The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DemocraticRepublic
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

universal background checks are a common sense solution to gun violence

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  
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: 10/3/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 316 times Debate No: 80477
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

people like to say criminals don't obey the gun laws so why have them. they don't obey drug law, theft laws, murder laws, or any laws... does that mean we shouldn't have those laws? the fact is, some people will not run and get a gun if they have dont have one because they are denied. if they dont have a gun when they might otherwise commit a crime, a crime has been prevented.
if there's any doubt, why not err on the side of caution and pass the background checks?

this isn't even controversial. ninety percent of people favor checks. and even seventy percent of NRA members. so anyone i'm arguing with on this is in a big minority. and, aren't we forced to conclude the only reason this doesn't pass, doesn't even get to the floor to vote in congress, mean that they are beholden to the gun lobby, and the likes of the NRA? that's the only way to make sense of it as far as i can see.

forty percent of sales do not involve checks. there is plenty of room for improvement here. if we treated guns like cars, and required licenses, checks, permits, etc, people wouldn't even bat an eye or think diferent about it. only when someone moves your cheese and challenges a status quo do people even care.


[not that we couldn't do more. the more likely a person is to have a gun, teh more likely tehy are to kill someone. this is common sense. but it's also empirically proven....the more guns a person or geographic area has, the more likely they are to commit crimes. countires with that take away guns have less crime. it's a fact. ]

people who might challenge me... do you seriously contend that one hundred percent of people who are denied a gun and might commit a crime will run out and get one? those kinds of absolute statements are notoriously known for being false. so what gives?

DemocraticRepublic

Con

I accept this debate.
Unfortunately, universal background checks on gun violence do not all cover the entire gun problem. Often, criminals will find loopholes round this system. Criminals can steal guns from legitimate gun owners, buy weapons illegally from criminal dealers (they exist) or in some cases, illegally import them. UBC's will not entirely solve gun violence.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i never said it would solve the gun problem. the only point is that it would help. even con seems to suggest in his words that some help will occur, just not all of it. he misses the point.
DemocraticRepublic

Con

Suggesting is different from asserting it or actually saying it.
UBC's do work until as I said, criminals often steal guns and or import them. Your missing the point about people using fradulent identities as well. Also, what crimes would you suggest would prohibit someone from using firearms or purchasing one? Almost 88 out of 100 people in the USA own a gun, couldn't they simply just borrow one from a friend or relative? UBC's have many loopholes through them. What about bribing gun store owners (I don't think that would be this difficult unless they are a professional brand retailer) and what about underground illegal gun stores? The majority of guns used in crimes are stolen. Over 93% of guns used in crimes are obtained illegally.[2] So 93% of these crimes wouldn't be prevented. Universal Background Checks wouldn't solve this issue at all.




[1] "Guns Per Capita" http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[2] "Gun Facts" http://www.gunfacts.info...
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i never said it would solve the gun problem. the only point is that it would help. even con seems to suggest in his words that some help will occur, just not all of it. he misses the point.

well to be clear, he is actually contradicting himself.
"UBC's do work until as I said, criminals often steal guns and or import them. "
"Universal Background Checks wouldn't solve this issue at all."
DemocraticRepublic

Con

You've repeated yourself on the last argument with the second last argument.

If your last argument is just quoting me contradicting myself, it is a very poor argument. Throughout this debate, you haven't posted specific arguments or countering/rebutting my arguments at all and have said the same thing three times: "i never said it would solve the gun problem. the only point is that it would help. even con seems to suggest in his words that some help will occur, just not all of it. he misses the point." This is a futile argument and clearly doesn't address your argument at all and therefore I find that your arguments have missed the point and have not made a clear view and point of your original argument. As you haven't posted a suitable rebuttle I can't argue with you no longer as there is no way I can rebut. This debate overall has frankly, been pointless as I have seen no arguments except the introduction argument made against me.
Please, instead of posting the same thing three times, post an actual argument.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by mrPrime 1 year ago
mrPrime
ah.. @Fascist_Ferret beat me too it. It's not a "solution" but.. a step in the right direction.
Posted by Fascist_Ferret 1 year ago
Fascist_Ferret
Pro, you clearly stated that background checks are a SOLUTION, which they are not. Con is suggesting that we actually need to ban some of these weapons which will completely change the availability of them and THAT is a solution. There is no solution except to take away handguns which are responsible for the vast majority of homicides, as well as assault rifles which have been used in almost all mass shootings.
No votes have been placed for this debate.