You go to school everyday with the requirement to not bare arms and do you honestly feel defenseless? 84% of americans havent taken one safety course on guns so its a threat to anyone, behind and infront of the gun. In alot of gun injuries, the user is harmed too. Guns should be left in trained haneds and with all the other types of defense methods, guns should not be the defult.

With all the other types of self defenise available and the many more being created, i dont think something as barbaric as a good should be the "fall back defensive."

Even if a background check is preformed and comes out clean, most americans have no history of gun safety. Also, though americans may be "law abiding" they still are animals and have natural reactions, there is NO human alive that hasnt been startled before or scared. Its those feelings that provoke gun use as a defense in the first place. If you want defense against intruders, try a home alarm system, a loud barking dog will even warn you without killing someone. If you want to stop someone, use another form of defense like a taser. Some people may say, but what if they have a gun? If there was gun control, that couldnt be the case, yes there will always be violent people, but without guns there would be less dead people. At school no one has a gun, its just how it is, and in the cases where one was entered into the environment, there was a set plan to stay safe and the deaths are obviously lower from that event, then they would be if guns were aloud daily. Guns make room for emotional mistakes and kill the need for restraint.

I do think gun control will help this country and i am not mistaken. If criminals keep their guns, they wont be able to use them. Why? People if no one had a gun in an area and one single shot was heard, the whole area would be on alert for that one shot and the gun would get confiscated. In countries like great britan where there is strict gun control, this happens all the time. If we just assume its useless cause we have some criminals and just have to bare arms to balance it out then its just twice as dangerous, two lefts don't make a right.

Anyone that is considered a "criminal" is on record by the US government and will be searched before the citizens for that reason. The government is smart enough to realize that criminals would have guns, its not something thats just overlooked.

The bill of rights does not state the an individual citizen has their own right to have their own gun, id read up on that before making that statement. People who live in a bad neighbor hood can move, or live in a protected shelter if moving is not an option. People who consider a neighborhood unsafe often think so because of guns. I myself often think "someones gonna come out and shoot me" when walking through bad neighborhoods. If citizens didn't have guns, that would make everyone feel that much safer. In unsafe neighborhoods, there would be one less worry of not getting hurt by some irresponsible citizen with a gun.

Your side sounds more "against gun control". Responsible people, in my opinion, are the ones who have been trained and are armed with guns under government authorization. Which is quite rarely an average american citizen. You state, "but theres some people who use them for the wrong reason and that is what makes little familys cry because there loved one was gunned down by a horable person ;(((((((((((". That quote is much more for the "against side" and hurts your arugment

First of all its not in the constitution itself, its simply an amendment, i think you should read about what your talking about before you go and time up and argument on it.

Here is the a the direct quote

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.

In oder for the state to be secure we cannot have deadly weapons used for looks like they are some new type of hot wheels made for fun and looks. Your constitutional right is to keep and bare arms, not guns, and for the safety of the state and all in it we need to take away simple dangers for citizens, cause eventually we need to stop playing with hot wheels and grow up.

Guns dont need a rule book, people need to be trained in what they are using and most citizen have never taken a gun safety course. People do have rights but they should not have the right to end someones life because they were scared the MIGHT loose their own, and thats the self defense argument. If you wanna feel safe there are so many less barbaric and deadly options then a gun. We are humans, not deer. If you pepper spray and tase an intruder, what more can they do? They cant see or move...so they cant shoot you and they are still alive. We do have a free country, we should make it safe too.

This comment should be under brads statement, but to dispute. Timing may just be a statement but the guns are still the main focus. Guns shouldnt be allow because the defenders want to shoot just as much as the intruders. I think i covered this in more detail when i explained the pros of having citizens being gun free.

Even "If criminals keep their guns",(if we were to confiscate all guns) " they wont be able to use them. If no one had a gun in an area and one single shot was heard, the whole area would be on alert for that one shot and the gun would get confiscated. In countries like great britan where there is strict gun control, this happens all the time.

If we just assume its useless cause we have some criminals and just have to bare arms to balance it out then its just twice as dangerous, two lefts don't make a right.

Anyone that is considered a "criminal" is on record by the US government and will be searched before the citizens for that reason. The government is smart enough to realize that criminals would have guns, its not something thats just overlooked."

I feel like im repeating myself. But to simplify what ive been saying, if the government had gun control they would start out with the high risk people such as criminals and work their way down. Not having guns would be an overall safer environment. A common environment like this is school. Some people argue that there are still school shootings and this is true and also related to your idea of "its just how things work." While their are school shooting they are vary rare, just like america would be if we didnt have guns. Schools also are prepared, remember doing those lock down drills? Our country would prepare us the same way. School shootings cause far less deaths then if schools were aloud on a daily bases to everyone (like america now). We should leave guns to the professionals and if we need to feel safe, we should protect ourselves without killing someone else.

This comment should be under the comment instead of on the "arguments for" side. This side is for your individual comments, as to debate with you, guns should not be aloud in the hands of citizens because it is the gun that kills the people, the person.

If the person was responsible, you could take the gun out of the situation and someone would still die, this is not true. The gun is what is directly taking the human life. To say that quote is false is just commonly statisticly untrue, as stated in my argument Against; "For example, during a year when over 5,000 teens and children died from gun wounds in the USA, in Great Britain, where gun ownership is very restricted, 19 teens and children died from gun wounds."

Although its not your idea, i think its still well formed. My dispute is that hunting and other recreational guns should be stored safely in the place where the recreation is taking place. For example, hunting guns should be stored under lock and key at those hunting grounds, then checked out and returned as not to take them home cause harm to non-deer life like humans.

As for the topic of self defense, guns should not be used as a common self defense. Why?

Lets use a simple example, your walking home in the dark its quite and you think someones following you so have your hand on the gun and keep walking, looking back. Suddenly a car pulls in front of you, startled you naturally turn around and shoot. Theirs no one behind you, but an innocent dead driver in front of you.

Its simple "accidents" like these account for most deaths. Having something less likely to kill a person, such as a taser, is much safer. Some people may argue that it doesnt do enough damage to defend somone, but taserd stop your muscles from moving, stopping whoever right in their tracks, alive. We should stop using guns for defense like we do, nothing that deadly should be so self conscious.

Although I'm against guns, what you are saying is absolutely correct.As far as Americas majority of people who do want gun rights, they are in a pretty good position.As i said in my first argument, my husband is all for guns and is one of those affected by Australia's recent gun laws. My hubby "wishes he had your gun rights America, so be grateful"....Personally i think its the reason behind half your problems... however my hubby,(in this moment i am typing) just rebutted me by saying that in Switzerland, they encourage, that all their citizens have a gun.

guns have no purpose other then killing. i do not think all guns should be banned, but definitely some. if you like to hunt, then go out and buy a hunting rifle. however i believe guns such as AK-47's serve no purpose. they are machine guns, and you do not need a machine gun to hunt a deer. as for self defense, well there are plenty of things you can do before resorting to a gun for defense. you could move to a place with a lower crime rate. buy a taser or pepper spray. get an alarm or guard dog. besides, what would you need a gun for to defend yourself? if it is against a robber then i should let you know that most robberies occur when you are away from home, making the gun pointless.

The about 80% of the "general public" dont even know a thing about gun safety. Although i agree that criminals should not possess guns, at least most of them know how to use it. Citizens trying to protect themselves should use something that wont kill people with a flick of a finger. Pepper spray can blind, tasers will stop someone wherever they stand, guns click and kill.

I said this in jacobs dispute, but if people were the ones killing people then it wouldnt matter if there was a gun involved.

Umm heres a visual

Person+Gun= -Person

(A person with a gun kills a person)

Take out the gun cause your saying its not its fault...

Person=-Person

If the gun wasnt responsible, and its the persons fault, then it wouldnt matter if the gun was there or not. But infact it makes quite the difference.

Your point about criminals finding illegal guns is just like illegal guns, something just cant be completely erased. But saying outlawing them would make gun rate increase cause they are illegal makes no logical sense. Take a place like school, we have no guns here, and in cases where shootings happen, its much less then i would be if people had guns everyday. Same goes for a biggerscale like the USA. We also have all been trained with the lock down drill, and im certain the government would issue something like that as well.

The people behind the guns "defending" themselves are just as trigger happy as any intruder. To just say guns should be aloud because criminals have them, is childish and we need to age past barbaric murder caused by guns.

This comment should be under brads comment instead of on the "arguments for" side.