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.





USA, Guns and The Rest of the world

Debate Information

Firstly, I am not American, and nor do I own a firearm. So, I am not biased. However, my Father used to own a gun and used it for hunting which I never liked and I think he later regretted. I'm from the UK and it's a misconception that there is a blanket gun ban in the UK; there isn't. I remember watching a video of Shapiro stating that the UK apparently has a blanket gun ban; I guess general knowledge isn't really his strong point. This was a debate with him and Piers Morgan a while back, and if it's any consolation I found it equally amusing when Morgan couldn't say anything about handguns which do kill more people when called out on it.

Anyway, after countless debates, discussions, and reflection I have to the conclusion that Guns are not going anywhere anytime soon in the US, and in many cases, you would be a fool not to own a gun in some parts of the USA to protect yourself. Not only that but it is disrespectful for us to condemn the US people about something that is part of their culture and has been for some time. It is akin to telling someone they can't breathe.

That being said, I also agree that laws should be in place to make sure guns end up legally in the hands of responsible people that want to have them. Now, an objection to that is to say that there is no point in gun laws as people will still get them illegally anyway. This argument I find ludicrous and is the same as saying we should make all classes of drugs legal because people will get them illegally anyway. Yes, people will do and get things illegally but it will be a darn site harder to do so than if everything was legally accessible.

I agree with liberty and I am against extremism and to me a blanket gun ban on American culture is extremism. Likewise, no laws regarding guns are also extremism. One is totalirarion; the other is anarchy and ultimately none will lead to liberty in the end.






Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • DeeDee 4788 Pts   -   edited September 19
    Not only that but it is disrespectful for us to condemn the US people about something that is part of their culture and has been for some time. It is akin to telling someone they can't breathe

    No I don’t see it as disrespectful at all. Why do Americans attempt to normalise the appalling slaughter  regards guns that happen daily ? How is it “disrespefuful “ to be horrified at the thoughts of children needing armed guards in schools to feel safe or people needing to carry guns to feel safe?

    The world has turned into an Orwellian nightmare where criticisms of the worst parts of a given society must be crushed otherwise it’s “disrespectful “

    Is the same reasoning to be applied to sh-it holes like Saudi Arabia where human rights abuses continue unabated on a daily basis and world leaders and others toady up to the Saudi leadership and say such things as “we must respect cultural diversity” …..that’s the PC term for excusing and attempting to normalise the sick and the abnormal 

    The main reason Americans cite for gun ownership is protection , watch them to a man fly into a rage when you say “ok I get it you need a gun to feel safe as you live in a violent society “ to a man /woman they will fight tooth and nail telling you how safe the US actually is 

    I don’t respect a society that has nationwide prayers every time there’s another school slaughter and I have zero respect for a nation that pretends they actually care yet take to Internet forums in their millions to defend guns after the latest slaughter of innocents at schools 
    JoeKerrJohn_C_87jackCYDdharta
  • Is the same reasoning to be applied to sh-it holes like Saudi Arabia where human rights abuses continue unabated on a daily basis and world leaders and others toady up to the Saudi leadership and say such things as “we must respect cultural diversity” …..that’s the PC term for excusing and attempting to normalise the sick and the abnormal.

    .It should be known abuse of human rights is a human right...Unlike Constitutional rights whereas the connection to established justice is in placed in writing. Not that we are assured a person can understand all they are capable of reading.

    .Saudi Arabia is constitutionally just a Monarchy with no second branch of legislation, it is the model of a absolute Monarchy.

    .In spite of what the people say, mostly by educational coaching started at a young age, the better United State of law held to address ownership of firearms comes by way of shared burden of lethal force equally between armed services and the public. Whereas, it is a human right to trick others by education into self-incrimination it is still Illegal by united states held in constitutional right. You do no legal teams had a liberty to choose freely over filing grievance over improper holding of the burden of lethal force keeping the justice focus on the creator of the ill doing. Or instead go after the people who have committed until unconstitutional orders committed no crime. The holder of equality of legal burden such as firearm owners, plus gun manufacturers. Otherwise you end up with a nation exposed to much more complicated and harder to prove murder that often just go unnoticed and become missing persons or accidental deaths.

    I don’t respect a society that has nationwide prayers every time there’s another school slaughter and I have zero respect for a nation that pretends they actually care yet take to Internet forums in their millions to defend guns after the latest slaughter of innocents at schools. Holding focus to the issue of the more perfect union, protection of children, there would have been armed guards securing the place at which children had been concentrated, this before all other action had been ordered. What you do not respect is the search for the better union made on established justice....that is not what you are saying it is all you keep proving.

  • anarchist100anarchist100 680 Pts   -  
    The situation with guns in America is entirely unacceptable, there are far too few guns, and far too many restrictions.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4713 Pts   -  
    I think that most arguments commonly used both by gun control advocates and by gun control critics are wrong and inconsistent. In my view, the only way to reasonably argue either way (and that comes to all political arguments in general) is to argue from the first principles, and few people ever do that.

    Here are my problems with your arguments:

    ZeusAres42 said:

    I have to the conclusion that Guns are not going anywhere anytime soon in the US, and in many cases, you would be a fool not to own a gun in some parts of the USA to protect yourself.
    I cannot imagine what those parts would be. Real life situations in which having a gun on you would improve your outcome are extremely rare, and in most cases either you are safe both with or without a gun, or you are damned either with or without a gun. If you live in an extremely criminal area, then you most likely will not have enough time to pull out a gun to protect yourself when you are attacked. If you live in an extremely remote area where it takes the police an hour to get to you, then chances of someone trying to break into your home are slim, as the overwhelming majority of criminals operate in cities where it is easier for them to remain unnoticed and get lost in the crowd.
    I think that one's right to defend oneself and to possess tools allowing them, in principle, to do that is sacred. I do not think, however, that, from the practical standpoint, owning and carrying a gun does a lot to facilitate that.

    ZeusAres42 said:

    Not only that but it is disrespectful for us to condemn the US people about something that is part of their culture and has been for some time. It is akin to telling someone they can't breathe.
    "It is just their culture" is not an argument justifying anything. One could look at Saudi Arabia with its beheadings and horrific women's rights violations, or at China with its "reeducation camps" and totalitarian censorship, and say, "Oh, they have lived like this for generations, it is just their culture; give them a pass". Cultures can have bad elements, and calling those elements out is not disrespectful - or if it is, then it is justifiably disrespectful, for one does not have to respect such things.
    I also do not think that the gun culture is nearly as big in the US as most people outside the US think. There is a subset of the population that is obsessed with guns, but the vast majority of people (me included) do not have any feelings towards guns and just want to stay away from any situations in which they can be involved.

    ZeusAres42 said:

    Now, an objection to that is to say that there is no point in gun laws as people will still get them illegally anyway. This argument I find ludicrous and is the same as saying we should make all classes of drugs legal because people will get them illegally anyway. Yes, people will do and get things illegally but it will be a darn site harder to do so than if everything was legally accessible.
    In a vacuum, you are correct. In a proper context, it does make a difference what activity precisely we are talking about. I would argue, for instance, that laws against marijuana in the US and Canada have no positive function: anyone who wants to get marijuana can get it very easily, by just asking a random shady-looking person on the streets about a dealer in the area - given how hard (and how undesirable) it is to consistently enforce these laws, they end up being applied arbitrarily, and a lot of people end up in jail for doing something that almost everyone does with no repercussions.
    Given the prevalence of guns and the dominance of gun culture in the US, I highly doubt that even very severe anti-gun laws here would have much impact on the ability of criminals to obtain guns for nefarious purposes. They would have a lot of impact on the ability of generally good (and generally law-abiding) citizens to obtain them, creating an obvious disparity. And while, as I said in my first objection to your arguments, having a gun does very little to protect you in case things go south, the possibility of you having a gun (that is much more likely when gun laws are liberal) may be a powerful deterrent for a criminal considering, say, robbing you.
    One of the reasons there is so little crime in remote rural areas of the US is precisely that factor. One would think that criminals would have a free roam in those areas, given how low the population density there is, how hard it is for the police to get there on time, et cetera. Yet in those areas the gun culture is especially strong, almost everyone has a gun - and practices with one at a range, or when hunting. Many people there have served in the military and know how to fight dirty. Criminals are mortally afraid of such areas, and even if you live in such an area and personally do not own a gun, criminals cannot tell if you do or do not and are not willing to risk it.

    ZeusAres42 said:

    I agree with liberty and I am against extremism and to me a blanket gun ban on American culture is extremism. Likewise, no laws regarding guns are also extremism. One is totalirarion; the other is anarchy and ultimately none will lead to liberty in the end.


    I call this thinking a "polarity fallacy". To illustrate its essence, I like to propose the following argument: "Both killing all Jews and killing no Jews are extreme positions. The optimum lies somewhere in between: the middle ground would be killing half of all Jews, which is what we should do".
    There is nothing wrong with a position laying at one of the ends of the spectrum. In fact, I would argue that if you have a strong and coherent set of principles, and if you take them to their logical end (as you should), then the vast majority of your positions are going to be extreme. One of the problems of the modern world is that people have very few principles and adopt middle-ground positions on everything, endlessly compromising and hopping between mutually contradictory moral systems. People have no idea what they really stand for - and, perhaps, they do not actually stand for anything.
  • @MayCaesar
    I think that most arguments commonly used both by gun control advocates and by gun control critics are wrong and inconsistent. In my view, the only way to reasonably argue either way (and that comes to all political arguments in general) is to argue from the first principles, and few people ever do that.

    MayCaesar to address the point of the missing consitutional legislation on fire-arm, or for that matter any topic facal piont of control sought after people having openly admited to abonadoning the search for the best connection to established justice...

    I would argue, for instance, that laws against marijuana in the US and Canada have no positive function:

    The American constitutional obligation is to argue connection to established justice, the laws of past marijuana legislation had been written in connection to the Centeries old Civil War named  "The Drug War" and cross contamination of narcotics in marijuana. The distribution of marijuana  was be lack of constitutional preservation simply associated to narcotic sales. To not we do not have Drug War I, Drug WarII, or drug War III for that matter it is just a Civil War that has been ongong for Centeries across may nations called " The Drug War." 

    There was already partitions in place set by creation of United States Constitution and legislation goals of constitutional law that had simply been abandoned and in doing so placed democratic voters in danger by self-incrimination. 

    “Maintenance cleanup American Constitutional aisle.”

    “Maintenance cleanup American Constitutional aisle.”


  • BoganBogan 195 Pts   -  
    Peaceful societies that have strong social cohesion, respect for the law, and which do not glamourise violent criminal behaviour (ie Switzerland, Israel) and which do not possess very violent minorities known for their extremely violent behaviour (ie black Africans, Pacific Islanders, Australian Aborigines, and Latinos) do not need onerous gun laws.       Countries cursed by multiculturalism do.  
    John_C_87
  • You make a false claim that law is not subject to abuse itslef equal to all mechanism of firearms or other weapons for no other reason other than it is law. In legal precedent people have been muirdered use law.There is no connection perfect or otherwise between law and established justice it is the writings held within the phrases of law only which foms the link or links to established justice.

  • again sorry

    You make a false claim that law is not subject to abuse itself equal to all mechanism of firearms or other weapons for no other reason other than it is law. In legal precedent people have been murdered use law. There is no connection perfect or otherwise between law and established justice it is the writings held within the phrases of law only which forms the link or links to established justice.


Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 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