THE (RESTRICTION) OF RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

[Harm94]

Same actually
I've also made a plot on how I'm going to go back in time and kill the people that invented gunpowder

That would be a massive mistake. No gun powder = no fire works, which means no rockets. No rockets means no missiles, no space thrusters. No space thrusters means no space travel.

[Ad Bot]

[Night Fox]

Because if we're attacked by those commie liberal russians muslims, what weapons can we defend ourselves with besides the word of God?

okay but seriously though, the fact that we can own guns is definitely among the reasons that nobody is going to try to invade the united states

[Dr_Zegobob]

I'm for gun rights, and I don't see it helping society in the long term to regulate more and more things. It just makes people less smart and take less responsibility for themselves, and that's not at all what society needs if we want a more free and peaceful world.

[Camel]

i've shot a gun and it was cool

it's just like shooting an airsoft gun but it goes bang and you can kill your friends

imo the risks outweigh the benefits

[Tayasaurus]

The general logic goes for the person of lower critical thinking is that if one person does something irresponsible then its a good idea to remove responsibility from everyyone.

Punish everyone.

[sir dooble]

england only gets less gun crimes is because they have strict gun laws and have a more brutal police force. america as is stands right now shouldn't even be called land of the free. it should be called land of the not-so free.

also, it's not our fault everyone who's legal age can just walk into a gun shop and buy a weapon as long as they have the money and ID.

IN what way is UK police "more brutal"? If anything our police force is more trained than American police forces (since yours all work separately and have multiple offices in the same area) and more unified, yet is under strict guidelines and laws on how to behave. Police need to follow precise rules on how to behave entirely, including when they decide to pull people over or stop them.
Police here don't even carry guns unless they're part of specialist armed units, in which case you have to be trained to an exceptional degree.

England only gets less gun crime because we never allowed guns to be a legal item that anyone can own.
It's a ludicrous concept that anyone can go around with a ranged lethal weapon which is easily concealable and effective at a distance.
Gun crime in the UK is so much lower than the UK solely because we don't allow guns without license.


Also, it is your own fault that anyone can have guns. Yes, I know that it was written into your constitution hundreds of years ago in order for your new-born nation to defend itself via Militia (which is specified in the constitution), but there have been ample opportunities to repeal that part of the constitution since.
And I hardly think that the US is at a constant fear that the British will re-invade and they'll be left without a military to fight them off.

It's voting people who have the power to force referendum's and government votes to change laws.
But it's just been bred into your culture that guns are fine, in order to feed your sense of patriotism, as well as big US businesses involved in the manufacture of guns.

If you want reasons for why guns shouldn't be allowed then have this;
- Guns are highly dangerous, concealable and transportable, yet available to all.
- Guns are unnecessary in the modern USA. Only a few people require guns, such as farmers (in which case they need shotguns), sportsmen (in which case they use shotguns and are licensed and trained) and hunters (i which case they may need shotguns or single-shot rifles and are licensed and trained).
- The right to bear arms does not specify what sort of arms, just that they are guns. This includes modern weaponry unthinkable during the time of the writing of the constitution, such as assault rifles and miniguns
- The ease of access to guns in America allows for a complete lack of tracking of who has guns, which allows for anonymous gun crime
-Guns are not necessary to defend a person. The only viewpoint in favour of this argument is that those causing you harm may have guns. If guns were never a constitutional right, then the chances of anyone using a gun to attack you are almost zero.


The only problem with removing the right to bear arms in the USA is how deeply rooted gun-culture is in the US, and how many of them exist in the country entirely untracked.
Chances are that removing the right would likely not decrease gun-crime in any sizable way for a long time.

[Tayasaurus]

If you want reasons for why guns shouldn't be allowed then have this;
- Guns are highly dangerous, concealable and transportable, yet available to all.
Weapons are created through knowledge. The only way to make it not available is to make the people dumb.
- Guns are unnecessary in the modern USA. Only a few people require guns, such as farmers (in which case they need shotguns), sportsmen (in which case they use shotguns and are licensed and trained) and hunters (i which case they may need shotguns or single-shot rifles and are licensed and trained).
You say unnecessary like every person in the world is pure of heart.
- The right to bear arms does not specify what sort of arms, just that they are guns. This includes modern weaponry unthinkable during the time of the writing of the constitution, such as assault rifles and miniguns
But nowhere has it said that you need to specifically crack down on the privileges of a people and take away their choices and responsibility to own such machinations.
- The ease of access to guns in America allows for a complete lack of tracking of who has guns, which allows for anonymous gun crime
This is true. However making it less legal will only make it worse. Better for a criminal to be taking a risk rather than a stroll when breaking into a house.
-Guns are not necessary to defend a person. The only viewpoint in favour of this argument is that those causing you harm may have guns. If guns were never a constitutional right, then the chances of anyone using a gun to attack you are almost zero.
Theres this things criminals do. Its called operating outside of the law.




The only problem with removing the right to bear arms in the USA is how deeply rooted gun-culture is in the US, and how many of them exist in the country entirely untracked.
Chances are that removing the right would likely not decrease gun-crime in any sizable way for a long time.
It's not entirely cultural. You've been taught fairly wrong and its apparent.

Its the same thing when they tried to ban alcohol during that one point in time in the states i don't even remember. The illegal market only thrived and people suffered more from it.

England has less gun crime because they are smaller. Size definitely matters. However other methods of violence as a result have skyrocketed.

[Camel]

It's not entirely cultural. You've been taught fairly wrong and its apparent.

listen taya, we're trying to give Swat 3 some argument points, we aren't actually trying to have a giant fight


even if my comment was a bit catty, forget me

[Harm94]

Gun culture is not exclusive to the US. I remember the pistol shooting community being upset by all the bans in UK, in Germany you can own a ar-15 with a permit, Switzerland, Norway also has many hunters plus they are good in biathlon.

[Big Brøther]

did somebody say bear

[GhostStar]

an average of 100,000 people are shot in America every year. an average of 5,500,000 car crashes occur every year in America. now tell which should have the ban according to these statistics.

unlike cars, guns are often used in home defense and STOPPING CRIMINALS.
which is something a car doesn't really do.

also guns are used in hunting and killing live stock, which is also something you cant do with a car. i certainly wouldn't want to eat a cheese burger knowing that the cow was slowly run over by a tractor.

im not saying cars should be banned. im just saying that banning guns is stupid because guns are not the #1 killer of America's citizens

[Camel]

an average of 100,000 people are shot in America every year. an average of 5,500,000 car crashes occur every year in America. now tell which should have the ban according to these statistics.

unlike cars, guns are often used in home defense and STOPPING CRIMINALS.
which is something a car doesn't really do.

also guns are used in hunting and killing live stock, which is also something you cant do with a car. i certainly would want to eat a cheese burger knowing that it was slowly run over by a tractor.

im not saying cars should be banned. im just saying that banning guns is stupid because guns are not the #1 killer of America's citizens

My debate group was chosen to do this topic, the thing is:
we don't know if we are for or against.

of course I am for guns, but I don't know how I would go against it other than the "omg guns make bad guys bad" and "guns kill people!".

[Night Fox]

im just saying that banning guns is stupid because guns are not the #1 killer of America's citizens

let's ban heart disease

[Tayasaurus]

I say its working fairly well from OP

he's seeing people from several different viewpoints debating their views.

[Harm94]

Also the murder rate has been dropping for years, to ban guns would be redundant and only make people angry.