Instigator / Con
10
1520
rating
6
debates
66.67%
won
Topic
#600

Should America ban the AR-15

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
6
3
Better sources
0
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

dustryder
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
11
1535
rating
5
debates
70.0%
won
Description

Many people claim the the AR-15 is a dangerous gun and should be banned in order to recuce the amount of mass shootings. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic carbine style rifle. A large amount of the people who support banning the gun get that statement wrong. I am against the ban as I do not see any strong reason to authorise a ban on this firearm.

But without my AR-15 how am I going to keep the king of England from waltzing into my house and doing whatever he wants

-->
@oromagi

Sounds like a good idea. I don't have time now, but maybe later?

-->
@Alec

I don’t buy any of that. We should debate US death penalty sometime- maybe California’s recent stay.

-->
@oromagi

It's cheap, it saves lives and an eye for an eye is a proportional means of justice.

-->
@Alec

Ok- name 3 benefits to NZ for such a change in policy. Don’t forget that NZ takes nonviolence as seriously as any nation on earth

-->
@oromagi

I want New Zealand to bring back the death penalty for murder so this guy can get killed painfully.

-->
@Alec

NZ abolished death as a penalty for murder in 1957.

-->
@oromagi

I hope the Christchurch shooter gets the death penalty. Lethal injection is too nice. He deserves more pain.

-->
@GuitarSlinger

Go research how many people have actually been killed by AR-15's...

I did on Saturday. If I remember right the 2016 estimate was less than 200 people. I couldn't get an estimate for 2016 mass shootings but as far as I could n tell none of the highly visible mass shootings involved AR-15s in 2016.

The reasoning behind banning AR-15's is because they are considered dangerous...correct?

I think it is well established that any guns are dangerous. Brendo's question is why are AR-15s singled out particularly. I think Brendo is correct that the AR-15 just looks meaner and more militaristic than other guns that actually kill more people annually but also because AR-15s have been used to perpetrate some of the most infamous mass shootings. I probably think these causes are more consequential than Brendo does but let's agree that any gun ban should have a more rational basis than perception.

My point to you was that comparing species (AR-15) to category (cars, knives) is not particularly informational: it doesn't really tell you whether AR-15s kill more people than other rifles.

Saying that you will wait until our human(and primate before human) propensity for murder magically goes away is essentially a confession that you have no plan for gun safety. I asked you what safety measures gun owners would be willing to support in an effort to reduce gun violence and you responded don't take away my guns. How do we find a middle ground if the dialogue is always only polarities set in stone?

-->
@oromagi

The debate is about banning AR-15. The reasoning behind banning AR-15's is because they are considered dangerous...correct?

Go research how many people have actually been killed by AR-15's...

I do not support any gun regulations because I feel that doesn't address the issue. The issue is not the guns, the issue is the people. THe human heart. Getting rid of guns, stricter gun controls, etc doesn't get to the heart of the problem-- a person's desire to kill/injure another person. THAT, is the problem.

As long as Man (Woman) have the desire/propensity to harm/kill another person, do not remove my ability to defend myself (take away my guns).

-->
@GuitarSlinger

"Let's keep some perspective folks. AR-15's, while they certainly make for eye-catching headlines, are not the greatest danger.
In 2016, over 40K people were killed in vehicle accidents. While I don't know the exact stats, my gut tells me the number of people killed by AR-15's is MUCH MUCH LOWER (I say that facetiously)."

40,000 Americans (1.25 million people) were killed in car accidents in 2016. An apt comparison would be 34,000 Americans were killed by gun. Just picking out one type of rifle and comparing to overall car accidents make no sense.

"In 2016, more people were killed by KNIVES than by AR-15s (according to the FBI)."

True, but that's like saying more people were killed by bicycles than by Kia Rios (the most accident prone brand of car in 2016). It's true, but it doesn't necessarily mean that Kia Rios are therefore safer than bicycles. Are we trying to identify ways to improve safety or are we just providing cover so that Kia doesn't ask why its product kils more people, so govts don't ask why Kia's product kill more people? Now apply to AR-15s

"While I respect the "March for our Lives" movement, etc the fact remains, a student is more likely to be killed in a vehicle ON THE WAY TO SCHOOL than they are by a school shooting...."

Actually, that statistic is close to tipping. 2017 was probably the first year in a century that US gun deaths exceeded auto deaths in the US in a century. The point is that 50 years of government regulation reduced an Americans chance of dying in a car by roughly 50%, autonomous vehicles could bring the present stat down another 90% by 2050. Americans have a plan for traffic safety. What is our plan for gun safety? What regulations would American gun owners support that might bring gun deaths down?

Let's keep some perspective folks. AR-15's, while they certainly make for eye-catching headlines, are not the greatest danger.

In 2016, over 40K people were killed in vehicle accidents. While I don't know the exact stats, my gut tells me the number of people killed by AR-15's is MUCH MUCH LOWER (I say that facetiously).

In 2016, more people were killed by KNIVES than by AR-15s (according to the FBI).

While I respect the "March for our Lives" movement, etc the fact remains, a student is more likely to be killed in a vehicle ON THE WAY TO SCHOOL than they are by a school shooting....

Christchurch is probably big news in Australia right now.

-->
@dustryder
@Brendo

I predict this debate will be good.

-->
@Brendo

If you have a taser, you can use it much more freely against an intruder, since the intruder won't die. A thick jacket conducts electricity so I think a taser would work in stunning an intruder with a gun.

-->
@Alec

I do not know much about the NRA so I cannot answer your question about that. As for tasers, they are not as effective as firearms. By pointing a gun at a person, the person on the other end should consider the danger. A taser does not have that same effect and the person would not react the same. A large amount of gun incidents in America do not actually involve the person pulling the trigger. They just point the gun at them until they go away. Also, there are multiple times when a taser would not work at all when deployed. Something as simple as a thick jacket would prevent a taser from being able to shock the person.

-->
@Brendo

Why can't the NRA develop tasers instead of guns? Tasers are safer while providing comparable protection. They are also more profitable in the long term since tasers are more expensive.