IIRC, there's a threadmark on this already. Something about how they were rarely used for criminal purposes when they were legal, and the fact that they're not actually all that useful in a mass shooting because automatic fire is harder to aim and just dumping bullets downrange wildly is less lethal than deliberately aimed fire. Letting people build technicals has a massive risk of increasing gun deaths. One man with a minigun technical could kill hundreds of people in seconds if near a festival or gathering.
I do not think there should be restrictions on Guns. Now, let me make a clear point here. Nuclear Bombs or Missiles.
I believe that the gun control in the US is unnecessary and nonproductive. So, here we go.
Gun control and laws are wrong. Thank you for the debate and I appreciate the sentiment. Unfortunately, however, I strongly disagree with your premise.
My opponent has stated that he does not believe guns should be restricted. He must first defend the abolition of basic gun possession laws, and then defend restriction of gun possession in regards to area. In terms of area, should that same child be allowed to take his newly equipped fully automatic assault rifle to elementary school?
Conclusion In conclusion, it is inconceivable to allow a 10 year old child to possess said weapon, and then allow the child to take it to elementary school. Thus, requiring gun restriction laws.
Con Clearing Up the Confusion There has been a lot of confusion in this debate. I would like to clear things up. I hope that clears up what I stand for on the issue and do apologize for any confusion.
I am standing for no further restrictions than what there already are. Now, I realize when my opponent states his argument for round one, he was unaware of what I said in the previous section "Clearing Up the Confusion" Also, a ten year old has no constitutional rights, so that comment at the end was completely irrelevent.
My opponent stated above unaware of what I stand for, and in the debate my opponent has gotten the idea that I am for no gun restrictions at all, which is not what I stand for, and I apologize if you were confused.
The comments I understand may have been misleading. The Debate of No Further Restrictions My opponent in taking the "Pro" For side of this debate means that he is in favor of more restrictions on our guns.
With more restrictions than there already are, that would not allow certain groups to get guns. Now, that is a direct attack on the "Right to Bear Arms," our second amendment. Technically, as American people we would be losing an amendment, a right as a citizen of the United States.
Nobody, has the power to take our rights. Which leads me directly in to my next topic. Taking Our Rights If the people of this country keep getting their way with issues like this, we may lose more rights than just our guns.Gun Control, a term that refers to the management of firearms in an effort to reduce the criminal use of these weapons.
(MICROSOFT (R) ENCARTA ) In the early s there were more than million privately owned guns in the United States, which makes it plain to see why there are argum. Explore the pros and cons of the debate Gun Laws / Control in the United States. Absent either, gun control would not be a controversial issue.
35 Views · View Upvoters · Answer requested by Quora User Brian Mead, I live in the USA, born and raised. When did the gun control debate begin in this country? Some say it started shortly after November 22, when evidence in the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy increased public awareness to the relative lack of control over the sale and possession of firearms in America. Indeed, until , handguns, rifles, shotguns, and ammunition were commonly sold over-the-counter and through mail . Gun control advocates concerned about high levels of gun violence in the United States look to restrictions on gun ownership as a way to stem the violence and say that increased gun ownership leads to higher levels of crime, suicide and other negative outcomes.
Nov 21, · In gun control groups outspent the NRA and pro gun control candidates won in places like Texas, despite the NRA heavily campaigning against them.
This could be a sign that the politics of gun rights aren't quite what they were a few years ago or not.