To start, I need to apologize to my opponent and the readers of this debate. I have had some real curve balls thrown at me the last few weeks
including a serious illness that I am really just getting past. So with that, onwards.
I made some points in my opening post about different forms of Gun control. Education, enforcing of Laws, responsible Laws, limiting the access of
guns by known criminals and providing a means to hinder the ability of people with bad intentions of getting guns. Yes, I am very aware that people
with bad intentions, if they want it bad enough, can and will get their hands on guns. Again, as I mentioned in my opening post, it is niave and
irresponsible to think other otherwise.
So let's start with education.
Now my opponent says this...
Gun control is one method, better education another. Here my opponent tries to equate the two. Im also for better education on guns...as the
better alternative to gun control.
as a rebuttal to my point on education. Sorry but I believe you agreed with me. My point was...
We also have to think that gun control can also mean better education. By that I mean that we can control the accidents that occur by having a
better educated population.
My point is that teaching people responsible gun ownership is a form of gun control. People who are taught proper safety, proper handling and
responsible ownership are going to have less gun accidents. That's the type of gun control=education I am speaking about. They are not mutually
exclusive, regardless of what my opponent may want you to believe.
This is that education I am referring to...
RULE I: All guns are always loaded
RULE II: Never let the muzzle cover anything that you are not willing to destroy
RULE III: Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target
RULE IV: Be sure of your target
Socratic Question: Would may opponent dispute these facts?
Now lets move on to enforcing existing Laws. Not all Laws are bad. On the contrary, certain Laws are required to have a civil society. Some gun
control laws are needed in a civil society. Even America has gun control laws. Many states have CCW laws. Many have other prohibited firearms laws.
In the United States, civilians are not allowed to possess machine-guns, sawn-off shotguns and rifles, silencers, and armour-piercing ammunition
without appropriate registration
Regulation of Automatic Assault Weapons
In the United States, private possession of fully automatic weapons is prohibited without appropriate registration
The Laws just need to be enforced better.
Now the third point I made earlier.
My opponent said this...
Its easy to show that tight gun laws have no effect on reducing crime, quite the contrary. Some of the countries with the highest murder rates
also have the strictest gun laws. Some of the countries with the lowest murder rates have the most lax gun laws.
Ok let's dissect those claims some shall we.
Murder rates around the world
Country Homicides per 100,000 pop
Luxembourg 0.4 2004
Japan 0.5 2005
Morocco 0.5 2004
Singapore 0.5 2004
Hong Kong (Spec Admin Reg China) 0.6 2004
Austria 0.7 2004
Egypt 0.7 2005
Fiji 0.7 2004
United Arab Emirates 0.7 2004
Norway 0.8 2004
Luxembourg- Tight gun laws
Japan- tight gun laws
Morocco- Decent gun laws but small ownership, 5.0 per 100 people
Singapore- fairly tight gun laws and low gun ownership
Hong Kong- In the year listed, there were NO recorded gun homicides
Austria-decent gun laws and decent amount of firearms in private hands, although out of about 8.5 million people, only about 330,000 are registered
gun owners( that's only about 4% of the population )
Egypt- fairly strict gun laws
Fiji- Strict gun laws
UAE- fairly lax laws
Norway( one of those places my opponent mentioned by the way as having strict gun control laws remember? )- Loose gun control laws.
Here's a few numbers for you from Norway, just to show my opponents claim of strict gun laws false. In Norway, automatic, semi automatic and handguns
are permitted with a license. Number of registered guns in civilian hands, 1.22 million. Out of 179 countries, Norway placed 11 for rate of private
* all summary of numbers and summary of description of gun laws come from...
Now, I am sure you're saying that, wait, doesn't this help Sky's argument? yes it does, sort of but what it really shows is that my opponent is
willing to be dishonest with you when he is presenting his "facts". Keep that in mind while you are reading his next posts folks.
I will finish my argument in my closing post.
Back to you Sky.