All guns should be banned for civilians
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 22 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 5,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
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.
Sourced FF
"There is no failure except in no longer trying" - Elbert Hubbard
Full forfeit.
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.
No.
I did that so I would get the last word unless there was a forfeit.
Debates structured such that the acceptor must post the first round of argumentation, however popular, aren't really good form.
There are anti gunners out there who only want guns reserved for military and police.
So basically someone has to argue against the 2nd amendment?
I'll plead the fifth!