frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Modern Sporting Rifles shall be protected from any and all future gun restriction laws in the USA

Debate Information

For this Modern Sporting Rifles (MSR) will be the topic of discussion.  Please, do not get off topic.

In the recent events of the Mosque shooting in New Zealand, the New Zealand PM vowed and changed laws regarding MSRs and Semi-Automatic firearms.  The question being asked by people is why the USA doesn't do the same.  

During this, you are either for protecting MSRs from future gun restriction laws or against it advocating for gun reform.
Bryce M. Sloan,
"Streite nicht mit einem Idioten, sie werden dich auf ihr Niveau herunterziehen und dich mit Erfahrung schlagen."  -Mark Twain 



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    We already have a Constitutional Amendment protecting them.  We already have a SCOTUS ruling on that Amendment.  What more is there to do? 
    Zombieguy1987Applesauce
  • BryceSloanBryceSloan 33 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta, true, but some will say that we still need to change the laws even though they do not understand that we have the 2nd amendment to protect our rights as American Civilians.  Keep in mind that gun violence is not the guns fault, its the person holding the gun.
    Bryce M. Sloan,
    "Streite nicht mit einem Idioten, sie werden dich auf ihr Niveau herunterziehen und dich mit Erfahrung schlagen."  -Mark Twain 
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta, true, but some will say that we still need to change the laws even though they do not understand that we have the 2nd amendment to protect our rights as American Civilians.  Keep in mind that gun violence is not the guns fault, its the person holding the gun.
    Do you think it's that they really don't understand the 2nd Amendment and Heller decision, or that they disagree with them and want to change them through any means possible?
  • There should just be a law against, and tax on getting shot. If those two process are the publics efficient way in creating the solution as a United State. Use them as a United State,

  • @BryceSloan ;
    You do not think the 2nd Amendment protects the civil liberty of the person, armed service man or woman who protects the United States Constitution? This by placing a united state on all people who make verbal, or written claim of being American. As the own ship of an Arm which can be brought to bear in it's defense is recognition of shared burden on lethal force? 
  • BryceSloanBryceSloan 33 Pts   -  
    John_C_87 said:

    There should just be a law against, and tax on getting shot. If those two process are the publics efficient way in creating the solution as a United State. Use them as a United State,

    I am a tad bit confused.  What do you mean a tax on being shot?  Like, if an individual were to get shot, they have to pay money, or if a person were to shoot someone, they need to pay a tax along with jail time?  Feel free to explain, I would like to know more about that. 
    Bryce M. Sloan,
    "Streite nicht mit einem Idioten, sie werden dich auf ihr Niveau herunterziehen und dich mit Erfahrung schlagen."  -Mark Twain 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5965 Pts   -  
    The New Zealand government reacted on emotions, rather than pragmatic reasoning. For centuries New Zealand was just fine with the laws on this being what they were. One terrorist attack does not change anything. As always, people blew one story out of proportions and got scared enough by it to let the government infringe even further on their freedoms.

    Nothing needs to be changed legally. And socially, people should stop being afraid of ghosts and face the reality: the gun deaths are negligible compared to, say, the car accident deaths, in New Zealand and elsewhere. A truck hitting an SUV and killing the family inside does not make for such a good news story, and people should recognise that fact and realise that their emotions are misguided.

    If we are to ban everything every time something happens, then in a few years we will run out of things to ban, because everything will be banned. Lawmakers should have a bit more foresight than this, they should think a few moves ahead and not panic over one event.
    Zombieguy1987Applesauce
  • BryceSloanBryceSloan 33 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    @CYDdharta, true, but some will say that we still need to change the laws even though they do not understand that we have the 2nd amendment to protect our rights as American Civilians.  Keep in mind that gun violence is not the guns fault, its the person holding the gun.
    Do you think it's that they really don't understand the 2nd Amendment and Heller decision, or that they disagree with them and want to change them through any means possible?
    It could possibly be that they disagree with it, but in my 3 years of being a debater for my high school, I have noticed that the main reason why people disagree with firearms and the 2nd amendment is that they don't understand the amendment.
    Bryce M. Sloan,
    "Streite nicht mit einem Idioten, sie werden dich auf ihr Niveau herunterziehen und dich mit Erfahrung schlagen."  -Mark Twain 
  • BryceSloanBryceSloan 33 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    @CYDdharta, true, but some will say that we still need to change the laws even though they do not understand that we have the 2nd amendment to protect our rights as American Civilians.  Keep in mind that gun violence is not the guns fault, its the person holding the gun.
    Do you think it's that they really don't understand the 2nd Amendment and Heller decision, or that they disagree with them and want to change them through any means possible?
    It could possibly be that they disagree with it, but in my 3 years of being a debater for my high school, I have noticed that the main reason why people disagree with firearms and the 2nd amendment is that they don't understand the amendment.
    Bryce M. Sloan,
    "Streite nicht mit einem Idioten, sie werden dich auf ihr Niveau herunterziehen und dich mit Erfahrung schlagen."  -Mark Twain 
  • @BryceSloan ;

    When a person is shot, when a person shoots someone a tax must be paid. A crime will either be officially established, then unproven,  in any case a tax must be paid so a summons for getting shot and shooting can be issued. To go deeper into translation of accountability It is required for hospitals to reported shooting, the lease the legislation can do is make the report legal by constant standard.


    The idea of legislation of law is now set on equality not basic understanding in constitutional principal.
  • @BryceSloan

    It could possibly be that they disagree with it, but in my 3 years of being a debater for my high school, I have noticed that the main reason why people disagree with firearms and the 2nd amendment is that they don't understand the amendment. 
     
    Context of Constitutional Amendments, we tend to not understand the context to Constitutional amendment. If, or when the interpretation is unconstitutional even though originally ratified that interpretation is no longer ratified. Meaning the idea of new legal precedent is open for challenge. 
     
    A whole truth describes the 2nd Amendment as a change to the way a common defense of gun ownership can be used. IN whole truth adding to the potential of just protecting a legal position on Military Armed use of lethal force. The problem being that this purpose is to complex explanation to be a constitutional basic principle alone. this type address of a state of the Union requires that the self-evident truth be kept by witness. To be stated as truth.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -   edited March 2019

    It could possibly be that they disagree with it, but in my 3 years of being a debater for my high school, I have noticed that the main reason why people disagree with firearms and the 2nd amendment is that they don't understand the amendment.
    I suppose it depends on who the "they" is that we're talking about.  If "they" are high schoolers or people who really don't follow politics, in many you're right.  If "they" are anti-gun politicians (the some [that] will say that we still need to change the laws), you may still be right that they don't understand the Second Amendment, but they don't want to understand the amendment.  They've made up their minds, and nothing is going to change them.  Their livelihood depends on undermining the Second Amendment whenever possible.

  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    @BryceSloan
     The question being asked by people is why the USA doesn't do the same.

    I'm tempted to answer: Dogmatism... Americans are pretty dogmatic in many domain (Politics, Economics, Social issues, etc), and this dogmatism permeates the whole right-left spectrum IMO, at least that's my view from the outside... 
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • Dr_MaybeDr_Maybe 138 Pts   -  
    It must be nice to have a hobby that is protected by the constitution.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  

    In the recent events of the Mosque shooting in New Zealand, the New Zealand PM vowed and changed laws regarding MSRs and Semi-Automatic firearms.  The question being asked by people is why the USA doesn't do the same. 
    A tale of two reactions;


    vs



  • Have you also notice a fear to assume any burden of the use of lethal force by the people themselves has increased. Thus, maintaining a common defense between people and police, people and soldier, and people with the people. The trends of Civil litigation and legislation describe a precedent supporting this type of negligence is okay, while others forms of the same negligence are not good. 

    Efforts to place ballistic shields are out, disarming the non criminal is in?
  • ApplesauceApplesauce 243 Pts   -  
    first rifles make up ,0.5% of all murders in the U.S. and about 25% of firearm murders.
    all  Modern Sporting Rifles are semi automatic but not all semi automatic rifles are considered MSR's
    guns don't kill people, bullets do unless you plan on beating someone to death with the gun.
    All semi auto guns function the same way, one pull of the trigger, one bullet fired, repeat this procedure
    minimizing casualties is a direct result of the time it takes to stop the shooter or a fear they would be caught/stopped.
    the form factor rifle vs pistol makes little difference in all the events that come to mind except for Las Vegas, when you have people bunched up in a building the gun doesn't matter nor does aim.

    cosmetic features are just that and make little to no difference in the handling by the user.  that's why ar-15s for example are sold with a pistol or forward grip and many don't bother with an after market one, probably a pretty good reason, they aren't all that useful, sure some people might like them, but it's an individual thing.
    "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood"
    The Animals
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch