The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Gun Rights

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
acortez1 has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,204 times Debate No: 117823
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




I will start by countering what all pro-gun rights people say: "Guns don't kill people. People kill people. " I understand that it takes a person to pull the trigger, But where are we if there is no trigger to be pulled? Yes, There are ways to kill besides guns, But without them the task would be a lot harder. Of course, Many will say that criminals will get there hands on guns, Just as they do other illegal things. However, I'm not suggesting that taking away guns will fix the problem, I'm just saying that it will help. It seems like a tough case to say that more people would be murdered without guns than with. Keep in mind that firearms are made for one purpose: to kill and injure.


Hello! Fellow Conservative Teenager here!
Thanks for the debate and also the open-mindedness you seem to have. Anyways, There are some things I want to clear in the air. I, As a conservative, Am also tired of children, As well as adults, Who have gotten killed by a firearm. Yes, These accounts are hard to digest indeed. But let me offer some perspective.

I want change to occur as well, But not in the way that most leftists are arguing for. Many want to ban guns completely, Most want to impose restrictions on guns. But, In most cases of the shootings that we have seen so far, These items are already deemed as illegal. Weaponry of that destruction requires high license authority, But most people still get their hands on them. Through the Black Market and Backdoor cuts.

If I were to tell you to walk up to a gun shop owner right now and ask for an AK-47, They wouldn't let you obtain it unless you had the license to do so. Folks like Nik Cruz do not have this license, And so do many other gunmen that we have all seen on media. But how they obtain those firearms is through an illegal route--not the common "gun shops sell guns to bad people" stereotype. Put yourself in the shoes of the gun shop owner, Why would you risk your life to sell a gun to someone who walked into your store, Risking crimes for conspiracy, Among many others. Also, Just like any other business, Gun shop owners have the right to deny service, And this does actually happen a multitude of times.

The left is arguing to make something illegal that is already illegal, Which does not make any sense at all.

Also, There were cases in multiple countries, Including Europe, Who faced a similar issue. The government decided to ban guns, An impulsive reaction if you will. The results were surprising to their opinion. Gun-related crime rates rose higher and murders increased after the legislation was passed and the ban was lifted.

I also have other arguments, But I will save it for later.

As a conservative, I want armed guards in schools and metal detectors in the front doors. School policy ID should be reinforced, And the standard procedure of preparing for these instances must be increased and often practiced.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for being willing to have a reasonable debate with me. I must say, Your arguments made much more sense than most people I talk to about this issue. Anyway, I would like to challenge your credibility when you previously said, "In most cases of shootings we have seen so far, These items are already deemed as illegal. " According to https://www. Statista. Com/statistics/476461/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-legality-of-shooters-weapons/ 72 out of the 100 mass shootings since 1982 were with legally obtained firearms.

You also stated that I am trying to make something illegal that is already illegal. I don't understand what you're saying here, So if you could elaborate that would help. As for the examples of Europe (which is a continent not a country by the way) banning guns, I agree that an instant ban would not have a positive effect. The first step is to ban possession of assault rifles. These are only made for killing purposes. While some criminals would get there hands on them in the black market, The numbers would be significantly lower. As for innocent people defending themselves, A regular gun should be enough. No human being needs something capable of spraying two rounds a second.


Thank you!

For the statistic on mass murders, I am not sure how accurate that is, But there is an opposing startling statistic, Where more than 80% of the items used in mass shootings were obtained illegally. The following is an article, But you are free to explore the statistics in the report. Https://www. Nbcnews. Com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/more-80-percent-guns-used-mass-shootings-obtained-legally-n474441 This is what I mean by the left trying to advocate for something to be illegal that is already pronounced illegal. There are other, More viable and less drastic solutions, As I have mentioned in the above argument, Including strengthening school security.

Also, Let me give an analogy. I am from New Jersey, And state law says that the miles per hour on a highway to be 55 mph. This is already a set law. Yet, People still go over the limit, With cases to do so widely varying. Further, These same folks are the ones that die from car crashes. As a result, "There had been 628 traffic fatalities in New Jersey in 2017 and still rising " the most since 2007 and on pace to finish the year with nearly 100 more deaths than at the recent low point in 2013, When fatalities had dipped to the lowest mark in 91 years", According to http://nj1015. Com/nj-roads-getting-deadlier-traffic-deaths-at-highest-level-in-10-years/.

Also, I would like to argue about people defending themselves. I would like to argue that assault rifles, Among others, Are in fact necessary. If you are suggesting that a grandmother with two of her young grandchildren are watching TV at home while three men burglar said home and that this grandmother is well defended enough by a pistol, I find the likelihood of survival here to be minimal. Especially if one is living in Chicago or Detroit. Some kids' parents need that to protect themselves from folks with bad intentions. If you take away guns, You are taking it away from the people that really need it. The people that use it for killing and only killing and not protecting will still be able to get these firearms, As there has been no statistical or comparative evidence that banning guns would do so. Black Market revenue would skyrocket, Which would be terrible considering the fact that more deadly weapons, Hence its place in the black market, Would be found here.

I would rather be well secured in my home choosing a rifle over a pistol to protect my loved ones.
Debate Round No. 2


I believe you read the title of the article wrong. Https://www. Nbcnews. Com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/more-80-percent-guns-used-mass-shootings-obtained-legally-n474441 (the same one you used in your argument) says that 80% were obtained LEGALLY, Not illegally. You actually gave some good evidence against your side, And causing me to question how accurate your research is. That being said, I still want to address the other points you made. While the black market would increase if assault weapons were banned, It would not make up for the lack of deaths based on the the new laws. If 80% were legally obtained, There's no way the black market would account for that number. As for the Grandma thing, I'll tell you this: While she would probably not be as safe without an assault rifle, The overall number of deaths would go down. It's not as easy to get illegal stuff as some might think.

Also, You stated that people will go higher than the speed limit at varying degrees. But people will still (on average) go slower on a 55 than a 65. They might all speed, But may go 70 instead of 80. Just realize that this argument is about averages. Nothing's going to take away murder, But taking away certain guns is definitely a good start.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Rozguy 3 years ago
Responding to Kendall2020:
People are not afraid to come to the USA because of weapons the people have, But because of our military. Our military is way stronger than any other by far, So that's why nobody attacks is anymore. Also, I understand there would be ways to illegally get assault rifles, But the rates would be lower. Also, As i said in the debate, No civilian needs an assault rifle to defend themselves.
Posted by Kendal2020 3 years ago
Responding to the con side. You mentioned that it needs to be a gradual step by taking assault rifles away first. And I felt the same way just about assault rifles because I thought they were a little ridiculous. But I found two good points not to do that! 1. (Assault rifles and other weapons but assault rifles are the best for this situation) but they keep a lot of countries from wanting to come fight on United States soil because just the dang citizens have strong weapons! And they"re everywhere! (At least where I"m from).
2. If it wasn"t for that then yeah they are a little ridiculous for us to have but if we get rid of them it still won"t keep them out of the hands of criminals because of the black market and smuggling and since the streets are already so flooded!
Posted by Rozguy 3 years ago
In response to AIRino: A pencil is meant to help you, But you can still make mistakes with it. A gun is meant to injure and kill. A pencil is a better analogy for a car.
Posted by Our_Boat_is_Right 3 years ago
Gun bans have proven not to be effective. In England, Murder rates spiked up after their ban. The Australia ban did not work. Places in America with the strictest gun control have the highest murder rates.
Posted by TwiggyStone 3 years ago
Guns save from 500, 000 to 3, 000, 000 lives per year. This takes in not just shooting but also brandishing or threatening with a gun. To say they do more harm than good is fallacious.
Posted by AIRhino 3 years ago
Blaming the fact that deaths happen at the hands of people with guns, Is like me blaming my pencil for failing my math test. I promise that no matter what, Criminals will find their hands on guns. And at that point, We citizens will have nothing to protect ourselves. The same way that people get illegal drugs, Or cheat sheets on a test.
This debate has 0 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.

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