Debate

 

If you ask me, you can learn as much in one debate as you could in a full semester course at a university. This is because debates force you to defend the logic of your argument and also expose the lack of logic in your opponent's arguements. In order to do that, you have to know more than just a slogan like "guns don't kill people, people kill people." The slogan is true and the logic is solid... but the Left has slogans of their own. What sets gun owners apart from the anti-gun crowd needs to be our ability to intelligently and persuasively knock down opposing views. For this reason I am putting together a list of some of the Left's main arguments against guns and my take on how you should begin to respond. This information is only a primer, enough to get you started, but you need to keep educating yourself on the issues that threaten our freedom every day. 

 

 

The Founders couldn’t have known about the destructive power of modern technology

 

The Historical Argument: This claim from the Left is surprisingly popular. I say "surprisingly" because it is 100% false. Not only could the Founders have envisioned weapons technology like automatic weapons, they didn't need to. The technology was in existence long before the Constitution was ever written. WHAT?? How is that even possible? Well, military rifle technology usually lags behind civilian technology. Two main reasons for this are that the military needs to produce their rifles in very large quantities, and more importantly, they extensively test new weapons before doing so. During the American revolution, muskets were what was used and so the political Left assumes that that was as far as weapons technology had come at the time. But as I said, this is a lie. Allow me to validate my claim with two examples. First up: the Puckle Gun. This gun was patented in 1718 and was one of the first guns to be referred to as a "machine gun". It may not have been as useful as a modern automatic gun, but the concept was there. And that was about half a century BEFORE the American revolution. The next example is tied directly to the Founders (in case you tried to use that to dismiss the previous example). Thomas Jefferson himself owned not one, but two Girardoni air rifles. These were a 22-shot, magazine-fed, nearly silent .46 caliber repeating rifle. For those of you that don't speak gun too good: Did it have what the Left calls a "high" capacity magazine? Yes. Is it capable of firing 22 aimed shots in a minute? Yes. Is it a military-style weapon? Yes. Was it manufactured during the American Revolutionary War? Yes.

The Legal Argument: The U.S. Sureme Court case DC v Heller (2008) ruled that the Second Amendment is not dependent on technology, just as free speech didn’t end due to the revolutionary power of speaking platforms that were brought about by the invention of computers. 

 

 

More gun control laws are needed to protect women from domestic abusers and stalkers.

 

With domestic abuse, the man is using his power to abuse the woman. If you take his gun away, he is still 99 times out of 100 stronger and able to overpower her and beat her up and toss her around. A gun is a power equalizer. Even though she may be weaker, if a woman has a gun to protect herself she now has control over her own body and her own safety. Taking guns away would leave her defenseless against those sick and morally bankrupt people out there that would hurt her just because they want to feel powerful. AND, the law already restricts domestic abuse felons from being able to purchase or own a firearm. They get blocked by NICS.

 

The Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns.

 

You clearly don’t know how many gun laws and regulations are in place. We are nowhere near the 2nd amendment being an unlimited right.

 

Guns owners stopping shootings is just a fantasy.

 

There are plenty of examples of armed civilians stopping mass shootings and even more examples of them stopping robberies, rape, and all sorts of other crimes. And that’s even with the circular situation the Left has put us in: All of the places where mass shootings happen...schools, concerts, hospitals...the Left has made it illegal to carry a weapon there. Then they try to say “concealed carriers haven’t stopped any mass shootings.”  Well gee guys, I wonder why that is. That’s like me owning a store and saying fire extinguishers aren’t allowed in my store. Then a fire breaks out and burns my store down. The next day I try to come out and say “see... fire extinguishers don’t stop fires because my store burned down.” It’s insane!

 

The Second Amendment is for a militia, not individuals. 

 

This is the argument that D.C. used in their case against Heller in 2008. The Supreme Court did a full analysis of the wording of the Second Amendment to decide this case. The wording of the Second Amendment can be broken down into two parts. The first is the Prefatory Clause (A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,) which is the stated purpose for the amendment. They specifically say that the amendment could be rephrased, “BECAUSE a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The remainder of the text is known as the Operative Clause. The first part of the amendment is only there to help us understand the second part, but it does not put any limitations or expansions on the second part. So the militia may have been the reason for the right of the people to keep and bear arm having been written, but it does not mean that you have to be in a malitia to exercise that right. Make sense? So I could write an amendment that says "Because people need to be able to cut fruit, the people have a right to own knives." Being able to cut fruit is the REASON for the amendment, but it doesn't mean that if you are not cutting fruit you can't have a knife. So, the second amendment guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms, and that is because the militia (all able-bodied citizens) may need to defend freedom from tyranny. 

 

The NRA is responsible for school shootings.

 

This claim from the Left is essentially that because the NRA wants weapons to be legal, they don't care about children. This is an unbased character attack and there is no evidence to support this. In December of 2012 the NRA initiated the National School Shield Program which was announced to the public in a speech by Wayne LaPierre. An exerpt from that speech reads:

 

"The NRA is going to bring all of its knowledge, dedication and resources to develop a model National School Shield Emergency Response Program for every school that wants it. From armed security to building design and access control to information technology to student and teacher training, this multi-faceted program will be developed by the very best experts in their fields."  December 21, 2012    Full text at: NRA Speech 

Want to take a guess as to how many schools took the NRA up on their offer? It's not a very big number. American public schools seem to want to take control of everything except for self defense and defense of the children. In that area they would rather sit back, snark, and mock the idea of actually stepping up to the plate and arming their own staff so that their children don't get massacred. They would rather do nothing and blame the NRA who actually has a plan and the resources to help. 

 

I don't mind handguns, but people shouldn't own assault weapons

 

Depending on the year, rifles (which includes "assault rifles") make up around 2% of gun deaths. 

2014_FBI_gun_stats.png

 

People that say they need guns are just paranoid and afraid

 

I'm no psychologist, but this seems like projection to me. Many people on the Left have an irrational fear of guns, and yet they claim people on the Right are the paranoid ones just for being prepared to defend against real, potential threats. We wear seatbelts, we have smoke detectors, we buy insurance, we take all sorts of steps to keep ourselves safe. It's not because we are paranoid, it's because we are proactive. It's because we aren't afraid to take control over our own lives, be responsible, and have a plan of action. 

 

Gun owners are all white men

 

You're an idiot.