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

Should We Have Gun Control?

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
rightbuttcheekgeekpeak 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: 10/19/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 583 times Debate No: 96258
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




Now, I have a school project. I have to debate against gun control! How can i do that if i dont have anyh arguments plz help give argument. I already have that 1) you can lie on the tests... 2) it defies the second amenment Thanks!


If I correctly understand the debate suggested here, you want me to provide arguments against gun control, so that you can use them in school.

1. The Founding Fathers did not put the right to bear arms into the Constitution by accident. It wasn't about hunting or fishing.
They did not include the right to bear fishing poles when they amended the Constitution. The right to bear arms is part of a Check and Balance system the Founding Fathers intended to prevent tyranny.

They understood that a government of the people, by the people, for the people would NEVER have a reason to fear its people. But a government that was considering abusing its people, would now have reason to consider the consequences of those actions.

The Nazis were huge Gun Control advocates, because this made Jews, Homosexuals and political opponents much easier to kill.

The Night of the Broken Glass (Kristallnacht)--the infamous Nazi rampage against Germany's Jews--took place in November 1938. It was preceded by the confiscation of firearms from the Jewish victims. On Nov. 8, the New York Times reported from Berlin, "Berlin Police Head Announces 'Disarming' of Jews," explaining:

The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been "disarmed" with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment

When the Nazis invaded nations, they gave their citizens 24 hours to surrender their firearms.

From time to time, evil will arise to assume the helm of power, even in a Democracy/Republic such as ours.

In such times, its only the threat of self defense, that may keep you safe.

It is the last Check and Balance the Founding Fathers left us.

2. Guns don't kill people...Crazy people kill people.

Gun Control didn't stop 9/11 (2996 deaths)
Gun Control didn't stop the Oklahoma City Bombing (168 deaths)

A gun is just a tool. If a lunatic wants to kill, a gun is an extremely ineffective tool to choose.
Even in times of war a gun is extremely ineffective.
The GAO states that it takes 250,000 bullets to kill one insurgent

Despite that, a gun remains an extremely effective method by which to rid ourselves of tyrants.

That is the real reason tyrants support gun control.
And that is the reason the Founding Fathers gave us this protection.

3. Criminal don't obey the law.
You can pass all the laws you want, but criminals are not going to obey them.
A person contemplating pulling the trigger on another human being is not going to care about getting a fine if he doesn't turn in his gun.

The end result of this thinking is that only dangerous violent criminals have guns and people who obey the law will have no way to protect themselves.

Harvard Study

According to a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which cites the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulation, the more guns a nation has, the less criminal activity.
The reality is that there"s simply no empirical evidence indicating gun control reduces crime. There are nations with far stricter gun-control laws than the United States but higher murder rates; along with Russia, Mexico and Brazil are examples. There are also countries with high gun-ownership rates but very little homicide, such as Israel and Switzerland (which has the world"s ninth-lowest murder rate).

Conclusion -
Nevertheless, the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra.149 To bear that burden would
at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.

Do you need more?

If every gun were taken from the streets, nothing
Debate Round No. 1


Lol thanks :)Im assuming thats all


ok good luck
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
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
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.