Instigator
Points: 28

All guns should be banned for civilians

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 4 votes the winner is ...
Alec
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Politics
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
5,000
Contender
Points: 6
Description
Rules to this debate:
1: The BoP is shared.
2: I will waive the 1st round and my opponent will waive the last round. They must signify this in the round. Violation is an automatic loss of the conduct point.
3: A forfeit is an automatic loss unless apologized for in the comments.
Round 1
Published:
Because of the rules, I waive this round.
Forfeited
Round 2
Published:
Since my opponent didn't publish an argument, I think I'll publish one.

Guns provide protection against criminals and the potential of a tyrannical government.

Guns also reduce homicide.  Whenever an area bans guns, law abiding citizens turn in their guns but criminals still hang on to their guns.  Can you imagine what happens if a criminal is armed and a law abiding citizen(LAC) isn't?  The LAC gets robbed or shot or both.  If they try to call the police, they are shot. DC placed huge restrictions on guns in 1976 and their homicide rate stayed constant at best and skyrocketed at worse (https://illinoisreview.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515c5469e2015392131038970b-800wi).  This means that gun control does nothing to stop homicide and may even increase homicide rates.  When they repealed their tough gun laws, the homicide rate fell.

Guns are also useful in hunting, which can prevent some families from starving.

Source:

Forfeited
Round 3
Published:
Argument extended.
Forfeited
Round 4
Published:
Forfeited
Added:
No.
#5
Added:
I did that so I would get the last word unless there was a forfeit.
Instigator
#4
Added:
--> @Alec
Debates structured such that the acceptor must post the first round of argumentation, however popular, aren't really good form.
#3
Added:
There are anti gunners out there who only want guns reserved for military and police.
Instigator
#2
Added:
So basically someone has to argue against the 2nd amendment?
I'll plead the fifth!
#1
#4
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Sourced FF
#3
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
"There is no failure except in no longer trying" - Elbert Hubbard
#2
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeit.
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con stated "Guns provide protection against criminals and the potential of a tyrannical government. Guns also reduce homicide."
Pro never posted anything, so Pro never refuted these claims and as such I have to accept that reducing homicide negates that all guns should be banned for civilians.
Arguments to Con.