Social Democratic states in Europe (Socialist gun grabbers) are not anti gun
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 2 votes and 12 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/best-countries-gun-owners/249644 Western European nations do not prohibit gun ownership and have healthy gun cultures and common sense laws
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Czech Republic
- Northern Cyprus
- North Macedonia
- San Marino
- United Kingdom 
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Northern Cyprus
- United Kingdom 
where did i say all states in Europe respect gun "rights'
My claim was the opposite that NOT all European states were anti gun but even the uk which has the strictest laws allow people to own guns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT3cPwV4uTk
my point which is totally valid
which you have misrepresented in a straw man argument that i stated all European states are pro gun,
when all i said was Social Democratic states aka the nordic states are NOT ANTI GUN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1_S7e-lryE
- Denmark, as well as Greenland
- Denmark permits some gun ownership but govt. officials decide who may own what guns.
- Danes may not:
- own a gun for personal protection
- carry a gun in public
- own a gun without registering w/ Govt.
- Using CON's test, Denmark is not a PRO-GUN state.
- "In Iceland, a license is required to own or possess firearms. A national government safety course must be passed before applying for a license. A special license is required to own a handgun, which may only be used for target shooting at a licensed range. Semi-automatic firearms have caliber restrictions, while fully automatic firearms are only permitted for collectors. Applicants must sit through a mandatory four-hour lecture on the "history and physics of the firearm". Paperwork must be filed in the police, magistrate, and the Environment Agency of Iceland. Applicants need to prove clean criminal records, need to be evaluated by a doctor to prove they "are of sound mind" and have "good enough eyesight". Two books referring to guns must be bought and read, a three-day course must be attended, and the applicant should score at least 75% on exams concerning gun safety, management, "what animals are allowed to be hunted and when". Finally, a practical exam must be taken. After Icelanders have their license, they need to own a gun safe to store the weapons in, plus a separate place to store the ammunition."
- Using CON's test, Iceland is not a PRO-GUN state.
- [In Sweden], the police issue licenses to persons older than 18 years in good standing on the "need to have" basis, which generally implies either hunting or sport shooting. Passing a hunting examination or membership in an approved sport shooting club for six months is required. Licenses for semi-automatic handguns are issued for five years and can be renewed, rifle and single-shot handgun licenses are valid for the owner's lifetime. License-holders may lend a weapon to a person at least 15 years of age for supervised use. A separate license is required for each particular firearm, caliber conversion kit or suppressor. There's no codified limit on the number of licenses a person can hold, but in practice a license-holder may own up to six hunting rifles, ten handguns, or a mix of eight rifles and handguns. Firearms must be stored in an approved safe. A firearm registered for hunting may be used for sport shooting, but not vice versa. Licenses obtained for hunting are implicitly limited to bolt-action or, more rarely, semi-automatic rifles that are "applicable for hunting", with no strict definition of the latter in the laws, which causes controversy. Self-defense with firearms, as well as carry, is generally prohibited.
- Using CON's test, Sweden is not a PRO-GUN state.
- Norway is not really a "shall issue" state since the Govt decides who is "sober and responsible" and therefore eligible for gun ownership.
- Finland does not recognize self-defense as a valid reason to own or carry a gun but restrictions are sufficiently lax to qualify as PRO-GUN.
another straw man argument , so i win what i said. Nordic states Social democratic states are often NOT anti gun
- VOTERS should carefully note the way PRO shifts the subject of this debate after R2 and starts crying out "straw man."
- In the title, PRO claims:
Social Democratic states in Europe are not anti gun
- In the debate description PRO wrote:
Western European nations do not prohibit gun ownership
- In R1-
Many nations in Europe have healthy gun culture s the American idea that Europeans are disarmed salves is nonsense
- In R2, PRO shifts the subject:
all i said was Social Democratic states aka the nordic states are NOT ANTI GUN
- In R3-
Nordic states Social democratic states are often NOT anti gun
- PRO may be suggesting that "Social Democratic States in Europe" is synonymous with "Nordic States" but as PRO's R1 showed, there are many Social Democratic governments and political parties beyond the set of Nordic states and any such implication baseless.
- Likewise PRO's adjective phrase shifts from "not anti gun" to "often not anti-gun" in R3.
- Considering PRO lack of clarity and unwillingness to engage CON's attempts to clarify, CON has little cause for complaint in the final round.
what you claimed i said 'nordic states are pro gun
- "Not anti-gun" means "pro-gun" by any ordinary understanding of the English language. Two negatives make a positive. If PRO was trying to make some subtle distinction between "not anti-gun" and "pro-gun" then PRO never bothered to explain or define the term.
- VOTERS should decide whether PRO's poor grammar rendered PRO's argument incoherent.
- Immediately after PRO cries "another straw man" PRO endorses the argument refuted in the prior sentence:
what you claimed i said 'nordic states are pro gunthats not what i saidbut actually yes they are pro gun in a real way
- CON can't tell if PRO's persistent self-contradiction is intentional or tactical but CON advises VOTERS to note the difficulty of refuting a claim that won't stand still.
- PRO failed to engage any of CON's core argument.
- CON defined Social Democracy.
- PRO had no response.
- CON offered a rational list of Social Democratic European States.
- PRO complained that CON was listing all of Europe without offering a counter list or explanation of PRO's intent.
- CON argued PRO's exclusive BoP
- PRO had no response
- CON argued PRO's R1 argument was non-sequitur
- PRO dropped his only argument
- CON offered a rational test for separating PRO-GUN states from ANTI-GUN states
- PRO ignored CON's argument
- CON showed which Social Democratic European States fail the suggested test.
- PRO ignored the successful refutation of resolution entirely.
- CON complained about PRO's use of double-negatives as confounding.
- PRO persisted using the double-negative without apology or clarification.
- CON argued that even accepting PRO's slyly modified list of Social Democratic, all but one Nordic State fails CON's test
- PRO continued to ignore CON's test.