The Instigator
Dr.Franklin
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
anc2006
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Banning Guns

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2019 Category: Fashion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 908 times Debate No: 122042
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (0)

 

Dr.Franklin

Con

Pro start. . .
anc2006

Pro

well guns are bad it can kill people. That is all to say.
Debate Round No. 1
Dr.Franklin

Con

ok and cars can too but we don't ban them
anc2006

Pro

Sorry for that careless argument, I was partying and there was no reason to stop and type a 3000-characters argument to a debater worse than backwardseden.

but let's get real here.

Reason#1: it's intended to harm people, Not accidentally.

you can argue fireworks' gun-powders are the very thing the french fire their violent cannons, But the difference is when the asian invented the "gunpowders" it's not used as a weapon, Nor if it's intended to. They discover it as the beat material to make signaling or celebrating fireworks. But guns are different. It just utilizes the same material with a whole different purpose. Today teens play with virtual AK-47 guns not knowing inventing guns are a mistake. Soon the inventors of the guns discover it can break things from far-away, They start attack the criminals. Now there are wars going on at any part of the world and guns are just used as it is invented: to break objects(the opponents' soldiers, And even that could be not right); but the United States are a peaceful country and many times guns are accidentally or deliberately used to enlarge the problem instead of solving it. People use it to terrorist attack the US, Instead attack the real wrong. Really, Handing something that is intended to be used in righteousness to a person that is already in vain and evil is extra risky, And that's why guns should be banned.

"ok and cars can too but we don't ban them"

unless you are talking about military cars(and even that was only handled by the righteousness people in the country), Normal cars are not intended to kill. They are supposed to be a transportation tool. You could argue guns aren't supposed to kill, Because it's how it is not how people use it; however, The most important job of the guns is to attack, And transportation for cars. So i can make a table:
gun car
intended to kill maybe no
people use it to kill yes maybe

this explains everything i've said. Guns are intended to kill and cars aren't. Guns are also harmful and that's why we should ban it, Not something else like cars.
Debate Round No. 2
Dr.Franklin

Con

well this is easy, Cars are statistically more dangerous than guns and guns stop 800 to 2 million violent crimes per year.
anc2006

Pro

Do a real argument instead of making nothing more than a claim( not even).

Refute:

"Cars are statistically more dangerous than guns and guns stop 800 to 2 million violent crimes per year"

one thing at a time.

first, Why even bother to bring cars to this? This is a debate about whether we should ban guns or not, Not if cars are harmful or not. I use cars to justify that guns are far more harmful than cars and cars aren't weapons (well except for military used ones but those are exceptions because they contain guns also). Yet you just use a car evidence to drift away with your thing you started yourself.

second, Guns are weapons, Get it right. I hope your neighborhood doesn't use guns for every single thing. Guns are weapons and nukes are weapons and nukes are banned. When guns are first invented the world bans it from being used by the people in commons. So in that time guns cause the same threats as what nukes did to the ww2. Guns are as dangerous as missiles.

are you telling me you are a military officer? A former one? A disgraceful and sacrilegious descendant of the ww2 hero? If yes, I will awake the dead and let FDR see what you are doing here ruining the world.

are you telling me you own cannons? Why, Tell me cannons are as harmful as guns but are banned. Seeing a portable and harmful cannot being shot from random people, Seeing more people dying.

tell me, Political 12inchbeef.

and lastly, What you are saying about guns solving violence, It is just solving violence with violence. That isn't going to work, Consider the most casualty of a duel between a good person and a bad person is 2, With 2 bullets each crossing the other's chest. Using violence against violence is more violence, And if that continues this way, That is never going to end or end good. Eventually guns will be overpowered and the UN being powerless if this happens.

that's it. Guns are bad. Be peaceful :)
Debate Round No. 3
Dr.Franklin

Con

you know what you bad so now i am going to SLAUGHTER YOU WITH FACTS

1. Over 98% of mass shootings happen in "gun free zones. "

According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, So-called "gun free zones" have been targets of more than 98% of all mass shootings " this is why they are often fittingly referred to as "soft targets. "
"According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, Only a little more than 1 percent of mass public shootings since 1950 have occurred in places that were not considered to be a gun-free zone. In fact, As Crime Prevention Research Center President John Lott Jr. Noted in October 2015, Only two mass shootings in the U. S. Since 1950 have occurred in an area where citizens were not prohibited from carrying a gun, " reports The Blaze.
Former Vice President Joe Biden introduced the Gun-Free School Zones Act(GFSZA) to the U. S. Senate in 1990 and it was signed into law by President George H. W. Bush. 2. Gun ownership does not correlate with a higher homicide rate.
More guns do not equate to a higher homicide rate, Despite what the Left purports. In comparison to countries like Russia, Venezuela, And Mexico, The United States has an exceedingly higher number of guns per capita, Yet a lower homicide rate.

And take the Swiss, For example. The nation of about 8 million is armed to the bone, With an estimated 2 million guns in circulation while boasting limited gun legislation. Demonstrating that gun ownership does not correlate with the homicide rate, Switzerland saw less that 120 homicides committed with a gun, Per government data, As noted by USA TODAY. They also boast a low crime rate.
Additionally, Data analysis from John R. Lott, Jr. , In his aptly titled book "More Guns, Less Crime, " has revealed that more guns can equate to less crime.

3. Gun bans are ineffective " yes, Even the much-touted "gun buyback" program in Australia.
According to a Center for Disease Control (CDC) report, "Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence, " gun turn-in programs are "ineffective":
There is empirical evidence that gun turn in programs are ineffective, As noted in the 2005 NRC study Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review. For example, In 2009, An estimated 310 million guns were available to civilians in the United States (Krouse, 2012), But gun buy-back programs typically recover less than 1, 000 guns (NRC, 2005). On the local level, Buy-backs may increase awareness of firearm violence. However, In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, For example, Guns recovered in the buy-back were not the same guns as those most often used in homicides and suicides (Kuhn et al. , 2002).
Additionally, As noted by The Daily Wire, A British Journal of Criminology study from 2007 and a 2008 University of Melbourne study found that Australia's temporary gun ban did not appear to effect the already declining homicide rate.
"Prior to 1996, There was already a clear downward [trend] in firearm homicides, And this pattern continued after the buyback, " wrote Crime Research Prevention Center President John Lott of Australia. "It is hence difficult to link the decline to the buyback. "
And after Britain implemented a similar gun ban, They had increased homicides in the following five years, Until "Britain beefed up their police force, " notes Lott. 4. There's a correlation between higher gun ownership and fewer mass public shootings.
Between 1977 and 1999, "right-to-carry laws reduced both the frequency and the severity of mass public shootings; and to the extent to which mass shootings still occurred, They took place in those tiny areas in the states where permitted concealed handguns were not allowed, " found Bill Landes of the University of Chicago and Lott.

5. Defensive gun use is higher than criminal firearm use.
The instances in which guns are used for self-defense far outpaces the criminal use of firearms. The Daily Wire previously reported:
The number of defensive gun uses are higher than the number of criminal firearm uses. There was a range of 500, 000 to over 3 million defensive gun uses in 2013, According to research from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council published by the CDC. That same year, There were 11, 208 firearm homicides and 414, 562 nonfatal illegal gun uses, According to the CDC and National Justice Institute, Respectively. Even when taking the low end of the defensive gun uses, It's clear that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal gun uses by Americans.

6. The government has failed to protect us time and again.
The government has failed us time and again when it comes to potential mass killers. Take this last school shooting in Florida, For example. Recent reports have confirmed that "the FBI was warned specifically about the Parkland shooter not once, But twice " and did nothing, " "the Broward County Sheriff"s deputies were called to the home of the Parkland shooter at least 39 times since 2010, " the "Sheriff"s Office was warned multiple times about the Parkland shooter, " and that "an armed officer was present during the shooting and did nothing. "

And the FBI has dropped the ball in other recent catastrophes, Too:
The Fort Lauderdale airport gunman told the FBI he was being mind controlled by the CIA before the rampage.
The Pulse nightclub shooter was on the terrorist watch list for two years and then taken off the list before he murdered in the name of Islam.
A 2014 report concluded that the FBI failed to act on warning signs over the would-be Boston marathon bombers.
And the list goes on.
How can the answer to government incompetence or malfeasance be to disarm the masses further and to rely even more heavily on the same institutions that have failed us?
anc2006

Pro

Wow. You actually tried. Didn't see your potential coming.

but your arguments are strongly flawed at the beginning, So none of your research is on the original path. What banning guns actually means isn't as what you mean, Taking them away or not even, It's more like not even give them guns at the first place. Suppose your country bans porn, Then do they give it to you then take it back for force, OR NOT EVEN GIVE IT TO YOU? I think the second choice.

guns are bad, I said it 3 million times (not really) already. It is intended to be used as a weapon killing people. And yet if i want to really reduce gun counts, Do i give them to everybody then take it back for force, Or do i prevent more people from getting it? I suppose the second choice is more efficient. If you take them back by force, Then you won't getting them back without violence. If you prevent people from getting it by education or preventing anybody new from getting it, Then it would be solved peacefully.

"According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, Only a little more than 1 percent of mass public shootings since 1950 have occurred in places that were not considered to be a gun-free zone. In fact, As Crime Prevention Research Center President John Lott Jr. Noted in October 2015, Only two mass shootings in the U. S. Since 1950 have occurred in an area where citizens were not prohibited from carrying a gun, "

well i could agree, But your point of view means guns are the only bendable weapons by law. In fact no. In some countries cannons are used by people for fun, Others need contracts to buy knives. KNIVES. Their knives is equivalent to our guns. In specifically dangerous areas knives are used for mass killing instead of a cooking device. Somebody ought to talk about firearms not guns, And i respond:

if knives and firearms create more violence than guns, Then we might as well ban them from used outside of appropriate area too.

and also what you say "gun-free zones", If there is a gun free zone there is a gun zone. If you don't ban them completely not by force, They'll spread too. Not everybody is others' maiden. If the people in gun zones can use it appropriately then prevent anybody outside of this category from even entering the place, Because they will illegally steal guns.

"The number of defensive gun uses are higher than the number of criminal firearm uses. There was a range of 500, 000 to over 3 million defensive gun uses in 2013, According to research from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council published by the CDC. That same year, There were 11, 208 firearm homicides and 414, 562 nonfatal illegal gun uses, According to the CDC and National Justice Institute, Respectively. Even when taking the low end of the defensive gun uses, It's clear that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal gun uses by Americans. "

do we actually know what is defensive and what is aggressive? No one knows. People can push their problem so easily. Imagine a man killing another man on his front door, Being convicted of crime, He can just say that he's defending. Using this vague line isn't enough.

also a piece of dirt can ruin a glass of wine, An illegal gun use can ruin a neighborhood. That ratio is technically already fatal. If more than 5% of gun uses are illegal then we really should do something. Anything about the government may be their fault, But if we just leave everything to the government, That isn't ethical either.
Debate Round No. 4
Dr.Franklin

Con

no evidence
anc2006

Pro

hands down
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 15 records.
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
backwardseden
(cont'd)
"the absence of guns from children"s homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents. "

Oh and btw, 60 minutes ran an article on this a few years ago! Trump is wrong as always.
"A tiny fraction of gun violence is committed by the mentally ill"
But more importantly, Our violent crime problem really has little to do with mental illness. Columbia"s Paul Appelbaum and Duke"s Jeffrey Swanson concluded that "only 3%-5% of violent acts are attributable to serious mental illness, And most do not involve guns. "

There's PLENTY more on gun violence and why they are trash and why they should be gotten rid of. But Dr. Franklin being the true scum of the earth that he knowingly is, Hasn't done a single ounce of research to support his pathetic little worthless slab of coined goodies that he constantly forges from his a$$ and he knows it.
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
backwardseden
(cont'd)
The Harvard/Northeastern survey shows a slight increase in the number of gun-owning women " a group that now makes up 12 percent of all gun owners. But while nearly 70 percent of women cited self protection as one of the primary motivations for owning a gun, Past studies show that a gun in the home is statistically more likely to be used to harm a woman than to help one.
"Our survey suggests that many more people believe guns in their home make them safer, When in fact, Epidemiological research suggests precisely the opposite, " Deb Azrael says.

Guns can kill you in three ways: homicide, Suicide, And by accident. Owning a gun or having one readily accessible makes all three more likely. One meta-analysis "found strong evidence for increased odds of suicide among persons with access to firearms compared with those without access and moderate evidence for an attenuated increased odds of homicide victimization when persons with and without access to firearms were compared. " The latter finding is stronger for women, A reminder that guns are also a risk factor for domestic violence.
The same thing is true for accidents. States with more guns see more accidental deaths from firearms, And children ages 5 to 14 are 11 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the US compared to other developed countries, Where gun ownership is much less common. About half of gun accident fatalities happen to people under 25, And some recent analyses suggest that the official count of gun accident deaths among children is understated.
"When 34 injury prevention experts were asked to prioritize home injury hazards for young children, Based on frequency, Severity, And preventability of the injury, The experts rated access to firearms in the home as the most significant hazard, " Harvard gun expert David Hemenway writes. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that "the absence of guns from children"s homes and communities is the most reliable (cont'd)
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
backwardseden
@anc2006 - "type a 3000-characters argument to a debater worse than backwardseden. " And yet you used the exact same argument that I did against the worst maggoty moron anybody can ---ever--- run into. You have no idea, None, As to whom Dr. Franklin is. Duh. Now we both know 100% that cars are generally NOT used as a weapon in the same way that guns are, And its not even a competition but the sweat that Dr. Franklin gets from his you know where areas from burning a woody in his studded place where his pet piranha gives him a b. J. , Well he thinks it is without any evidence, Naturally, To back him up. Here's some more evidence to prove guns are crapola. Ready? Oh and btw, Who gives a f--k about you partying? It really makes you look arrogant and ignorant.
Btw, DDO does not allow extended links, So copy and paste the quoted headliner posts into your google search engine, And the links will come right up at the top.
"7 facts about guns in the U. S. - Pew Research Center"
7. 2017 saw more gun deaths in the U. S. Than any year in decades, According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The nearly 40, 000 Americans who died of gun-related injuries in 2017 marked a 19% increase from 2012 and the highest annual total since the mid-1990s. The increase in gun deaths over five years included a 15% rise in suicides involving a gun and a 25% rise in murders involving a firearm.
Fear of Other People Is Now the Primary Motivation for American Gun Ownership, A Landmark Survey Finds"
Studies have found that people who live in homes with handguns are twice as likely to take their life compared to those who live in homes with other types of firearms, Such as shotguns and rifles. (Seniors are the population at the highest risk of using a handgun in a fatal suicide attempt. )
Domestic violence victims are five times more likely to be killed if their abuser has access to a gun, Research shows.
Posted by Dr.Franklin 2 years ago
Dr.Franklin
you value nothing squeaking away at your computer screen 58 year old loser. Guns stop 800k to 2 million violent crimes per year
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
backwardseden
Typical argument from a true scum of the earth worthless pile of manure spread Dr. Franklin who offers absolutely nothing of value to the human race. Cars are NOT used as weapons here in this country, And they are really not used as weapons in other countries, Not anywhere close to what guns are you stupid pile of dung. Oh but wait, As always you have done absolutely no research to quantify your idiotic positioning you cowardly wizard of ooze. Grow up.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.