No one needs an AR-15
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 11 votes and with 59 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
This is the full description of the debate! It is highly important that you read this. If you do not read this, you might regret it later if you accept this debate.
PRO = No one needs an AR-15.
CON = At least one person needs an AR-15.
The Burden of Proof is on con, of course pro can provide arguments as pro sees fit.
Pro is not arguing that no one should be allowed to have an AR-15, simply that no one needs an AR-15.
No one = No person
Person = A human being
Need = a physiological or psychological requirement for the well-being of an organism
AR-15 = ArmaLite Rifle 15
1. The above definitions are not to be disputed, unless agreed upon pre-debate in comments
2. Pro will waive first round, and con will waive R4.
3. Pro cannot provide rebuttals during R2, because con cannot provide rebuttals during R1.
4. Pro cannot provide new arguments in R4, and con cannot provide new arguments during R3.
5. Be respectful
6. No forfeits
7. For all relevant terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the rational context of this resolution and debate
8. Violation of these rules should result in full points being awarded to the rulebreaker's opponent
I think that yeah, some of these perps are motivated by fame. We don’t have a number. We really don’t. We have to be honest. We don’t have a number. But I think definitely that some of them do it for the fame. For the attention. And you know, lots of people go through life never getting any attention at all. People aren’t paying attention to them in any way. And they feel they’re a nobody. They’re a nothing. And then they see this event happen – some heinous event – and another person, sort of like them, they think, suddenly is being talked about all over the world. And that has a twisted appeal for some people. 
Definition: well-being,the state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy.
There are many speculations as to the motivations of mass shooters. One in particular is the fame and infamy aspect.
I think that yeah, some of these perps are motivated by fame. We don’t have a number. We really don’t. We have to be honest. We don’t have a number. But I think definitely that some of them do it for the fame. For the attention. And you know, lots of people go through life never getting any attention at all. People aren’t paying attention to them in any way. And they feel they’re a nobody. They’re a nothing. And then they see this event happen – some heinous event – and another person, sort of like them, they think, suddenly is being talked about all over the world. And that has a twisted appeal for some people.
This profiling of mass shooters who are motivated by fame indicates several things. They are obviously not happy, because they are likely not receiving any attention. Nor are they comfortable for the same reason. The conclusion can only be that receiving attention is likely to improve their psychological well-being. In this case, this attention is the fame and infamy received from committing a mass shooting.
The AR-15 has been the primary firearm of choice in several mass shootings. This includes the Sandy Hook, San Bernardino, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, Stoneman Douglas High School, and Port Arthur shootings. If indeed it is true that the act of committing mass shootings promotes their personal psychological well-being and that the scale of those mass shootings could've only occurred with that particular gun that they possessed at the time, it can only be concluded that the AR-15 used at the time has been needed and the events have shown that the AR-15 will continue to be needed in the future by aspiring mass shooters.
1. Murderous motivation
First of all, as you said, this is speculation. Secondly, there is no evidence given supporting this speculation.I take great note that, while the source is reliable, this is clearly an opinion. The speaker makes this very clear by saying "I think." He goes on to say, "We don't have a number," which means the number could, in theory, be 0. You have failed to prove that anyone does this for fame.
As a sidenote, fame and infamy do not necessarily cause comfort, happiness, or healthiness.
Assuming there are mass shooters that are in it for fame/infamy in order to get attention (which there might not), mass shooting does not need to be the way in which the shooter obtains attention. Their need is attention, where it comes from does not define the need.
While I do not dispute the fact that the AR-15 was very often used in mass shootings, it can not be concluded that the AR-15 is needed. Other guns would actually be more efficient. The AR-15 is not fully automatic, nor does it cause massive explosions. Grenade launchers, bombs, and fully automatic weapons would be far more efficient in killing large numbers of people quickly. The AR-15 was not, is not, and never will be a need.