CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
32
Yes No
Debate Score:43
Arguments:37
Total Votes:47
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (9)
 
 No (28)

Debate Creator

orangepeel(188) pic



Gun control

Just want to see why people want more gun legislation.

Yes

Side Score: 11
VS.

No

Side Score: 32

It seems most people have this fantasy about shooting somebody breaking into their house in the middle of the night. Statistically, it's far more likely that they or a member of their family, especially their own children will die as a result of there being a gun in the home, not some street hood intruding on their castle. The classic argument is that "Criminals don't care about gun bans, so a gun ban only takes guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens". I believe I read not long ago that there are close to 300 million legally owned firearms in the United States. With a house full of guns on every corner, where do you think criminals get them from?

Side: yes
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

It seems most people have this fantasy about shooting somebody breaking into their house in the middle of the night. Statistically, it's far more likely that they or a member of their family, especially their own children will die as a result of there being a gun in the home, not some street hood intruding on their castle.

So people shouldn't have the capacity to defend themselves?

The classic argument is that "Criminals don't care about gun bans, so a gun ban only takes guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens". I believe I read not long ago that there are close to 300 million legally owned firearms in the United States. With a house full of guns on every corner, where do you think criminals get them from?

Well, as a child raised by ex-criminals on both sides of my family I can tell you that we would never purchase guns from the store or pawn shops. The best way to acquire guns is via yard sales, or have a person buy the gun for you, that way your name doesn't show on the paper work. Seriously, who is stupid enough to follow gun regulations at face value and get their name attached to a model of firearm? That's just asking for trouble.

Did I mention black market arms dealers? They aren't THAT hard to find.

Also, why in god's name would you steal a gun from an armed house? That's the riskiest thing to do, because you need to know where it's hidden and you always risk being caught in the process by the armed owner.

Side: No
0 points

So people shouldn't have the capacity to defend themselves?

With a gun? No.

Well, as a child raised by ex-criminals on both sides of my family I can tell you that we would never purchase guns from the store or pawn shops. The best way to acquire guns is via yard sales, or have a person buy the gun for you, that way your name doesn't show on the paper work.

I see, so banning guns just stops law abiding citizens from having them, yet your family of criminals buys them from people who legally obtained them, or has them legally obtained for them. That makes sense.

Also, why in god's name would you steal a gun from an armed house? That's the riskiest thing to do, because you need to know where it's hidden and you always risk being caught in the process by the armed owner.

Why? I don't know, ask some of the people who stole 1.7 million guns between 1993 and 2002.

Is it really that difficult to case a house for a couple days and figure out when somebody's at work? I don't even come from a family of criminals and I'm sure I'd have no problem doing this.

Side: yes
orangepeel(188) Disputed
1 point

Statistically, it's far more likely that they or a member of their family, especially their own children will die as a result of there being a gun in the home, not some street hood intruding on their castle.

That's true, but what people aren't told is that the number of deaths are just below 50.

Criminals don't care about gun bans, so a gun ban only takes guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens."I believe I read not long ago that there are close to 300 million legally owned firearms in the United States. With a house full of guns on every corner, where do you think criminals get them from?

80% of all deaths from firearms are from illegally bought guns, either smuggled in from another state or over the boarder from Mexico (in the US anyway).

Every single massacre has been in a gun controlled area. Columbine, Albertville, Virginia, whereas not a single one has been in places where citizens have been allowed to carry guns. A natural response would be more gun regulation is going to help, but people need to look at the facts rather than just ideology. Think about it: if you were a madman and you wanted to kill as many people as possible, would you rather go to a gun-free area or an area where most people are carrying guns.

Gun regulation is based upon the misled knowledge that if you give a gun to the average person, they will go about trying to kill as many people as possible, but in actual fact the average person is relatively good and sane enough not to do that. The government can stop law abiding citizens from protecting themselves, but they can never prevent criminals from doing so.

What really kills, the gun or the person carrying it?

Side: No
TERMINATOR(6766) Disputed
1 point

It seems most people have this fantasy about shooting somebody breaking into their house in the middle of the night.

What are you saying? That people desire to kill a burglar, or that people desire to protect their family?

Statistically, it's far more likely that they or a member of their family, especially their own children will die as a result of there being a gun in the home

So that means that people oughtn't have the right to protect themselves when a break-in does occur?

not some street hood intruding on their castle.

But it can happen.

A large portion of the people I know have been robbed.

The classic argument is that "Criminals don't care about gun bans, so a gun ban only takes guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens".

What is wrong with this argument?

I believe I read not long ago that there are close to 300 million legally owned firearms in the United States.

And if those 300,000,000 guns were taken away, what would come of the millions of illegally owned firearms?

With a house full of guns on every corner,

That's quite the exaggeration

where do you think criminals get them from?

Many places.

Side: No

Strict gun control is needed. It is now 2015 and gun violence continues to grow.

Side: Yes

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has a startling revelation for 2015. It is projected that deaths from guns will surpass deaths from car fatalities in 2015. An estimated 33,000 Americans will lose their lives from guns as opposed to an estimated 32,000 Americans who will die in car accidents.

The gun violence in America is an American Shame!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015

Side: Yes
0 points

I don't have an issue with hunting rifles (300, 306 etc) , even handguns are probably ok. My question is why would anybody need to own an M-16 or an AK-47? I was at a gun shop last week that had an assault rifle on sale with a fucking gernade launcher attached to it. "Well, you can't buy the gernades legally." Then why the fuck is it on there? I'm pretty sure when our forefathers wrote the right to bear arms in the constitution they weren't envisioning the assualt rifle.

Side: yes
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

I don't have an issue with hunting rifles (300, 306 etc) , even handguns are probably ok.

Many people feel this way.

My question is why would anybody need to own an M-16 or an AK-47?

Simple answer, really. Fun. Why did I build a flamethrower when I was a kid in school? Why do young boys make pipe bombs and enjoy firecrackers? It's fun. Lighting things on fire and blowing stuff up is fun, and having powerful guns is especially so.

I was at a gun shop last week that had an assault rifle on sale with a fucking gernade launcher attached to it. "Well, you can't buy the gernades legally." Then why the fuck is it on there?

Because some of us are drawn to big weapons and would like to see one, and on the down low you can make grenades or buy them and launch them in no-man's land.

What ever happened to just accepting that some of us like to shoot things, blow things up, etc? It's good, clean fun and nobody is hurt from it.

Culture of fear maybe?

Side: No

Simple answer, really. Fun.

What does fund matter when safety is involved?

Why did I build a flamethrower when I was a kid in school?

How did you do it, pray tell!

Why do young boys make pipe bombs and enjoy firecrackers?

I don't know; I never did. However, I'd be interested in knowing how to do so.

Lighting things on fire and blowing stuff up is fun, and having powerful guns is especially so.

Both of which are extremely dangerous, however. If you are arguing that the danger/power is fun, I could say the same thing for rape or murder, depending on the person.

Because some of us are drawn to big weapons and would like to see one

They are aesthetically pleasant.

and on the down low you can make grenades or buy them and launch them in no-man's land.

How many people actually know how to make them?

What ever happened to just accepting that some of us like to shoot things, blow things up, etc?

Some of us? Are you saying that you are like this? If so, this is a side of you I've never seen: the human side.

Culture of fear maybe?

Mainly since the '90s.

I'd say somewhere around the mid-90s: Amber Hagerman, JonBenet Ramsey - the media paid too much attention to these child-murders and people came to accept them as normal.

Side: No
liberty1(16) Disputed
1 point

Hey quick question for you...why were these weapons made? They were made for the government, the same government that wants to take them away. P.S. I have many guns and as I stated before the only time have pulled the trigger on any gun for violence was for the government. You folks that think your political party can be trusted are sadly mistaken.

Side: yes
orangepeel(188) Disputed
1 point

I'm pretty sure when our forefathers wrote the right to bear arms in the constitution they weren't envisioning the assualt rifle.

No because they didn't actually exist at the time. But the reason for the second amendment is so that we will be able to protect ourselves from the government if we need to. If guns such as M-16's and AK-47's are restricted to government use, then who's more powerful? The people or the government? The fact that someone has a gun is not the point of the second amendment. It's the right to have a weapon to defend ourselves from the government that will tell us we don't need them.

If you gave the average person a grenade or an AK-47, what do you think they will do with it? There's a misconception that they will go mad and shoot everything in sight, when really they will probably lock it away.

Now tell me, what would be more useful during a home invasion: the AK-47 or a hunting rifle?

Side: No
IMright101(107) Disputed
1 point

You make a good point on the home invasion thing but how often does that actually happen?

I don't have any stats but I'm pretty sure there are a lot more accidental deaths from Timmy grabbing dad's AK and playing cowboys and indians with the neighbor kids than dad using it to stop a home invasion, and if a home invasion is reason for buying it why wouldn't a handgun do the trick?

Side: yes
Cicero(239) Disputed
1 point

The founding fathers didn't envision phones, or television, or the internet, should our first amendment rights be limited to things they had like print, and speech?

Side: No
saintlouis(161) Disputed
1 point

M-16 or an AK-47

These weapons require a specific, and very expensive, permit to own. So if a man is shot with an m16 or ak47, it would be very easy for authorities to find everyone in the city who owns them and see who did it. Adding to that, People who would go on a killing rampage would not be able to obtain a license to carry these weapons.

Side: No
1 point

These weapons require a specific, and very expensive, permit to own. So if a man is shot with an m16 or ak47, it would be very easy for authorities to find everyone in the city who owns them and see who did it. Adding to that, People who would go on a killing rampage would not be able to obtain a license to carry these weapons.

Exactly, which is why anyone with half a brain obtains these guns from shadowy sources, if they intend to commit a crime.

Side: No
orangepeel(188) Disputed
1 point

That's exactly the point! The fact that it is so hard to obtain a gun has created the statistic of 80 percent of all gun crimes committed with illegal firearms. Not only that, the good people who abide by the law cannot protect themselves?

Side: yes
2 points

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

Side: No
2 points

Wake up...no law is ever going to make the world safe and remove all accidents and crimes. The world has sharp edges and sometimes people get hurt, not to make light of this it is awful when bad things happen. However the answer isn't to have a bunch of criminals in Washington take away more of our rights, because the only people that lose are those of us that follow the law and behave responsible. It is time for us to start remembering that liberty and freedom has a price tag...that is we may from time to time not like the actions of our neighbors. We may not like their morals, manners, or actions however if they are not harming you then its not your business. You cannot legislate human behavior or actions if I want a gun in my home it is my business, if my neighbor wants to use drugs that is his business, or marry someone of the same sex, etc... Stop trying to legislate a perfect world the only thing you gain is loss of liberty. Not for nothing but the only time I was forced to use a gun for violence was when the same gang of criminals in Washington, that are often lobby to remove gun rights, sent me to some lousy desert to do there bidding. I don't support violence in any way shape or form..but if someone wants a gun its there business and it doesn't mean there violent people. Stop allowing these bums in D.C. to remove our rights, that is both parties, government has the monopoly on force and violence don't trust it. Make no mistake I am not an anarchist...I believe in liberty! Yes some government is needed but to enforce natural law that is it!! And not to pick on democrats but if you think your party is any better when it comes to peace then the lousy republicans...What parties held the white house during Vietnam and the Korean War. Wars of nation building that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Wake up and embrace liberty it works when its real!!!

Side: No

I do not fully understand the purpose of such legislation. Are they trying to cut down on illegal firearms, accidental deaths, or both? I presume this pertains to the U.S.A.

Illegal Firearms

Obviously, legislation cannot reduce the number of these.

Accidental deaths

I believe that Liberty or Death was one of the founding principles of the U.S.A. It seems stupid to replace one tyranny with another. Governments are addicted to removing people's rights, and every effort should be made to prevent them from doing so.

Both

An attempt to remove both will be covered by the above two arguments.

Side: No

Are they trying to cut down on illegal firearms, accidental deaths, or both?

Yes, and they are trying to do so in quite an absurd manner.

I presume this pertains to the U.S.A.

Usually it does. That's the problem with not being an American.

I believe that Liberty or Death was one of the founding principles of the U.S.A.

That was the old way! Modern Americans hardly even know about the Revolutionary War.

It seems stupid to replace one tyranny with another.

It does, doesn't it? You'd think that people would realize this.

Governments are addicted to removing people's rights,

Mainly progressives. They're the exact opposite of libertarians.

and every effort should be made to prevent them from doing so.

Which is the reason that the "right to bear arms" was included in the first point.

*However, you didn't really cover accidental deaths in your "accidental deaths" section. Wouldn't more lives be saved by taking away all of America's legally owned guns?

Side: No

However, you didn't really cover accidental deaths in your "accidental deaths" section. Wouldn't more lives be saved by taking away all of America's legally owned guns?

See liberty or death. The liberty of all overshadows the deaths of few.

Side: No
1 point

Usually it does. That's the problem with not being an American.

Actually it applies worldwide, but most western countries have populations that are fearful and spineless (I'm looking at you Britain, Australia and Canada), so America is one of the few modern nations where owning and operating guns isn't so heavily regulated, and the population has strong, vocal support for it.

Side: No

Guns that kill people on the street are most likely obtained illegally. Tightening gun control for legal firearms that are bought and sold legally would do nothing to stop the crime.

Side: No
1 point

This would only take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.

Side: No
1 point

I support this point. Criminals could really give a fuck less what the laws are. They'll get laundered guns anyways.

Side: No
1 point

But if we have gun control then how are we suppose to overthrow our government when they fuck up?

Side: No
RogueTurk(7) Disputed
1 point

Unfortunately our government has set it up so that we cannot overthrow them, even though it is well within our rights (if not our requirement) as described in the Declaration of Independence.

"...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness".

Our forefathers were truly amazing men.

Side: Hell NO
1 point

Unfortunately our government has set it up so that we cannot overthrow them, even though it is well within our rights (if not our requirement) as described in the Declaration of Independence.

"...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness".

Our forefathers were truly amazing men.

Side: Hell NO