CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:63
Arguments:65
Total Votes:98
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Guns. Fun with Numbers. What do the numbers tell you? (55)

Debate Creator

Amarel(4987) pic



Guns. Fun with Numbers. What do the numbers tell you?

Statistical tools you can use to make your point.

US Stats (CDC):

https://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

World Stats (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation):

https://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare/


Add New Argument
2 points

“Fun “ facts with numbers .......

236 Mass shootings in the U S so far this year one for nearly everyday

456 kids under 11 injured or killed by a gun this so far over 2 for everyday of the year so far

1,917 teens between 12 and 17 killed or injured by a gun so far this year 5 a day for everyday this year

But of course it’s no problem because as that favourite bit of Americana goes “ Buh ,Buh guns don’t kill people , people kill people “

1 point

Dermot i must play Devils Advocate here okay. People kill People not guns because a gun is an inanimate object. It cannot think nor can it feel. With that said no media covers the gun violence in Chicago which has the strict gun laws nor does the media cover the children killed in Chicago.

iamevil(34) Disputed Banned
1 point

People kill People not guns because a gun is an inanimate object.

If "people kill people" then only a fucking retard would give those people guns. Are you trying to make sure?

Amarel(4987) Disputed
-2 points
iamevil(34) Disputed Banned
0 points

Unless you are using the sources already provided for in this debate, please cite your source .

Amarel, there is only one personality type which confronts unequivocal common sense with "statistics": the liar.

Amarel(4987) Disputed
-2 points
Dermot(5453) Disputed
1 point

I’m presenting an argument based on stats regarding mass shootings with guns do you dispute the figures for mass shootings ?

I’m not presenting the most “ favourable one “ as you put it I’m putting the facts .

If you want a separate debate about other accidents /deaths by all means have it , stats don’t go away by evading them

iamevil(34) Disputed Banned
0 points

“Mass shooting” is always defined in such a way as to confirm the bias of the author.

In other words, instead of simply accepting that mass shootings occur very frequently in the United States, you want to attack the semantics of the terminology itself, which only confirms your own bias, since clearly you are trying to "exclude" certain shootings from being classified as "mass shootings".

As such, it is not a good indicator for getting at facts.

I'll tell you a great method of "getting at facts". They will usually be the precise opposite of whatever you say.

In the US in 2016:

-4,947 non-firearm homicides

-1,781 blade homicides

This is an outrageously stupid variation of the tu quoque fallacy. Other homicides have nothing to do with gun homicides. Stabbing someone in the head is not evidence that shooting someone in the face is fine. I mean, it's literally retarded. The precise same statistics provide a significantly better argument that nuclear weapons should be legalised, since homicides from nuclear weapons are significantly less represented than drownings or blade deaths.

You are just pathetic. The insanity on this site is simply astonishing.

1 point

Looks like some countries have a suicide problem. How come we have so few debates about that ?

Flatlander(63) Disputed
1 point

Suicide is a strange issue.

Some people are suffering just being alive, so they want to end their own life but it is "illegal" or frowned upon.

Mostly because suicide causes suffering for anyone around them. Family, Friends, etc.

Some people say suicide is never the answer, but tell that to someone in pain everyday because of an illness, or someone simply being kept alive by machines in the hospital. There are plenty of situations where a person might want their own life to end, and telling them to live as long as possible so you don't feel sad is kind of immoral.

I'm not saying suicides are a good thing, but it is definitely a grey area.

Amarel(4987) Clarified
2 points

I just think it is interesting that everyone, whether from the US or not, seems to be ready to talk about America’s guns. This, despite more than half our gun deaths being suicides. This being the case, you would think people might have something to say about Japan, Hungary, Poland, Germany, France, Switzerland, or Belgium whom all have a higher suicide rate than the US despite tighter gun laws. People seem to care significantly more about American deaths from American guns, even though we have higher rates of death and violence by mean other than guns, indicating a cultural problem.

Fun Fact: Frances Suicide by firearm rate is 2.98. America’s Homicide by Firearm rate is 3.8, which isn’t much higher. If you account for gang violence, the rate drops closer to 1.6, which would put our gun homicide rate lower than Frances gun suicide rate.

iamevil(34) Disputed Banned
0 points

Looks like some countries have a suicide problem. How come we have so few debates about that ?

Because normal people are incredulous about why you are arming suicidal people with guns in the United States.

1 point

Utah has the most lax gun laws in the US. California has the strictest.

Utah has a firearm homicide rate of 1.21. California has a firearm homicide rate of 3.5.

Utah has a non-firearm homicide rate of 8.2. California has a non-firearm homicide rate of 1.56

The US has higher rates of violence in general. The numbers say the solution is not in legislation.

Strictest gun control states (#1California).

https://www.deseretnews.com/top/1428/0/10-states-with-the-strictest-gun-laws.html

Most lax gun control states (#1Utah)

https://www.deseretnews.com/top/1429/0/10-states-with-the-most-lenient-gun-laws-.html

1 point

When people commit crimes, they use whatever tools they have available for the job.

If the tool they require is a weapon they will use whatever weapon they can obtain that is effective.

Removing guns doesn't remove crime, it simply makes them choose a different weapon to perform the task.

Solving the environments which encourage people to commit crimes is what people should be looking at. Not removing the best defensive weapon ever invented.

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

Solving the environments which encourage people to commit crimes is what people should be looking at.

The US has a serious drug problem. A significant amount of gun crime centers around this larger problem. "The war on Drugs" clearly hasn't worked.

Oceaneer(13) Disputed
0 points

When people commit crimes, they use whatever tools they have available for the job.

Guns are the most useful tools available to potential criminals, and you insist on selling potential criminals guns. Hence, you endanger all the people who are not potential criminals, and force them to buy guns for their own protection. The end result is madness.

In 2015, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (29%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.

So you tell me with each child dying from a drunk driver, why the Left is not all over the media pretending to be outraged over these innocent children's deaths? Do you have any idea how many more children are killed by drunk drivers than by guns in schools?

Where is the outrage and demand for alcohol regulations and back ground checks in public bars, nightclubs, etc.

If the real reasons for more gun control legislation is to save lives, why won't the Left propose laws mandating back ground checks in public places that sell alcohol to possible repeat DWI offenders?

I don't want this, but if your goal is to save lives with all your anti Gun rhetoric, you should be over joyed to save many thousands more lives by having background checks on people before buying alcohol in public places.

Do you have any idea how many times repeat DWI drivers continue to drink and drive? Approximately 40% of drunk drivers are repeat offenders! They drive even when their licenses are revoked!

The only way to prevent this is to do a background check before they buy that weapon of death.....ALCOHOL!

Wait, what you say? You say you don't want to be inconvenienced by background checks when buying alcohol? You say you are a law abiding citizen who would never drink and drive?

You say you don't want to pay more for alcohol to pay for those background checks for past DWI drivers?

I THOUGHT YOUR GOAL WAS TO SAVE LIVES? You expect law abiding citizens to pay more and put up with all the inconvenience from your anti gun legislation, but when it comes to your alcohol...... HANDS OFF?

A drunk driver behind the wheels of a car happens millions of times more often than some lunatic with a gun! The odds of you or your loved one being killed by a drunk driver is far higher than the odds of being shot at a concert or Church.

You are hypocrites and total jokes. You prove you could not care less about saving lives. You final goal is to take our guns.

You always spew your ludicrous reasoning why only guns should be singled out to save lives. A police state is just fine as long as it only controls one particular weapon of death..... the gun.

You say we already have alcohol restrictions? Yes, and we already have gun restrictions. You can't buy a gun under age, the same as alcohol. We can't shoot people, you can't hunt near public places and you can not drink and drive. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT!

IT'S NOT THE WEAPON OF CHOICE, BUT THE PERSON BEHIND THAT WEAPON. Use the brain God gave you and start addressing why people grow up to be criminals, or become irresponsible drinkers who have no problem drinking and driving.

Start addressing the core problem instead of their weapon of choice.

1 point

Guns. Fun with Numbers. What do the numbers tell you?

Well let's see!! You want to Ammy ??????

The Worst Mass Shooting in U.S. History Was Not in Orlando

The horrific massacre of innocents in an Orlando nightclub in 2016 was a tragedy of national and international proportions. The senseless, methodical killing of people just like us, in a place where they came to relax, was an affront to our humanity and civilization.

It was immediately dubbed “the worst mass shooting in American history” by many media organizations (and our President), looking to single out this event from the almost weekly incidents of gun violence that plague the U.S.

But this kind of categorization is very debatable and has been called out for “whitewashing” history. If we mean murder perpetrated by guns, the worst “mass shooting” in American history was the “Wounded Knee Massacre” in South Dakota, when 150-300 Native Americans were gunned down by the U.S. army in South Dakota.

1 point

Yes. Let's look at the numbers. Compare the number of those killed by guns against the total population. There are many things that are much more lethal.

johnnyvegas2(2) Disputed Banned
1 point

Compare the number of those killed by guns against the total population. There are many things that are much more lethal.

And by that same patently false logic, nuclear weapons are considerably less lethal than guns.

You're a retard. Fact.

Grugore(849) Disputed
1 point

Actually, nuclear weapons have probably saved countless lives. And auto accidents kill more children than guns have. Perhaps you should try to ban cars. Lol. Idiot.

0 points

Wow ! What a fucked up debate site , you’re asked to give an opinion on a topic and because Americans disagree with you they downvote you

KyloRen(46) Disputed
1 point

You are entitled to your stupid fucking opinions, you are not entitled to have smart people like them.

Dermot(5453) Disputed
1 point

You are entitled to your stupid fucking opinions,

You are entitled to make no argument for and continue downvoting what you cannot defend

you are not entitled to have smart people like them.

What does that piece of stupidity in print even mean ?