Gun Control
Debate Round Forfeited
mightymiah has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
| Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
| Started: | 12/13/2017 | Category: | Politics | ||
| Updated: | 2 years ago | Status: | Debating Period | ||
| Viewed: | 658 times | Debate No: | 105811 | ||
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)
 Con  Pro I will be accepting your challenge in the debate. I will be arguing against your stance. As the creator of this debate I will allow you to go first. I'm ready and excited for the challenge! |
 |
|
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet. |
 |
|
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet. |
 |
|
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet. |
 |
|
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet. |
 |
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.
https://en.wikipedia.org...
Where your "quote" is a dry, sarcastic remark, mine is at least a quote from a founding father.
Where your "quote" is a dry, sarcastic remark, mine is at least a quote from a founding father.
The basic principle in argument within the 2nd Amendment is that a person must incriminate themselves into an Armed-Force of some kind, then the risk of federal or state compensation for the study of planed murder is a Constitutional conflict in Civil law. This is wrong as a person is expected to be willing to participate in a known creation of crime all in the hope it may server justice in some undefined way.
The fact being a citizen is entitled to defend impartial separation only as people cannot witness Justice only impartial separation without being introduced to taking a side in some way.