Instigator / Con
1
1420
rating
395
debates
43.8%
won
Topic
#3460
Gun control
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with the same amount of points on both sides...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
1
1455
rating
3
debates
16.67%
won
Description
I was requested by the contender to post this debate.
I don't know exactly where they stand on this topic so I can't form any direct specific detailed arguments.
I can try to play oppositional advocate as best as it matches to my true position.
In the end , there may or may not be much to agree or disagree with.
Round 1
What are you for, in support or in favor of regarding gun control?
Last year, the Violence Policy Center found that gun owners are 32 times more likely to use their weapon in criminal homicide than in self-defense. Usually, the first reason a gun advocate says there is a need to own guns is the self-protection myth. Now that that myth has been debunked and it has been proven that justifiable homicides are rare, We must move past the old self-defense narrative and think with clearer heads when discussing gun ownership." In other words, Owning a gun DOES NOT protect the gun owner in comparison to protecting the gun owner. It's a myth. "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.) Research shows that domestic violence victims are five times more likely to be killed if their abuser has access to a gun. 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.In a statement, AMA President Steven J. Stack, MD, Said: "With approximately 30, 000 men, women, and children dying each year at the barrel of a gun in elementary schools, Movie theaters, Workplaces, Houses of worship, and on live television, The United States faces a public health crisis of gun violence. Even as America faces a crisis unrivaled in any other developed country, The Congress prohibits the CDC from conducting the very research that would help us understand the problems associated with gun violence and determine how to reduce the high rate of firearm-related deaths and injuries. An epidemiological analysis of gun violence is vital so physicians and other health providers, Law enforcement, And society at large may be able to prevent injury, death, and other harms to society resulting from firearms. " Continuing" The legislation that the doctors" groups hope to overturn with such money stems from what some refer to as the Dickey Amendment, named after former Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark. ). In 1996, Dickey successfully introduced legislation that stripped $2. 6 million from the CDC"s budget"the exact amount the agency used for firearm-related research. While the money was later added back to the CDC"s budget, So was wording in the appropriations bill that stipulated that the agency couldn't"t use federal funds to "advocate or promote gun control. Though that language does"t explicitly ban firearm research, It has effectively done so. "Removing the money from the budget and enacting the Dickey Amendment were the first and second shots across the bow by the NRA, "
Round 2
Looks like you have detailed statistics, facts and surveys regarding people owning guns.
I'm steady looking for what you're arguing here. You are for gun control in terms of mandating background checks.
I suppose the opposing side would argue that background checks wouldn't make a difference.
I can possess a clean background on the day of a firearm purchase.
Get it dirty and have some friends in high places to get it cleaned up again.
Beyond that, I can have some friends in low places like on the streets and acquire illegally. I can use a connect to be my middleman with a clean record to continue to acquire for me.
This is why we continue to have senseless gun violence . These "security "procedures in place aren't making a dent in crime.
Some argue to do away with guns altogether. But what do you think is going to happen then? People will revert back to what they were using prior to the existence of guns.
Go full medieval.
You forgot to mention suicide attempts because there is a gun in a home suicide attempts increase and Domestic violence increases if there is a gun in the home, etc. Ars Technica "AMA takes on NRA: Doctors prep for political battle over gun violence crisis" "Following Sunday"s tragic mass shooting in Orlando, Florida"the deadliest in US history"the American Medical Association has officially declared gun violence in the US an unrivaled public health crisis. With this declaration, The AMA will now actively lobby Congress to overturn legislation that has kept the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from researching gun violence for the past 20 years" legislation backed largely by the National Rifle Association. also Absolutely gun bans are required and all weapons of superior firepower are to occur if there is to be worldwide peace. No exceptions, None. Granted, That is a pipedream. Of course, other things are required to happen as well if worldwide peace is to occur. The banning of guns and weapons of superior firepower is one way for a solution for worldwide peace. 4 more categories are required to take place for worldwide peace to occur. Everything falls into the umbrella of these categories IF and only IF worldwide peace is to occur. Of course they probably and most assuredly won"t because man is a man with the stunted brain of a pea. Regardless, As those who enter gun debates do because they have no other alternative when their backs are up against the wall, Especially when bullets guns and the people that fire them knowingly cause the deaths of children, When 17 vets on average put bullets in their brains per day, When on average an American dies due to suicide with a gun every 22 minutes, etc, etc etc. Sure some do, But how many of the 100% deliberately, Key word is "deliberately" go out and try to commit a homicide and or take their lives with them and thus use a car as a weapon to murder someone, Whereas with a gun someone does murder someone in comparison? Does someone wish to get drunk so they can go out and commit murder and not know what the crap they are doing? Sure alcoholism does increase violence among most who are alcoholics But was invented for. The very press of a trigger is a violent act. Someone does die due to gun violence because someone DOES wish to go out and shoot up a neighborhood, Take themselves completely out of the game, Go off to war, and murder someone else. There's a HUGE MONUMENTAL DIFFERENCE in which ALL GUN CRIMES can be prevented that is unless you believe these things are a good thing? No, they're not. Sorry
Round 3
Is there any objections to what I stated on background checks?..
I didn't see any refutations.
no there is no objections im am just saying that ESPECIALLY someone"s suicide attempts people should stop getting guns UNLESS there are so so so many horrific things going on with that specific person that it just in no possible way can be overcome. Yeah. Been there, Tried it, But not with a gun as a gun makes suicide a lot easier. With vets especially (no I"m not a vet), They need help, and they"re not getting it, Rather than committing suicide. It states in the article on the Harvard webpage which is: https://www.Hsph.Harvard.Edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/ "All new gun owners are heavily encouraged to participate in gun classes on use and safety." I decided to read a little bit further. See how bad your argument is? "are heavily encouraged" Does this mean that they will? No. They won't. There"s also no such thing, None, As teaching gun safety to kids. NONE. Especially when a kid finds the gun, Plays with it, And takes his life ACCIDENTALLY even if the adults practiced all the gun so-called safety rules there are in which case there are none "What sources say that guns fail to protect the owner?" also "Removing the money from the budget and enacting the Dickey Amendment were the first and second shots across the bow by the NRA, " Mark Rosenberg told the LA Times. Rosenberg is a gun violence expert who was head of the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the time the Dickey amendment passed. "The third shot is the idea that if you do this research, You"ll be hassled [by the NRA], " he added. "The result is that the CDC does nothing in gun violence research." Politicians, Including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif. ), Have made attempts to strike the gun research stipulation but have had no luck. After the 2012 Newtown, Connecticut, Massacre of schoolchildren, President Obama issued an executive order that the CDC resume firearm-related research, But the CDC has continued to avoid the topic, Noting that it still lacks dedicated funding for the research. " Ah yes "the fear people have of losing their lives. A gun does give them that security so that feeling of dread they might not lose it. So? How many kids lose their lives due to guns because the parents and or adults do not know how to properly store and or care for them because there is no such thing? Yeah, the kids know EXACTLY where the guns are. Not only that but the worst of it is how many kids die in the streets because of gun violence and or are shot and murdered in the crossfire? Here's something else. . . Suppose there's an invasion. . . How many are trained to use their guns, Not only take their guns out, Point, Aim and shoot the intruder BEFORE that intruder is actually on top of them? Absolutely gun bans are required and all weapons of superior firepower are to occur if there is to be worldwide peace.
Even if one side barely contributes, you still have to at least point to an argument the other side made that upheld their position. It’s not automatic that a contribution is pertinent.
Votes requested.
Con provides absolutely nothing of substance and Pro provides 3 rounds of relative substance.....It's a no brainer, as well you know.
Someone whinges and the vote get's removed.
Is it any wonder that no one bothers to vote.
D******D
**************************************************
>Reported Vote: zedvictor4 // Mod action: Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 1 to Pro
>Reason for Decision:
#1. Instigator Con doesn't seem to know what's what, so should have declined contender Pro's request.
#3. Con gives us a brief intro into life on the streets.
#5 Con unwisely rests upon the strength of #3.
#2.4.6. Pro, at least provides 3 rounds of relative substance, emotion and thoughtfulness. Thereby they should be acknowledged for their effort.
>Reason for Mod Action:
The voter must address specific points made by both sides in the debate and consider how they function with the resolution. The voter is kind of specific about what Con said in R2, but doesn't consider specific points made by Pro, nor does he consider how any of these points impact under the resolution. Acknowledging effort is nice, but not sufficient.
impressively diplomatic
why do you hope i win?
I hope you win
i was just wanting to do a debate on gun control and I want people to have a background check before they even set there hands on a gun