Gun Control

RebuttalsI would like to begin by asking this question: If gun control is not going to be enacted, what else can you do to prevent crime? Are you simply going to stand there and do nothing, while allowing innocent individuals to die because of gun violence? I will not. I will not stop advocating gun control until every school, mall, movie theatre, and public space in the United States is safe. My opponent said that I have a "lack of sources and information to back up claims" and "excessive use of the word 'logic." Okay, I must concede to that. If the voters wish to, they may give my opponent the sources points. However, I believe I made the better arguments. There should rather be a delay for criminals to obtain a gun than immediately obtaining that gun. The black market exists and is dangerous, I know that. However, background checks are the only gun control method we have discussed to far. I have plenty more rebuttals. There is one I just noticed and neglected earlier. In the third round, my opponent said this: "As for how gun control would have a direct impact on the economy, I believe I have explained this in my previous argument. Obviously, you're not satisfied yet. During the recent recession, the gun industry created 37,000 new jobs with an average salary of $47,000 a year." What does this have to do with gun control? The industry itself will be doing just fine. The jobs are not going to magically disappear. My opponent needs to prove that this point is relevant.I will provide some more links now:http://listverse.com...http://www.huffingtonpost.com...;First, it seems that the support for gun control has risen, actually. Also, most massacres occur using legal weapons, not weapons from the black market. The more guns are available, the more suicides occur. My opponent is a Conservative. Actually, an individual that all Conservatives hail - Ronald Reagan - actually favored gun control. Here is his quote: Yes, he did indeed say that. Ronald Reagan, one of the most Conservative presidents we have had, favored gun control, particularly background checks. Now, tell me, is the below image rational?: An entire family is holding guns. Even the young boy in the image is holding a pistol. That is simply irrational, unecessary, and simply appalling. A young boy is not going to always make the right decisions. It just takes one wrong move and then he will cause chaos. "Gun control harms the economy because it runs thousands of people out of their jobs." My opponent has not made a logical link between jobs and gun control. "When you said Germany has great gun control, I'm guessing you meant in urban areas where guns aren't needed as much." I somewhat meant that, yes. However, Germany has a much lower crime rate than the United States - as I have shown earlier - and that means something. "It doesn't interfere with law abiding citizen's right of getting a gun. However, it is an inconvenience to the buyer. If it is an inconvenience to the average buyer, and it does not prevent or delay crime, why do it?" Gun control does delay crime. I believe I have shown this. I sincerely apologize if my arguments are somewhat bad. I have endured a lot of stress lately. I have a lot of obligations to take care of. I essentially rushed this argument. I apologize for that. I admit, my arguments could be better, but I tried. I really tried. I wish my opponent good luck on this debate, as well as his future encounters. The better debater shall win!