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

"You take their guns, I'll keep my gun"

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
Floridagirl021 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: 3/1/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 356 times Debate No: 109963
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Gun violence is all over the news. The topic of gun control has come up again an again, more recently because of the high school shooting in Parkland, Florida. People want the government to take more extreme actions in gun control.
These people are acting irrationally, they are letting their current fears cloud their common sense. Someone says that a US citizen should not be allowed to own guns and that all existing firearms should be taken away. Well, if the government apprehends the guns, the only people who will give them up are the law abiding citizens. The criminals who we want the guns taken away from, who have possession of illegal firearms, will not give them up. It would be a futile move on the government to prohibit the ownership of guns.


You should be able to have hunting rifles, but nothing else. Why do you need an assault rifle? You can put as many regulations and background checks as you want but there are too many people out there with problems that we don"t know about until it"s too late. The background checks and regulations should still be put in place to reduce the amount of mentally ill people with guns, but someone will still get a gun, and it"s better that that gun is a hunting rifle that can not cause mass shootings rather than an assault rifle that can. Even in Colonial times when the Second Amendmant was first enacted, the amount of gun powder you could have was regulated, and that"s when they only had Muscat"s! It"s not denying your right to bear arms if you still have a hunting rifle, but with more advanced guns must come tighter restrictions and reforms.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
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
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
Define an assault rifle and define a hunting rifle. I assume you mean bolt action hunting rifle so the difference is semi automatic so are you asking to ban semi automatic weapons such as the majority of rifles AND pistols or are you just asking to ban assault rifles.
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
So the idea I get is only people who do not own guns can attack groups of people at random, this is because breaking a law by stealing is not killing anyone. There for much better and safer a crime for the public and should not be punished by law enforcing. Leaving some-one defenseless to die is simply not legally pulling the trigger, and we can no longer follow the law, it is not safe?
Is this principle correct?
This debate has 2 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.