Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

6
13
Yup. Wait..., what? No!!!
Debate Score:19
Arguments:21
Total Votes:19
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yup. (6)
 
 Wait..., what? No!!! (13)

Debate Creator

jolie(9810) pic



Can the U.S. government realistically confiscate civilian weapons (guns)?


Australia confiscated 650,000 guns.

Murders and suicides plummeted.

Yup.

Side Score: 6
VS.

Wait..., what? No!!!

Side Score: 13
1 point

The short answer is, yes.

The long answer is, I hope not. We need to keep rush hour traffic under control.

Side: Yup.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

The short answer is actually no. There are way more than 650,000 guns in America. I think you have to do the Australian buy back program 48 times to cover America.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

I know, right? I love it ;)

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
AlofRI(3294) Clarified
1 point

650,000? I heard an FBI guy yesterday put the number at 310,000,000....at least one for every American!

Side: Yup.

Yes, look at the evidence! The evidence right there states that there was a great decrease of murders and suicides. Why would you disagree with the governement confiscating these weapons

Side: Yup.
1 point

I consider gun related deaths as population controll, helping to keep rush hour traffic down to a more manageable level.

Side: Yup.
1 point

Those are gun related. It just went to knives and 2 by 4s after that. Honestly I'd rather be shot. KEEP EM GUN COMIN

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

The article you limited is bullshit. The guy is writing about a study specifically about firearm related deaths, but describing all deaths. We need to know if total deaths went down, not just firearm deaths.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

Freaking Bull shit articles!!!

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

Regretfully, no. What they CAN do is seriously upgrade the penalty for committing a crime with one, or endangering the lives of others with one. They can also bring the second amendment up to date since, when it was written, the most dangerous firearm was a single shot musket with an inaccurate firing rate of about once every 2+ minutes! Handguns and assault rifles with firing rates of over a thousand rounds a minute were unimaginable!. I have little doubt that the founding fathers would have put much more thought into that piece of legislation if they could have imagined anything like that!

The Constitution was designed to be changed to fit a growing nation and a changing world. It was NOT written to give the NRA Carte Blanche on the interpretation of it.

I have always been a gun owner, was a member of the once proud NRA for many years. Today I consider them a force for domestic terrorism. A shame!

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

I always thought that reason for gun ownership is to deter tyranny. So I think assult riffles are OK.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
AlofRI(3294) Disputed
1 point

Any tyranny will be accomplished WITH assault rifles. The last REAL tyranny in the U.S. was called the "Civil War". Most of us have grown intellectually enough to keep our elected government from that kind of tyranny. The tyranny of today are led by those groups who defy the elected government "by the people", those who think the "majority" means the majority who agrees with THEM. There are those un-American media groups that are able to convince gullible minds that only THEIR point of view is "patriotic". They are no different than the "Brown Shirts", the KKK, or ISIS. Real Americans work WITH their elected government, WITH the WHOLE majority not WITH groups of "Posse" and gun clubs that are armed with the express opinion that THEY should take over the government "Of the people". THEY are the "tyranny" that WE, the majority of the people need to keep from destroying democracy.

Side: Yup.
1 point

Regretfully, no.

Regretfully?!?! Are you ballistic?!?! Take guns away from law abiding citizens? When there will still be black markets for illegal weapons such as the RPG or flamethrowers (Which it is actually 100% legal to own a flamethrower in America. 'MERICA FUCK YEAH) for criminals?

What they CAN do is seriously upgrade the penalty for committing a crime with one

But will that stop criminals from committing the crime in the first place... Noooooooooooooooooo.

or endangering the lives of others with one. They can also bring the second amendment up to date since, when it was written, the most dangerous firearm was a single shot musket with an inaccurate firing rate of about once every 2+ minutes!

Actually they were decently accurate (not as accurate as our current but that was 200 years ago) and they could be reloaded in 30 seconds. Also they could inflict more damage than our current average weapon at a close-medium range. Mainly because the bullet was the diameter of a quarter. And the criminals were trigger happy and liked dat black powder.

Handguns and assault rifles with firing rates of over a thousand rounds a minute were unimaginable!

And I'm sure our founding fathers (and mothers, we needed them just as much) would look you in the eye and slap you upside the face for thinking they would change their mind about guns.

I have little doubt that the founding fathers would have put much more thought into that piece of legislation if they could have imagined anything like that!

looks behind myself LINCOLN GET OUT OF BED! SHOW HIM WHAT SOMEONE THAT HAS BEEN SHOT THINKS ABOUT IT. moves for Lincoln to sit, has to type for Lincoln because he knows nothing about computers Had we those weapons during the civil war I would have rejoiced! We would have died quicker and less painful deaths! I got shot and lived to the next morning. God that was painful but had he shot me with a Glock I would have died peacefully.

The Constitution was designed to be changed to fit a growing nation and a changing world. It was NOT written to give the NRA Carte Blanche on the interpretation of it.

I have always been a gun owner, was a member of the once proud NRA for many years. Today I consider them a force for domestic terrorism. A shame!

Is completely confused. Are you supporting gun rights or are stripping them???

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

I fear that the people who try to take our guns away will end up getting shot ;)

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!