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

Should Adults Have the Right To Carry a Concealed Handgun?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Anonymous has forfeited round #2.
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: 4/6/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 731 times Debate No: 112412
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Hello everyone, I am looking forward to debating someone on this topic.


i. Overview

Following the debate structure, any violations should be taken off by the voters when the debate is finished. I'm probably going to regret leaving this open acceptance, but whatever.

1. No swearing/personal insults.

2. No trolling.

3. Follow the round structure for the debate.

4. Have fun, of course.

5. In round 4, the Con MUST waive the round to Pro. This is so that everyone has the equal amount of rounds to argue, 3 for Con and 3 for Pro. If you violate this, I hope the voters will take points off/ignore the round.

6. Use the definitions I provide to put forth your argument. If you have a problem with the definitions, please ask me to change them and I will see what I can do.

7. In your conclusion, summarize your arguments from before, don't provide new arguments.

ii. Debate Structure:

Round 1:

Pro - Rules/Background
Con - Intro argument

Round 2:

Pro - Rebuttal/Opening argument

Con - Rebuttal/Argument

Round 3:

Pro - Rebuttal/Argument

Con - Rebuttal/Conclusion (no new arguments)

Round 4:

Pro - Conclusion ONLY (no rebuttals this round)

Con - Waive Round

2 arguments, 2 rebuttals, and 1 conclusion for each person.


i. Definitions:

a firearm (such as a revolver or pistol) designed to be held and fired with one hand. [1]

Concealed carry: the act or practice of carrying a concealed firearm in public or the legal right to do so. [2]

Adult: fully developed and mature. [3] When is someone an adult? Most laws recognize around 18 years of age. [4]

That's it for now, I look forward to a good debate. Good luck!


[1] -

[2] -

[3] -

[4] -


I accept all of the rules and I am ready for this debate. I am arguing that guns should be banned, correct?
Debate Round No. 1


Yes, you are for guns being banned. Unfortunately, I don't think you read the debate structure, but you were supposed to put your introductory argument forward in the 1st round. This is fine, I'll just adjust the debate structure. Here's the modified version:

Debate Structure:

Round 1:

Pro - Rules/Background
Con - Acceptance

Round 2:

Pro - Opening argument(s)
Con - Rebuttal/Intro argument(s)

Round 3:

Pro - Rebuttal/Argument(s)
Con - Rebuttal/Argument(s)


Pro - Rebuttal/Conclusion
Con - Rebuttal if needed/Conclusion

This is how we will go forward with this debate. Anyway, onto my opening argument!


i. Introductory:

First, I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this challenge. I look forward to a great debate with you! l will be arguing FOR the fact that a civilian should have the right conceal carry. This means the right to own and carry a handgun, not only in the private confines of their residence, but also in public. My opponent will be argument AGAINST the fact that handguns should be allowed to be carried in public. Keep in mind that this is a concealed carry, not open.

ii. Arguments in Round 1:

The arguments I will be putting forward in this first round are as follows:

1. Concealed carry laws usually deter/lower crime.

2. Laws that restrict owning/obtaining a firearm/handgun are usually ineffective.

3. People with concealed weapons can stop crime.

These will be my first three arguments, I will continue with more in the later rounds.


i. Overall in the United States:

One of the common misconceptions in the United States is that concealed carry usually leads to more crime. This however, is not the case. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, between 2007 and 2014, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.2 per 100,000. Why is this important? The reason why is because in the United States as a whole, conceal carry permits for women have increased by 270% and men by 156% since 2007. To top it all off, overall violent crime in the United States fell by 25% between 2007 and 2014. [1]

To see these numbers on a graph, take a look below.

ii. Florida:

A prime example of concealed carry laws lowering crime is present in the state of Florida. On October 1, 1987, Florida’s concealed law became effective. Since then, crime has lowered exponentially. [2] The crime in Florida went from almost 11 murder per 100,000 to 5 by 2014 according to the FBI. [3]

iii. Texas:

Another example that we have the state of Texas, which enacted a law permitting concealed carry in 1996. Since then, the murders per 100,000 has dropped from 8 to 4 in a study by the FBI, almost half the amount originally. [4]

These numbers show that when concealed carry laws are enacted into place in the United States of America it overall helps lower violent crime. This also debunks the misconception that concealed carry causes more crime.


Many people think that banning firearms will cause crime to be lowered. This is not the case, as many states that enact bans on certain firearms actually experience more crime, or it does nothing to help the crime. Here are some examples.

i. Chicago:

Chicago is known as the "murder-capital" of the United States, due to the fact that so many people are killed there yearly. The crime rate is through the roof, and many people are calling for help for the city. One of the ways they tried to stop the crime from happening was by banning certain handguns for citizens in the city. This ban occurred in 1981, and since then the amount of crimes committed by handguns has doubled from 40% to 80%. This is one of the key reasons why Chicago continues to struggle with crime. [5] These numbers are shown on the graph below.

ii. Washington D.C.:

Another example of a handgun ban going haywire is the handgun ban that was put into place in Washington D.C. in 1975. The handgun ban was put into place to help the crime lower in the district, but little did the lawmakers know that this would raise crime. The murder rate per 100,000 went from 30 to 80 between 1975 and 1993. [6] The ban was eventually struck down in 2008 due to its ineffectiveness. The graph for the statistics is also present below.

Luckily, Washington D.C. came to its senses and actually struck down the law. Since then, the murders per 100,000 have been lowered to about 15. However, Chicago has still not struck down its handgun ban, and crime continues to be a problem.


i. Revoked Permit Rates:

People who conceal carry usually are responsible individuals based on statistics. The state of Florida had to revoke about 11,000 permits from 1987 to 2017, but compared to the amount of people who actually have concealed carry permits this is extremely small. This means that per 100,000 permit holders, only 2.4% will ever have their permit actually revoked. [7] Now you may say, what about mass shootings? Concealed carry persons usually don't commit mass shootings. As a matter of fact, there have been only four people with concealed carry permits that have committed mass shootings. [8]

ii. People With Permits Stopping Crime:

There have been many cases where people with concealed carry permits have actually stopped mass shootings. The Crime Prevention Research Center have reported more than two dozen cases of where a crime has been hindered by a citizen with a concealed carried weapon. [9] One of the stories was in Rocklege, Florida, where two concealed carry handgun permit owners stopped an attack on an automotive shop. This shows that people with concealed carry handguns can stop crime, and also shows by the previous crime statistics I showed.


Based on my statistics and arguments provided, it shows that concealed carry laws are effective in lowering crime, and that laws banning handguns or any other firearm usually are ineffective. People with concealed carry permits can also stop crime, as provided by the examples in my argument. Banning concealed handguns would be ineffective to lowering crime, maybe even raise it, and also prohibit concealed carry owners to have a chance of stopping crime.

I would look forward to seeing my opponents' rebuttal, as well as his intro argument. Over to you, Con!


[1] -

[2] -

[3] -

[4] -

[5] -

[6] -

[7] -

[8] -

[9] -

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Anonymous 3 years ago
No problem
Posted by Anonymous 3 years ago
My opening argument should be up tomorrow by 7 PM. Been a busy week, but I will definitely get this done. Thanks for your patience.
This debate has 4 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.