CreateDebate


Debate Info

5
5
PROS CONS
Debate Score:10
Arguments:10
Total Votes:10
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 PROS (5)
 
 CONS (5)

Debate Creator

racheledubal(5) pic



Should people in the USA be allowed to have guns?

PROS

Side Score: 5
VS.

CONS

Side Score: 5

We should all have 20 guns ready for when the libs try to take them. Good luck.

Side: PROS

As for pros, gangs are making their own guns, thus? You don't get to take mine. Guns also equalize a small woman to a big male rapist. Have a nice day.

Side: PROS
1 point

Yes for adult citizens who are mentally stable, and obey the Constitutional law, to own a gun, if they want to. No felons, or mental patients.

Side: PROS

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.

Side: PROS
1 point

To defend oneself against an armed or stronger attacker, rapist, thief, etc. one requires a weapon. The police do not typically arrive until after the crime has taken place; when it is too late. I don't believe that people's ability to defend themselves and their property should be taken away simply because other people are irresponsible. Studies suggest 2 million crimes are prevented annually by firearms, of which 200k are rapes (1,2). Compared with the 20k annual homicides by gun, this seems to me a worthy tradeoff (3).

Sources:

(1) http://americangunfacts.com/pdf/Armed Resistance to Crime- The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defe.pdf

(2) www.johnlott.org/files/GeneralDisc97_02Surveys.zip

(3) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

(You need to copy and paste sources 1 and 2 for them to work).

Side: PROS
1 point

People should not be allowed to have guns because it generates violence

Side: CONS
1 point

I do not agree as these massacres would not have happened, it’s dangerous for public security.

Side: CONS
1 point

Guns are very dangerous, only policemans should be able to carry them. Fla and anna

Side: CONS
1 point

Guns, as a really dangerous weapon, should at least be sold after specific mental tests, and owning one should not be that easy at this young age and without a valid reason. Many murders would have been avoided

Side: CONS
1 point

No, violence isn’t the solution to the violence, it is a measure that can only get worse the situation

Side: CONS