not a murderer. Simply put, a gun makes a murder easier."

Sir, the vast majority of murder is not premeditated killing. In most cases, a murder will happen when someone tries to resist a criminal act, or is in the wrong place at the wrong time when one is happening. Most criminals do NOT want to run into conflict when they're breaking into something.

If someone truly makes the decision to kill someone else, the smallest factor is the weapon. A knife can be just as deadly. Heck, a straw can be deadly if you cork it with your thumb and hold it right:-)

"I am sorry if i am not the best opponet for this debate, i am not hardcore opposed to guns myself, but i am trying....:D"

Hey, it's all good man:-) It's a difficult thing to try and shoot down, and especially when you aren't so anti-gun as lots of crazies out there... Good debate though Sir, good thinking on your part- You keep responsibility of actions in play, that's always important, regardless of the issue...

Argumentation's purpose should be to reach a conclusion, a higher understanding. Only a true Sophist would say that it's not, and that any subject matter could be defended----------------
Tavadon

Con

Well. the constitution can be bent becuase you can not and should not allow situations 200+ years ago to govern how the supreme law in the land dictates our judicial system.... at the time of the revolution due to hostilities btween the natives and settelers, native american raids were common. Hence the reason why most families kept guns....we just finished fighting a war with no guarentee to our nations future and the gov't couldnot afford to arm everyone...that is also another reason for the amendment... and another argument for the viability of altering the constitution is that this whole debate you have been defending an alteration of said constitution, becuae the bill of rights themsleves were added onto the orignal document... therefore since you aruge that the constitution must not be altered you should naturally be agaisnt any amendments to it... and seeing as the right to bear arms was an addition to the constutution, you must therefore concede defeat here...:D(obviously i do not expect you too or desire you too)

When it comes to murder and guns reducing murder rates...I say that murderers will not think twice about going into a persons home who owns a gun, because( and you yourself stated this) that most murders are not pre meditated...holding a gun gives people an empowering feeling, which a bit of straw would not...

Now my argument is that we cannot have complete freedom to bear arms, nor can we completely ban guns.... we must reach a compromise betweent the two sides
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by magpie 8 years ago
magpie
You both agreed on waiting periods "... hot about someone cheating with his wife'. And, what about the poor woman who is being stalked and must wait until three days after she's been beat to death before she gets permission to have a gun. The ability to instantly check backgrounds, obviates any need for delay.
The notion of "living document" or need to adjust the Constitution to the contemporary, is ludicrous. If a change is needed, the constitutions amendment process is perfectly adequate.
Would you select a builder who insisted that the contract to build was a "living document" subject to change as he saw fit? I doubt it!
Posted by Chaotiklown 8 years ago
Chaotiklown
Gun ownership saves lives- How many people's lives are saved per year due to their own self-defense?

Here you go...

http://www.gunowners.org...
Posted by Tavadon 8 years ago
Tavadon
Just because we cant control where all the guns come from,If wqe can save just 1 live by having everyone register guns, then it is worth it.... its not a huge inconvience to gun owners and i hope they wouldnt be that selfish not to do something that could pontentially save at least ONE live
Posted by Chaotiklown 8 years ago
Chaotiklown
Maddermom, where do you think these weapons on the streets come from? Goes into the same realm as some drugs.

Uzis are not manufactured in Harlem, and not one of these thugs owns a poppy field. If a criminal wants a gun, he/she will most definitely get one. The majority of unregistered guns do not come from legitimate sellers in this country...
Posted by mmadderom 8 years ago
mmadderom
I am 100% in favor of gun ownership (surprise, since I own several). I'm also 100% in favor of registering EVERY gun sold in the U.S. Owning a gun is NOT a "right". Felons are forbidden from gun ownership and it's COMPLETELY consistent with the constitution.

Crack down on the SELLERS of guns and you won't have nearly as many unregistered weapons on the streets. Simple as that.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 8 years ago
Geekis_Khan
I agree with you. It's a valid argument to challenge the Constitution, but on the flip side it's also very valid to use it as a source of authority. I think it depends on the resolution, though. At least in a lot of cases.
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
Is it just me, or is it impossible for an American to admit that maybe the Constitution is wrong about certain things? I'm Australian, and this question is not in jest; it is something I've noticed particularly on this website, that when the argument "but the Constitution says...." is brought into a debate, it is very rarely challenged. Just curious.
Posted by Chaotiklown 8 years ago
Chaotiklown
Good debate sir, lot of good points brought up everywhere:-)
Posted by Geekis_Khan 8 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Sorry... For some reason I typed the security code on that last one.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 8 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Heh... CON, I'm thinking you did a lot better in Round One.

We'll see how Round Three goes. :)MKYH
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by magpie 8 years ago
magpie
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Tavadon 8 years ago
Tavadon
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 SPF 8 years ago
SPF
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 girbrother2 8 years ago
girbrother2
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 GaryBacon 8 years ago
GaryBacon
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 reaperofmen 8 years ago
reaperofmen
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 tangerineman91 8 years ago
tangerineman91
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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 XLdrpepper 8 years ago
XLdrpepper
ChaotiklownTavadonTied
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