CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:23
Arguments:12
Total Votes:24
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Is an armed society a polite society? (12)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(40001) pic



Is an armed society a polite society?

Gun control advocates tell us that removing guns from society makes us safer. If that were the case why do the worst shootings happen in gun free zones, like schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are unheard of at gun and knife shows, or military bases. It bears repeating that an armed society truly is a polite society.

Add New Argument

We should be ever vigilant against any attempts to disarm the people, especially in this economic downturn.

3 points

...why do the worst shootings happen in gun free zones, like schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are unheard of at gun and knife shows, or military bases.

Sure, a person who wants to shoot someone is going to do so in a place and in a manner less likely to lead to they themselves being shot. This would be true whether everyone carried guns or not though. That is, if someone wants to shoot someone bad enough, they will shoot them, all that would change is the time and place, regardless if every man woman and child were armed or not.

That's one type of shooter.

Another is the crazy kind. Like the Columbine kids. Many like to say "well if everyone had a gun, someone would have shot them first."

I disagree. This type of shooter goes in with a specific intent to kill a bunch of people, random or not. They plan ahead how they will carry out the killing. If they already had known that other kids had guns as well, then they would have planned on that, used different methods, with most likely similar loss of life.

Another thing assumed by the NRA incorrectly, is that somehow anyone with a gun would be willing to use it. Just the opposite is true, the vast vast majority of the population would be hesitant to use a gun against another human in even the most dire of situations, meanwhile the criminals in questions are not hesitant. So while the victims may be armed, they might as well not be. Most in that situation would not believe it was happening, by the time they realized it was, they would be dead.

There's an assumption by law abiding gun enthusiasts that somehow the inner working of a crazy person or career criminal is similar to their own.

"I wouldn't shoot into a crowd if everyone was carrying a gun, therefore neither would they."

The thing is, they wouldn't shoot into a crowd anyway. And just as whether the crowd is armed has no baring on the end result (them not shooting into a crowd,) so it goes with the career criminal and crazy person. That fact has little to no baring, and they would plan for it, so the results would be similar.

The body count at the end of the nation wide armament would be about the same taking into account the intended crimes and crazy people shootings.

Now though you have two new factors.

1. Accidents, which would naturally increase.

2. And spur of the moment, uncalculated killings.

ex. I'm on the strip, and I see my girlfriend making out with some dude I absolutely hate (this is conjecture, never really happened but) I don't have a gun, so I punch him in the face. Okay, end of story, I feel better, he feels worse.

Same situation, but I, along with everyone, has a gun.

In that moment of anger, am I going to be thinking that maybe I'm going to get shot as well? Would I care? I don't know, but I gaurantee there are hordes of people that would shoot in that one moment of anger, consequences be damned.

All that said, I have absolutely nothing against a law abiding citizen carrying a gun. Many many are good people, who know how and when to use the firearm, and they as a result are safer. That's a segment of the population who can and should be allowed to bare arms.

The problem is that the NRA through tricky ads and fear based brain wahing methods, has turned it into an "us vs them" mentality, where anyone who is not willing to carry a gun must somehow be unamerican. They've tricked a large part of the population into thinking something totally untrue, that if everyone has a gun everyone is safer.

The ideal situation is not to simply arm everyone, it's to figure out a way to get guns out of the hands of criminals, to make it impossible or nearly impossible for criminals to get guns.

Instead of focusing on that though, they just make it easy for anyone to get a gun, and use "it's easy for criminals so you should have one to" as their selling point.

If I didn't know better, I would say guns in the hands of criminals was good for gun sellers...

That's just a crazy conspiracy though right? right?

Side: guns for criminals

OK, lets simplify the question. Should we ever allow the government to take away our right to bear arms?

Side: guns for criminals
4 points

lol, no.

I thought I stated that very clearly in my page long dissertation on the psychology of the gun bearing criminal.

Side: guns for criminals

If I knew that half of you were packing, I wouldn't write half the stuff I write ;)

Side: guns for criminals

Well, it depends on your view of human nature. If you believe that humans act purely out of self-interest, then yes, an armed society would be a society in which everyone would be afraid to be rude to others purely because they might get shot. A cynical view though would mean people would make their decisions based risk/reward analysis. With lots of guns the risk factor goes way up, but if the rewards still outweigh that risk (or the person happens to be crazy) then shootings will still occur.

Now the questions are, is that what we want? And, does it help? Do we want to live in a society dominated by fear and tensions, and will that fear be enough to keep people from misbehaving?

Protection is a much better reason to own a weapon than forcing those who deal with you to be polite, because in the latter example, the respect people afford you has nothing to do with you, it has to do with your gun.

Side: guns for criminals
1 point

Look at the Swiss. They don't have the gun control laws like the U.S....when was the last time you heard about gun-crazed maniacs in Switzerland?

Yes, an armed society is definitely polite...I always make sure I say "please get the f* out of here" when I defend myself from an attacker with my Glock, and then yell "thank you" as they take off.

Yup, I'm always polite when I conceal carry.

Side: guns for criminals
2 points

Last I heard, the Swiss had mandatory gun ownership, one per household. And not just almost zero gun-crazed maniacs, almost zero gun crime period.

Also voted up because girls with guns are sexy. And so progressive. Unlike voting girls up for being sexy.

Side: guns for criminals
iamdavidh(4856) Disputed
1 point

Hehe,

Well, the Swiss are kind of backward.

Plus, don't you all listen to death and black medal? (I'm a fan) How laid back does a country have to be to all own a gun, listen to hardcore, and still hardly ever shoot anyone?

Kudos to you,

I'm not convinced it would work in the U.S. though.

Side: guns for criminals
1 point

What do you mean? I'm one of those Americans you are referring about. [eye twitching as I scratch my trigger finger] ;)

Side: guns for criminals
1 point

i like the saying "guns dont kill people, people kill people".

and "this home protected by Smith&Wesson;"

personally i love guns not to shoot people but just to have and target practice as of right now i own: 1 S&W;44 revolver, 4 12 gauge shotguns (2 pump 1 semi-auto and a WWII bolt action) 2 30-06 hunting rifles, 1 30-30 hunting rifle, 1 m4 assault rifle 1 S&W;38 handgun, 1 glock 40 and have another m4 and glock on the way. i obviously collect guns but ya and i haven't killed anyone yet! lol

Side: yay guns