Attention: Debate.org is closing and the website will be shut down on June 5, 2022. New Topics can no longer be posted and Sign Up has been disabled. Existing Topics will still function as usual until the website is taken offline. Members can download their content by using the Download Data button in My Account.
The Instigator
Eugenious
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
billsands
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

American Citizens Should Have Their Firearms Removed

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: 2/18/2019 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 423 times Debate No: 120370
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Eugenious

Con

To remove the citizen's firearms is to remove their method of self-defense. A common saying goes "If you outlaw guns, Only outlaws will have guns. " I want my opponent to prove that GUNS are the problem and not just the insane people using them; I want my opponent to prove that taking guns will solve the problem; and I want my opponent to prove that the government has a Constitutional right to take the guns from citizens. Please be respectful, And good luck to my opponent!
-Eugenious
billsands

Pro

Presently American citizens can have their private fire arms confiscatted if they commit a felony or become mentally incompetant, I would not under any circumstances confiscate fire arms from law abiding citizens, Unless they failed to be licensed and register all fire arms if they failed to register all fire arms especially semi automatic rifles and handguns which would be regulated more strictly that they presently are, Then and only then would they have them removed. . As long as people follow the new rules they will be okay
Debate Round No. 1
Eugenious

Con

You said that you would only take the guns of the people if they are, Essentially, Unfit to own firearms. This completely contradicts what you said in the poll about guns being bad. Plus, You accepted to be the affirmative speaker in this debate, So you have to prove that American citizens' firearms should be taken away. If you cannot do this, You have lost this debate.

Your side of this debate is to prove that the people's firearms should be taken away. Please begin offering evidence to support this idea.
back to you!
billsands

Pro

To argume an absolute is pointless and absurd, What would be the point of taking all fire arms from people, Would that include the military and police, Farmers, Hunters, Plinkers? I don't see the logic. . That said there are many in this nation who should be diisarmed and harsh laws need to be put in pace to do that. The felon the drug addict the mentally ill, Wife beaters drunks, People who don't pay their traffic tickets speed in their cars, The reckless, To make this absolute is illogical but there are many people that present a good reason to be deprived of arms
also there are certain types of guns people all private citizens should be prohibited from having. You can't reace a ferrari on the street, There are some cars so powerful and fast it is illegal for civilians to drive them on a road, By the same logic some guns have no rational purpose in the civilian world, And those guns should be totally removed or at least grandfathered.
Debate Round No. 2
Eugenious

Con

Something that you are obviously ignoring is that you accepted the challenge to defend an absolute! By accepting this challenge, You must defend your side or you lose. Please actually start doing that, Or just give up and forfeit.

Next, We aren't talking about the military. We are talking about the everyday citizen. I agree that criminals should not be allowed to possess guns! That's just obvious! But you have to prove that the everyday citizen should not have firearms. You yourself said that guns themselves are bad in the poll you voted on, So please start defending this view. If you can't, Please retract the statement, Admit that you were wrong, And we'll forget about it. Your only other option is to debate this thing out. Stop stalling and defend your view, Or forfeit.

Finally, The reason why we have certain larger guns, Such as assault rifles, Is to protect us from government tyranny. This was one of the main purposes behind the second amendment. Please answer this.

Back to you!
billsands

Pro

no i did not i agreed to argue about absolutes, Absolutes are absurd
Debate Round No. 3
Eugenious

Con

You accepted this debate! That means that you must defend your side! Anyone reading this, Do you see what's happening? I just posted my arguments, And rather than try to refute them, My opponent literally posted one sentence about why he wasn't even going to debate. You accepted this debate. You agreed to the requirements of this debate, So you must naturally prove your side of this debate. This isn't rocket science! Just do your job in this debate! This is very cowardly debate style. You're not even debating me! Please answer my arguments! Is that such an unreasonable demand? If you read the terms when you accepted this debate, You would have seen that it said you job is to prove the pro side of this debate. IF you cannot do that, Just admit defeat.
billsands

Pro

there are no absolutes, That is my argument, So i win
Debate Round No. 4
Eugenious

Con

You make absolutely no sense. Do you just not listen? I said that since you accepted the debate, You accepted to defend the pro side of this debate! What do you not understand about this? Answer my arguments, Or just forfeit!
billsands

Pro

billsands forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Eugenious 3 years ago
Eugenious
Well, I see what you mean, Sort of, But he DID accept the debate. He accepted to prove the affirmative (pro_ side. So, Whether or not he agrees with it in the end, He did agree to do it. He hasn't done that, So he should lose this debate.
Posted by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
Technically, Pros "ansolute" point is right. If you believe two Americans should he restricted, You believe Americans should. . .
Posted by Eugenious 3 years ago
Eugenious
This just might be the most ridiculous debate I've done so far. My opponent has ignored literally EVERY QUESTION, And my opponent has neglected to even TRY to defend his side. Very odd, Indeed.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.