the democratic party

All right. Let's break this down and try to make it more clear. First, It's not because African-Americans like you. It's because through your policymaking you have not only kept them almost completely dependent on the government for support, but you have implemented patronizing policies such as affirmative action that hurts the public image of the people who get the support of affirmative action by demeaning their accomplishments and always making people wonder if they actually earned it. Your policies have also shattered their families and subjected their communities to large amounts of violent crime. Next, my opponent says we should keep guns under lock and key. for this I have a rather lengthy response. so I'll try to limit it down to just a thousand or so characters. Contention one: Subpoint A I can produce several examples of cases against gun control one according to Time.com is that there has been a remarkable decrease in gun violence since the 1990s yet there has been nothing but an increase in privately owned handguns showing that there is no correlation in the ownership of handguns and the preservation of the second amendment and gun violence. As well that if you have already decided to commit murder I don"t think you"re going to care if your gun is owned illegally that"s like saying "a"right i"m gonna go commit a murder. Wait what handguns are illegal!? Well then it"s all off then we wouldn"t wanna get in trouble." subpoint B The notion that crime will go away if we ban guns is in and of itself ridiculous the only thing that would be accomplished if we ban handguns from being owned by citizens would be to violate the rights of American citizens and violate the second amendment of our constitution. Which the American government is sworn to uphold as stated in the president"s oath "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." If we ban handguns we make those words nothing but empty promises over a dead oath. As Americans, we cannot condone the violation of our rights or our constitution which has presided over the government of our nation since it was created and has done an excellent job with it. The right to bear arms is clearly stated in our bill of rights and while taking away one may seem reasonable at the time it"s a slippery slope. Once we start it will become acceptable to take more and more until the United States is a shadow of its former self, having been denied of its liberties. subpoint C Furthermore, according to a recent supreme court case known as Heller vs. Columbia according to law.cornell.com written by Cornell University law department on December 5 2015 the supreme court ruled that gun control of any kind is unconstitutional so any argument that the second amendment was drafted a long time ago and is out of date null seeing as it was still ruled as correct in the modern day. subpoint D according to gunowners.org on handguns are used to defend people against criminals 2.5 million times per year making about roughly 6,850 times per day just in the U.S meaning that handguns are used to defend innocent civilians over 80 times more often than to take lives of innocents. Furthermore, according to the United States national institute of justice the black market for guns is quite large so if we ban handguns clearly the only people without guns would be the people who already follow the law, not the people who don't. this is affirmed by ATF.gov who used gun tracing to detect suspicious activity and found incredibly high numbers of illegal gun trafficking in the U.S. nullifying any argument that banning handguns would keep them away from criminals. So as we can see, "keeping guns under lock and key" is not only ineffective but is also immoral as it would lead to an increase in innocent deaths. He asks "how the heck" raising the minimum wage wouldn't help poor people. Reading my posts would help you formulate arguments in case that wasn't clear. All of my reasoning is there and I'm not going to take the time to write it all again. Next, he states that it's Repubbos like me that cause mass shootings. Ad hominem aside, he also misstated my argument. I did not say that gun control fails to stop some mass shootings. I stated that it failed to stop any significant number of them. In order for something to be statistically significant, the p-value needs to be at or below 5%. Gun control was not statistically significant in stopping mass shootings, therefore scientists would reject gun control as a null hypothesis.