Allowing Citizens to Carry Handguns Reduces Crime Rates

As the contender of this debate, I have a few specific inquiries concerning the context of today's debate: 1> The specific requirements and regulations concerning acquisition of a permit for handguns as stated in the debate. 2> How you feel should be the criterion for which crime rates should be judged by, in the stated hypothetical situation of the resolution. Now as to move onto the specific resolution: 1> Acquisition as well as possession of handguns by citizens on a day to day basis increases crime rates because of the basis of the facilitated usage of such destructive weapons that it rests on. Having it legal for a citizen to be in possession of a handgun increases number of individuals that have access to items that are capable for crime; the crime rate is judged on the fundamental basis of probability of the number of an individual or a group in being able to utilize weapons to commit illegal actions. Thus, looking towards this basic vital point, having such a easy way to acquire a weapon such as a handgun not only increases the number of individuals capable of committing crimes, which increases probability of crime, but also provides a method for individuals looking to purposefully devote to crime to do so without legal regulations of possession of a weapon on the body. 2> Not only does having a background check provide insufficient grounds for which permits can guarantee safety in terms of possession, but also excludes the huge possibility as well as reality of individuals who are not intrinsically or inherently criminals in their past, but are looking to do as such after such possession. Criminals, as a term used to refer to the wide range of individuals who have violated specifically in a wide range of ways law regulations, is too broad to be inclusive of a benchmark or specific criterion for which we can judge whether or not to give a permit to. Crimes differ in severity, and there is no specific or valid ground for which permits can be given. Allowing it to be denied from all individuals who have violated legal restrictions, either accidentally or purposefully would entail denying possession from such individuals who have committed certain violations such as jaywalking or traffic violations; it would destroy the concept of a permit altogether, and thus it would not be valid to provide a certain and specific benchmark to judge whether it is valid and safe to bestow a permit based on criminal record. b. Limiting safety to means of a permit also neglects and fails to address the fundamental issue of individuals who are looking to commit crime or violate law regulations yet have not done so in a past criminal record of any kind. Providing handguns for all individual citizens who do not have a criminal record allows for easier possession as well as for individuals who are looking to do so in the future to do so without any law restriction or violation. 3> My opponent's assumptions yet all also cater only to the basic assumption of safety and work towards the factor of safety; yet the fundamental point that remains throughout is that safety is based on possession, and no form of registration or security on an individual basis will allow for safety in of itself to be provided because of the facilitated way for individuals with a criminal mentality to access handguns and such weapons. Thank you, and I eagerly await my opponent's further developments in this debate.