Return to CreateDebate.comhunter8a • Join this debate community

Hunter 8A


Debate Info

9
6
Yes, we need to update it. No, it should not be updated.
Debate Score:15
Arguments:17
Total Votes:15
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, we need to update it. (9)
 
 No, it should not be updated. (6)

Debate Creator

ryan712(226) pic



Topic #1: Do we need to update the second amendment for a modern society?

Yes, we need to update it.

Side Score: 9
VS.

No, it should not be updated.

Side Score: 6
1 point

Opening Statement: The second amendment needs to be updated as it was made during the civil war to allow members of America to defend themselves from hostile people. although nowadays it's less necessary, These days guns are being used as a weapon against Americans, People are using these guns to kill other people and there is no need for it to be sold properly. Some people can go into a store and buy a military grade weapon as a civilian which has no use.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
1 point

Argument #1: Firstly the second amendment is outdated, It was made in the civil war, back then people died and bombs was set off, so it was necessary to protect your family from war or, that is when they made the second amendment but nowadays it is not necessary to have military grade weapons in your household.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
marwan_a(12) Disputed
1 point

-DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE-

Supporting Evidence: List of US Mass Shootings (www.voanews.com)
Side: No, it should not be updated.
marwan_a(12) Disputed
1 point

-DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE--DELETE-

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
1 point

Argument 2 Nael: People say they use their gun to help defend themselves and their family from attackers although you don't need a military grade assault rifle with high firepower to defend yourself from a simple attacker. If you look at other countries you can see how they have gun laws banned and there are many fewer attackers as not only the civilian himself has no gun to defend themselves but neither do the attackers. A recent study in 2003 showed that counties with higher household gun ownership are more likely to get robbed as the robbers did not only want money but also wanted the guns.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
marwan_a(12) Disputed
1 point

We already talked about this idea on the other side. Please refer to it.

Side: No, it should not be updated.
1 point

Closing Statement: So the second amendment needs to be updated because it was made in the civil war, back then people died and bombs were set off, so it was necessary to protect your family from war and you don't need a military grade assault rifle with high firepower to defend yourself from a simple attacker. Also If you look at other countries you can see how they have gun laws banned and there are many fewer attackers

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
1 point

Gun control legislation would likely increase the black market in countries.

Side: No, it should not be updated.
marwan_a(12) Clarified
1 point

If someone wants to own a gun, they’re going to own one. That is a pretty basic principle that applies to legal and illegal gun owners. Gun control legislation attempts to create more safety by creating more loops for legal owners to jump through to own a firearm. There will always be people who steal firearms or alter information on background checks to circumvent laws. Gun control legislation would likely increase the black market in countries for ownership for those who simply want a self-defense option, or for those who still brutally want to cause a shooting.

Supporting Evidence: Inside the illegal online weapons trade (edition.cnn.com)
Side: Yes, we need to update it.
Fabio(5) Disputed
1 point

Firstly this is wrong because there is no reason for owning a military grade gun, those guns are specially made for war, not for protection. The selling of black market guns may increase although going through the process of buying from the black market puts more stress on the buyer and makes it overall a much harder task to do.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
1 point

Fewer guns will not change the behavior and decision of people.

Side: No, it should not be updated.
marwan_a(12) Clarified
1 point

Gun control laws have arguably caused gun violence incidents to reduce around the world, but alternative weapons could still be used to commit a crime. Knife attacks, vehicle attacks, and homemade explosives can technically do just as much damage as a gun can, and in some cases, they could even deal more damage, when put into the right hands.

For example, recently, in New York, a terrorist drove a truck at full speed over a bike path, leaving lots of people dead and many people injured.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
Nael(2) Disputed
1 point

Alternate weapons, that means less weapons, less lethal weapons too. This is still helpful. Knife attacks are much harder too pull off than a gun attack, explosives are much more complicated, and vehicle attacks take out less people at a time and is overall easier too stop. This is overall still helping stop/reduce overall attacks and making them less lethal in some cases.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.
Nael(2) Disputed
1 point

Also yes it will, it will make it much harder for people attempting to buy weapons and it will overall put more pressure on people who want to buy guns as they know it will be illegal. It also means people can't just walk around the street with a gun with them and have nothing happen to them.

Side: Yes, we need to update it.