The Instigator
toxictrick137
Pro (for)
The Contender
FollowerofChrist1955
Con (against)

the government is trying to make us give up our gun rights

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
toxictrick137 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/16/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 465 times Debate No: 112876
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

toxictrick137

Pro

i personally think the school shootings are set up by the government so we will finally give up our guns so "nobody else will get hurt". they are doing this so they can make any decision and we cant fight back because nobody will have guns since they're illegal
FollowerofChrist1955

Con

Lies? Really? You have ZERO PROOF that they are calling FOR removal of personal gun ownership. As was previously PROVEN in the Debate http://www.debate.org... the Ban of assault rifles in the United States of America.

The People have no legal Right to Weapons of War ownership in the FIRST PLACE. That is, and was totally fabricated by the People and Not written into the constitution in accordance with the English language. I represent the same argument.

I GIVE YOU THE The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."

Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope. But it should not! It is plainly stated. It does not stipulate by definition and wording the authorization nor RIGHT of the PEOPLE to own WEAPONS OF WAR- save in the capacity of MILITIA!

Read it again! "A well regulated Militia, being necessary/ the right of the people to keep and bear Arms

let's look at that by defintion shall we?

Definition;
Militia

noun: militia; plural noun: militias
a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities, typically in opposition to a regular army.
all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.
Now for the REALLY DENSE- Organized militia. Each state has two mandatory forces, namely the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard. Many states also have state defense forces and a naval militia, which assist, support and augment National Guard forces.

(are we learning yet?)

National Guard/Reserve (who HAVE tanks, and weapons of War!) but they CANNOT TAKE THEM HOME!

You have a Right to bear arms- but NOT BEING MILITIA restricts in common sense and practicality, the rights of "THE PEOPLE" to OWN TANKS OR WEAPONS OF WAR! End of subject! Thank you for playing have we or have we NOT common sense!

The reasoning powers of the founding fathers are obviously more suited to Patriots of State/Country. Being Mature Individuals, with a high degree of competence, fair play and equality of mind, these people set up a Nation. in essense more suited to thinking along the Line of myself and others of National interest above self gratification standards.

and theose less than 21? Forget about it!

Evidence of History- That NO CANNON WAS personally owned by individual persons in the entire Country, save Business concerns and even THEN sparingly ... like maybe 2 in the whole country! Demonstrates that weapons of War were OUTSIDE the RIGHT of ownership of the common man!

so unless you can show evidence- like the kind just revealed to you above? Your just staing like everyone ELSE .... opinion. and opinion isn't evidence of TRUTH!

Now THIS is an example of persons LYING to attempt to persuade others into BELIEVING their opinions .... no evidence mind you ... just opinion;

Yes, private citizens were allowed to own cannons, and many did. It was very common for private merchant ships (for example) to be equipped with cannons. They were called "armed merchantmen" - so yes, "arms" definitely did include cannons.
https://www.reddit.com......

Now lets LOOK at this statement CAREFULLY with UNSHADED glasses. also note he states MANY but gives NO EVIDENCE of the many (NONE) , only militia (merchant ships)

Yes, private citizens were allowed to own cannons ( notice this extremely biased opinion- opinion mind you- not evidence!)

Now note the BIG EVIDENCE this misguided prejudiced fellow uses- private merchant ships (for example) to be equipped with cannons. They were called "armed merchantmen"

Now let US LOOK at this statement a moment- PRIVATE? Merchant ships that transport Goods, are FAR from PRIVATE- they carry , Treasures, Stores, Humanity- being aware of course of Pirates which exist even today- those ... UHHHH supposed private Vessels REQUIRED protection ..... TODAY WE CALL THEM THE COAST GUARD! And Yes they HAVE weapons of war, they are tasked to protect the lanes of shipping which did not exist in this time but emerged later on!
that however isn't proof of anything but self prejudice. Let them actually provide proof of common everyday folks owning cannons, not those who it just made sense that the need for security and protection was common sense necessity!

Who owned a Cannon in antiquity to protect his home, outside royalty, Monarchs and such .... answer ZERO!

so no proof other than opinion? FORGET ABOUT IT!
So yes these prejudiced people spin yarns "higher than haman" but sadly ZERO evidence is ever forth coming! just opinion after opinion, with nothing to back up their assertions , yet History itself DEMONSTRATES the common folk did NOT have cannons! PERIOD! which were weapons of War!
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
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
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
FollowerofChrist1955
Hahaha some Warriors
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
FollowerofChrist1955
Besides there IS NO GUN PROBLEM in the United States,
Just immature people!
The REAL STATISTICS tell everyone they should be on Xanax.

School shootings- 17
Number of Schools 143+ Thousand .... actual impact of guns 0.01%
Number of Gun deaths in 2017= 15+ thousand deaths
Number of citizens 323 Million Souls .... actual impact of guns 0.01%

Number of Abortions just under a million actual impact 0.28%

Conclusion- your peeing your pants on numbers that don"t even register, but you MURDER 3 Times that number LEGALLY!

Put you big girl panties on and butch up!
Your lives are not worth more than those babies you kill. Snap out of your cowardice people!
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
FollowerofChrist1955
GodsWarrior76;
Lying is not what we do, because it is sin! Exercise caution or you effect your witness.
Title of Debate- the government is trying to make us give up our gun rights

Your lie-He never said that the government wants to take our guns.

Give up your Gun Rights you give Up your Guns .... he did not say Assault Rifles he said Guns. Thus the government trying to make you give up your GUN RIGHTS is exactly saying the government WANTS TO take your Guns!

If your gonna exaggerate don"t make comments please. Some of us are not emotionally invested in this debate, and know lies when we hear them. Thank you!
Posted by GodsWarrior76 3 years ago
GodsWarrior76
You're argument had nothing to do with his statement. @FollowerofChrist1955
Posted by GodsWarrior76 3 years ago
GodsWarrior76
Fake news media sources said absolutely NOTHING the inmate that was SHOT, and injured by a security guard, which he saved a lot of people's lives, it was in washington D.C. and fake news organizations like MSNBC don't like to report heroic saves with a gun against a criminal, because the left hates guns.
Posted by GodsWarrior76 3 years ago
GodsWarrior76
He never said that the government wants to take our guns. He said he THINKS that might be trying to do it in secret, because, they can't do it legally, because it's the constitution of America. So I believe the same thing with pro.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
DeletedUser
Good, public citizens should clearly not have guns
This debate has 6 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.