No Futher Restrictions on Guns

Now in to the debate:Laws already in placeHere are some basic laws already in place throughout various states in the USA. You have to be at least 21 years old to purchase and own a handgun in the U. S. . http://forum.pafoa.org...... All states basic restrictions . http://en.wikipedia.org......(by_state)Criminals cannot own a gun, nor can illegal aliens. http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com......You must be 18 to own a shotgun or rifle. http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com......Those are just some basic United States gun laws already implemented in to our system of Gun Control. If you read, you will notice that one of the basic laws is that criminals and illegal aliens cannot legally own a firearm in the United States. With stricter gun laws being added, who else would you like to restrict? What other citizens should not be able to own a gun? None of them. We all have the right to bear arms. Now, should we all have them? No. Criminals, illegal aliens, mentally unstable, should be prohibited, and they are. So who else would you like to ban? Another basic law is that you must be 18 years old to own a gun. We should not further restrict that either. That is the legal age to be officially an adult. Plus, when you are eighteen, you cannot have a handgun, which in today's society is much more dangerous than a shotgun. You must be even older to own a more dangerous weapon. That makes perfect sense, we should not further restrict. Why no further restrictions? My opponent is obviously for further restrictions of guns. So, as the opposer, it is my job to present arguments against further restrictions. First off being, of course, the second amendment. The right to bear arms. Lets honor our country and rights, and not restrict or abolish an amendment. Further restrictions could possibly lead to a removal of a right, or even so much restrictions its pointless to have a right. Number two being that the gun laws are strict enough. The gun rights that are currently being practiced are strict enough, and the thought of adding more may not have an effect. Changing the legal age to own a shotgun from 18 years old to 24 years old, is in my opinion, absurd. What is the point. If I am eighteen and am planning a crime, two years of waiting will only make me want my gun more than ever, and being more anxious to get it. Disarming the wrong people I would like to ask my opponent what further bans or restrictions he would like to implement to our current system. I personally believe that adding more restrictions and making a pile of bans one after the other will only disarm the wrong people. The only people that will follow more restrictions and bans are the law abiding citizens not planning on abusing their guns in violent ways. For example, take cocaine or any other illegal drug. It is illegal to have or use, but criminals still get a hold of cocaine, and who doesn't? Law abiding citizens. You can restrict guns further and ban them, but criminals will still get a hold of it, and who won't? The citizens planning no violence. Not only is this unconstitutional, but very dangerous. The criminals are now armed, and the citizens needing self protection are unarmed, making the criminals more dangerous, and the citizens less equipped and protected. Now, I apologize for the brief opening statement, but I do not have my opponents plan of action for more strict laws, and choose not to assume what he will say. In my last debate over guns I made a lot of errors, my main error other than lack of experience was the fact that I assumed what my opponent thought, when they obviously had other plans. Therefore, I would rather have a brief opening statement than one full of assumptions. Thank you again Con for the acceptance of the debate, and I now turn the debate over to my opponent. Sources Used. http://forum.pafoa.org...... . http://en.wikipedia.org...... . http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com......http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com......