8G - Topic 1: Right to Bear Arms
More Restrictions
Side Score: 25
|
 |
Less Restrictions
Side Score: 22
|
|
|
|
|
3
points
3
points
Based ACLU, Americans owning a gun should be restricted harshly. Yearly an average of 112,695 (all ages) are killed within a gun violence. No matter what, laws can be easily broken for personal reasons, more gun control will help lower the levels of armed crimes. Side: More Restrictions
2
points
2
points
2
points
Twenty-six people -- 20 students age 6 and 7, and six adults -- were shot and killed at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012. Because a teenager was able to get a gun. If there were more restrictions the 20 students and six adults would still be alive today. Side: More Restrictions
2
points
1
point
Gun restrictions are obviously related. If there were more gun restrictions first, the school shooting would have never happened.Second, =27 people would not have died, and finally the 1,216 mass shootings after the Sandy Hook Elementary School due to influence. Side: More Restrictions
1
point
The Washington Post shows data that Guns are now killing as many people as cars in the U.S. An average of 30,800 people in the US die yearly due to carsIn 2005, gun deaths outnumbered vehicle deaths in just two states, Alaska and Maryland, plus the District of Columbia. By 2014, gun deaths were greater in 21 states. This shows that if there are more gun restrictions there would be less overall deaths in the US. Side: More Restrictions
Since gun restrictions prevent citizens from protecting themselves, they can be easily harmed. Based on National Crime Victimization Survey Data, a conclusion was made. “Robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of self-protection.” According to The Crime Research Prevention Center the majority of mass shooting tend to occur in gun-free zones. Since 1950, about 99% of mass shootings have taken place within a gun-free zone, such as the Orlando attack, as well as the shooting that resulted in the death of the famous singer, Christina Grimmie. Less gun restrictions will allow for citizens to at least have a chance to protect themselves within any endangering situation. Side: Less Restrictions
1
point
Guns can be used for self-defense, in the scenario of rape, mugging, or house invasion, but with restrictions to only the use of the weapon for self defense and in no intention for harm. This shows that people can still own guns to protect themselves but something as simple as a restriction or a permit could prevent something horrible or possibly a death from happening. Side: More Restrictions
As mentioned before, most gun control laws prevent citizens from protecting themselves. That will create an opportunity for criminals to attack citizens that do not benefit from any firearm. Statistics by Safewise is tell us 74% of the criminals actively try to avoid breaking into houses when the owners are home because the fear of getting shot down with today’s restrictions. Stricter gun control will just decrease this percentage and the murders will be increase. Side: Less Restrictions
1
point
1
point
1
point
|
Stricter Gun Control will create an environment which invite an illegal market to develop guns and it’s not going to stop the bad guys from bearing arms. It will be a opportunity for criminals because guns from black markets don’t have a serial number or any other identification. Side: Less Restrictions
0
points
0
points
The government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled “There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.” That means, for life protection citizens need less restriction to protect themselves against criminals. Side: Less Restrictions
1
point
No matter how strict the restrictions are, criminals will always find a way to break those laws. In that case, people need to be prepared to defend themselves. Based on Crime Prevention Research Center, the majority of Police officers show strong support towards concealed gun carrying. 76% (more than 20,000) of department heads believe that “qualified, law-abiding armed citizens help law enforcement reduce violent crime activity.” Side: More Restrictions
The government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled “There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.” That means, for life protection citizens need less restriction to protect themselves against criminals. Side: Less Restrictions
As a conclusion, strict gun control laws will prevent citizens from protecting themselves during an endangering situation. Based on several statistics, strict gun control laws will only increase the murder/homicide rates. There also seems to be a correlation between strict gun control and police killings. The only solution to this problem is by having less restrictions for gun control. Side: Less Restrictions
1
point
No matter how much laws and legislation is passed to restrict gun ownership, the truth is evident that criminals a.k.a lawbreakers will break the laws to retrieve a firearm, the answer is not more government regulations on guns in the U.S, the framers also intended the 2nd admendment not only for self-defense, but for defense against the possibility of a tyrannical government, less restrictions equals less crime! Think about it I wouldn't try to rob a house if I knew that people have a right to bear arms Side: Less Restrictions
All American individuals must have the right to bear arms with less restrictions not just to prevent themselves from any harm or danger, but also to help decrease murder/suicide/homicide rates. Less restrictions will also help with clearing out black markets. Side: Less Restrictions
Less gun restrictions are vital to our today's society. This has been proven through many different sources and studies. Harsh gun restrictions will not only isolate the society, but it will bring harm to it. Years of information gathering have been put into statistics and they have shown that harsh gun restrictions are effective but rather in a negative way. Side: Less Restrictions
0
points
0
points
You stated that harsh gun restrictions will bring harm to the country. I beg to differ if there are more gun restrictions then citizens will still be able to protect themselves without bringing harm to the country since they will have restrictions. 63% of Americans think that having a gun in their house with restrictions makes them safer, but it does not mean they will harm the country Side: More Restrictions
I do agree with your point, but these restrictions often regulate the citizens from the usage of firearms. According to the Brady Campaign, Connecticut is considered to have one of the toughest gun laws in the country, but despite that, the laws were all broken by a shooter in Newtown. For many years, mass shootings have occurred in the country, within gun-free zones. Side: Less Restrictions
|
