Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

15
26
Sure why not. Hell, no!!!
Debate Score:41
Arguments:44
Total Votes:43
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Sure why not. (15)
 
 Hell, no!!! (22)

Debate Creator

jolie(9805) pic



Should liberals be allowed to own guns?

https://mic.com/articles/172489/liberal-gun-club-buns-rural-urban-2nd-amendment-leftists#.pseFLakwi

Support for the second ammendment has increased since Trump took office.

Sure why not.

Side Score: 15
VS.

Hell, no!!!

Side Score: 26
1 point

Hello:

I thought right wingers LOVED the Constitution.. No, huh?

excon

Side: Sure why not.
1 point

If we allow the liberals to own guns then the LGBTQ community will want them and the Muslims will want them and anyone else who Trump hates will want them and it will make the job that much more difficult once the shooting starts ;)

Side: Sure why not.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

Which right wingers here are trying to stop liberals from getting guns?

Side: Hell, no!!!
outlaw60(15375) Disputed
1 point

Right wingers TALK about the Constitution but they don't understand it..

Hello:

George W. Bush started the prison at Gitmo because he THOUGHT the Constitution didn't apply. But, he found out that it does. Here's the 5th Amendment...

"No PERSON shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

If you notice, the subject of this amendment is "persons". I suspect my opponents will say it MEANS citizens. I, however, don't think our founders made a mistake. Do any of you paper conservatives wanna take me on???

Ex-Con

Your confusion is so noted !

Side: Hell, no!!!

Only 16-18% of liberals think guns should be banned for everyone except law enforcement. The vast majority support the right to own a gun. (source)

Side: Sure why not.
1 point

That's kind of scary. Imagine if 16-18% of a political party felt that only cops should have free speech.

Side: Sure why not.

I'd say that's still a small number.

Unless that's all part of the elected.

Side: Sure why not.
outlaw60(15375) Disputed
1 point

Vast majority of Progressives want guns banned !

PHILADELPHIA — Fifteen years after they concluded that gun control was a losing issue for them, Democrats say it’s time for a rethink, convinced that a spate of mass shootings has changed the politics and left Americans clamoring for action.

From the stage this week, a powerful lineup of victims and family members of those killed in shootings begged for gun bans, saying the deranged shooters would have caused far less damage without the semi-automatic rifles many of them used.

Side: Hell, no!!!
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

Only banning semi auto rifles isn't banning all guns.

Side: Sure why not.
outlaw60(15375) Disputed
1 point

Give up your percentages once again if you will LittleMisFit !

Side: Hell, no!!!
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

When you can't dispute the facts you Progressives run and hide

Side: Sure why not.
2 points

Liberals who own guns are hypocrites ;)

Side: Hell, no!!!
AlofRI(3263) Clarified
1 point

Aw, C'MON! I've always owned guns! I used to be a member of the NRA ... for years! I taught gun safety in NRA sanctioned classes @ the "Y", shot in NRA sanctioned matches! Because THEY changed their agenda I AM THE HYPOCRITE?? No, I'm still FOR the Second Amendment, I just think it should be modified slightly for the good of the American people. We should be as sure as we can be that whoever buys one (or more) legally should not be a terrorist or a person with known, shall we say, "uncontrollable urges" (mental problems etc.)! That done, we have to work on the "ILLEGAL" buying. We have to start somewhere!

The idea that "liberals want to take our guns" (other than a very few radicals) is an NRA/Faux News fabrication! Millions of liberals own guns and want to keep them .... like ME!

Side: Sure why not.
Amarel(5560) Clarified
1 point

Indeed, many liberals are gun owners and 2nd Amentment advocates. The problem is that many liberal representatives are not, and since it is not a primary concern of gun owning liberals, representatives occasionally express anti-gun rhetoric without reprimand from the gun owning liberals they represent.

Side: Sure why not.
1 point

If we allow the liberals to own guns then the LGBTQ community will want them and the Muslims will want them and anyone else who Trump hates will want them and it will make the job that much more difficult once the shooting starts ;)

Side: Hell, no!!!
Amarel(5560) Clarified
1 point

The flip side of this partisan character attack is the insinuation that right wingers want to arm terrorists, criminals, and the mentally deficient. I would say that this is at least as false as the notion that liberals want to take guns.

Which misrepresentation do you think is the least false? That liberals want to take guns, or that conservatives want to arm the insane?

Side: Sure why not.

I think this is really funny. Liberals say "I don't want to ban guns, I want people to be able to own guns, but have regulations." Republicans say "LIAR! You're just trying to ban all guns in baby steps." Liberals say, "No, look, I have a gun." Republicans say "Hypocrite! You don't match what I said you believe!"

Side: Hell, no!!!
2 points

Do you own a gun? ;)

Side: Hell, no!!!
Amarel(5560) Disputed
0 points

I'm not sure Jolie can represent Republicans position. Liberals aren't typically called hypocrites when they own guns, but rather when they don't, they take an anti-gun position (which not all of them do), and their body guards are armed.

Side: Sure why not.
pirateelfdog(2655) Clarified
1 point

I don't know. When everyone was getting mad at Hillary Clinton for having an armed guard, they were ignoring the fact that she has never advocated for a universally anti-gun position.

Also, I do think those arguments are somewhat ridiculous in their own right. If I'm anti-gun, but not having an armed guard means I'll die because the place I live in has guns, it's not hypocritical to have an armed guard.

Side: Sure why not.

THIS DEBATE WON A GOLDEN BRONTO AWARD.

https://www.facebook.com/Ultimate-Debate-708992005944621/

Side: Hell, no!!!