The Instigator
EJR925
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
hardward
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Gun Control

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: 11/13/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 714 times Debate No: 118957
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

EJR925

Con

I am against further gun laws and regulations. The current regulations/laws are necessary. I am pro gun and believe that people should have the basic right to defend themselves against foreign and domestic threats. I stand on prohibiting felons, Mentally ill, And domestic violence perpetrators from purchasing firearms. Also I think we should increase the penalties for gun-related crimes.

THE 2ND AMENDMENT DOES MAKE GUN OWNERSHIP A RIGHT
- The 2nd Amendment clearly says, "A well-regulated Militia, Being necessary to the security of a free state, The right of the people to keep and bear arms, Shall not be infringed. " I want to dissect the meaning of this. Let's focus on the phrase, "the right of the people. " The phrase, "the right of the people" comes up a few times in the Constitution. For example, The 1st Amendment gives the right of the people to peacefully assemble to protest the government. The right of the people is obvious to protect people's rights. What about the phrase, "a well-regulated Militia. " What was the word "Militia" understood at the time? According to the Militia Act of 1792, Defined Militia to be all white males 18-45. Of course today it would mean people of all races and women also. Now on the phrase, "to the security of a free state, " in the 1790's a free state didn't mean to represent an individual state like New York or Delaware but rather a free country. A country free of tyranny and corruption. An armed citizenry is a threat against a tyrannical government. This does not mean this Amendment is unlimited, Reasonable restrictions have already been implemented. A disarmed citizenry makes you vulnerable to the government, The government can do whatever they want with you. George Washington once said, "When any nation mistrusts its citizens with guns, It is sending a clear message. It no longer trusts its citizens because such a government has evil plans. "

Over 98% of mass shootings happen in "gun free zones. " According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, In gun free zones have been targets of over 98% of mass shootings. The Crime Prevention Research Center found that a little over 1% of mass public shootings since 1950 have happened in places that were not considered gun-free zones. In October 2015 only two mass shootings in the U. S. Since 1950 have occurred in an area where citizens were not prevented from carrying a gun according to the President of the Crime Prevention Research Center John Lott Jr.

Gun ownership does not correlate with a higher murder rate. In comparison to countries like Russia, Venezuela, And Mexico, The U. S. Has a much higher number of guns per capita, Yet a lower murder rate. Take Switzerland for example. A nation of around 8 million people armed like crazy and 2 million guns in circulation having limited gun regulation. Switzerland saw less than 120 homicides committing with a gun, And also have a low crime rate.

Gun bans are ineffective and yes I mean the "gun buyback" program in Australia. According to the Center of Disease Control (CDC), Quote "There is empirical evidence that gun turn in programs are ineffective, As noted in the 2005 NRC study Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review. For example, In 2009, An estimated 310 million guns were available to civilians in the United States (Krouse, 2012), But gun buy-back programs typically recover less than 1, 000 guns (NRC, 2005). On the local level, Buy-backs may increase awareness of firearm violence. However, In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, For example, Guns recovered in the buy-back were not the same guns as those most often used in homicides and suicides (Kuhn et al. , 2002). " A British Journal of Criminology study 2007 & a 2008 University of Melbourne study found that Australia's temporary gun ban did not appear to effect the ALREADY declining murder rate. Correlation is not necessarily causation. "Prior to 1996, There was already a clear downward [trend] in firearm homicides, And this pattern continued after the buyback, " wrote Crime Research Prevention Center President John Lott of Australia. "It is hence difficult to link the decline to the buyback. "

Defensive gun use is HIGHER than criminal firearm use. Direct quote from the Daily Wire, "The number of defensive gun uses are higher than the number of criminal firearm uses. There was a range of 500, 000 to over 3 million defensive gun uses in 2013, According to research from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council published by the CDC. That same year, There were 11, 208 firearm homicides and 414, 562 nonfatal illegal gun uses, According to the CDC and National Justice Institute, Respectively. Even when taking the low end of the defensive gun uses, It's clear that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal gun uses by Americans. "

The problem is criminals inflicting evil acts, Not law abiding citizens wishing to protect themselves and their loved ones.
hardward

Pro

I'd like to start by saying that I agree that it is our constitutional right as American citizens to own firearms. That being said, I do believe we need stricter and more secure gun control.

I think we can all agree that gun violence is a large problem in the United States. In the first 312 days of 2018, There were 307 mass shooting in the United States. I believe that this number directly correlates with the number of guns in the country. You cited Switzerland as an example, Saying that they have 2 million guns among 8 million people. That means that Switzerland has 25% as many guns as compared to citizens. The United States, On the other hand, Has an estimated 393 million guns among it's 326 million citizens, So there are 120% as many guns as compared to citizens.

It's often said that if guns were not available, Then the perpetrators would likely just kill people in large crowds with their cars, Given that many of them are suicidal (or at least mentally unstable) anyway. Wouldn't it be crazy if we needed to actually take a driving test in order to be licensed to drive a car? Or if we needed liability insurance to pay for any damages we caused with that car?

Why can't these same restrictions be placed upon guns? No one ever complains about how long it takes to get your driver's license, Or ho to process is unfair. This would allow for law abiding citizens to have guns and would ensure that only law abiding citizens have guns.

Additionally, I don't see how the "gun-free zone" part is relevant, As I am aware that mass-murderers are willing to break the law. My goal is to make it so that they never have a gun to bring into the gun-free zone in the first place.
Debate Round No. 1
EJR925

Con

EJR925 forfeited this round.
hardward

Pro

hardward forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
EJR925

Con

EJR925 forfeited this round.
hardward

Pro

hardward forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
EJR925

Con

EJR925 forfeited this round.
hardward

Pro

hardward forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
EJR925

Con

EJR925 forfeited this round.
hardward

Pro

hardward forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by McSloth 2 years ago
McSloth
@Shavo

I suggest you go back and read what I said, Nowhere did I say the solution to gun violence is taking away guns or people"s right to defend themselves. I freely admitted to not knowing the answer to this problem, I honestly don"t think anyway has the perfect solution. Regardless, Something needs to be done, Inaction isn"t helping anyone or any side. It"s also important to note that common sense gun control DOES NOT mean the federal government is taking away your guns. It is simply closing loopholes and making it harder for certain potentially dangerous people from getting ahold of firearms, Not to mention I would argue that the US should have a comprehensive gun registry. Is that all so difficult to wrap your head around? Also, Omar brings up an excellent point, Mass shooting deaths are dwarfed by the number of people killed each year in homicides and suicide (https://fivethirtyeight. Com/features/gun-deaths/). The fact that a gun is involved in all those deaths shows that something needs to be done, What that something ends up being, However, Is still up for debate.
Posted by McSloth 2 years ago
McSloth
This website is broken, I can't post any comments.
Posted by JesusChrist4Ever 2 years ago
JesusChrist4Ever
Gun laws won't do anything. The same people who break the law now will still break the law even if new laws are in place. Instead of controlling guns, Why don't we help the people with mental illnesses who are responsible for these shootings?
Posted by rebel59 2 years ago
rebel59
Its not a gun problem people, Its a mental illness issue. Period.
Posted by zhaod1 2 years ago
zhaod1
I would advocate for only responsible people to get guns.
Shavo
The problem is today that gun laws vary enormously by state. Some states have very lenient gun laws.
Posted by Shavo 2 years ago
Shavo
So you're saying, The solution to crime is to prevent people from defending themselves?
Strict background checks already exist.

You know what my solution would be?
To advocate for more people to get guns. Washington posts say right now only 20 to 30% of America has guns.
Having a fire arm would make it much more easier to defend yourself.

School shootings and "mass shootings"(which has no proper definition) are very unfortunate. But how is taking guns away going to stop that?
U. S. Rep John Faso says "The vast majority of crime that is gun related is committed by people who illegally are possessing that firearm"
"Only about 13 percent purchased the gun from a store or pawn shop. . . 60 percent of inmates illegally procured the gun they used" - Webster, Politifacts

@McSloth please respond
Posted by omar2345 2 years ago
omar2345
Mass shootings are not comparable to murders. Murders happen more often. Murder is more of a problem then mass shootings. You are disingenuous to single out mass shootings as though that is the biggest. Compare murder and mass shooting. More Americans then injured, Dead by mass shootings.
Posted by McSloth 2 years ago
McSloth
What's your solution then? This country obviously has a serious problem when it comes to gun related crime, We have a problem and both sides can agree on this fact I would hope. If gun control isn't the solution to the problem then what is? How do we solve this problem? I would love to hear your opinion.
Posted by Varrack 2 years ago
Varrack
I'll accept this if we do it on this site: https://www. Debateart. Com

This place is dead and I don't see any debate getting attention here.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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