Gun Laws / Control in the United States

This is the third and final round of the debate, so in this round I will be laying out four things; 1) My Opponent's false statements and quotes2) My Response to my opponent's in round two3) My final statements and points to which my side is correct4) Closing Statements So, let us begin: My opponents false Statements and Quotes Quote 1) "The score is now 1 round to my opponents 0" Response) I personally believe that we should let the audience and voters decide what the score is, not us. We are not debating the score we are debating guns, so that should be our main focus. Also, there is no "score" right now, so let's not establish one independently, please. Quote 2) In reply to my previous statement, "A ten year old has no constitutional rights" my opponent says, "Nonsense, it was to point out he had 0 limitations on guns," Response)That is completely false. It is a basic fact to everyone that we do not get constitutional rights until we are a legal citizen, in which you must be 18 years of age. Also, if you add more gun restrictions it will not be effecting the ten year old. A ten year old could take a gun in to school whether there are gun laws or not, because they do not pertain to him. Because, once again, a ten year old has no constitutional rights. Quote 3) "Soldiers (Opponent typed "soldier" clearly meaning "soldiers") are not dying specifically to protect our second amendment," Response) That statement is not what I would consider to be a false statement, because it is obviously true. A soldier does not go out and die for our country just because he wants to make sure the people back at home have guns. He goes and serves his country for like my opponent stated, "free society" and part of having a free society is having our rights. And one of our rights is the right to bear arms. So yes, obviously a soldier isn't fighting alone for our second amendment, he is dying for all of them. Which includes the second amendment! Quote 4) "I have no interest in abolishing the second amendment," Response) I would hope you don't! I don't think anybody does though, unless of course a communist. Nobody really wants to lose an amendment, but if we keep adding more and more restrictions to what already exists, we may loose the amendment. Now, nobody's main focus is to abolish amendments, but if we go down the continuous path of more and more restrictions, you will loose an amendment. A right as a citizen. Response to Round 2 In round two, my opponent talks of how we need specific gun laws to be followed and obeyed to keep us safe. For example, strict strict trading/selling laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. With stricter gun laws, you are disarming the wrong people. The only people that will follow these laws are the law abiding citizens, who are not the ones that will be using guns in a dangerous way anyway. Like I said, you are taking guns away from the people that won't be doing anything wrong or dangerous with them. Criminals will still get guns no matter how strict you make laws, through concepts such as underground or "black market" selling. The only thing removing guns or making them harder to get would make criminals value them more. Leading to an increase in gang violence and gang activity. Criminals will view guns as more valuable. This same concept goes with illegal drugs. Drugs such as cocaine are illegal. Criminals still obtain cocaine and use it though. The people that don't are law abiding citizens. The same with guns. You can restrict them more and more and even take them away, but criminals will still get them, and the average, law abiding citizen will not. You will make criminals more dangerous. Now, you are basically taking away self security. Now the criminals have guns and the citizens don't, which make the criminals at least two times more dangerous and powerful. My opponent really does not give any solid facts that gun control would reduce gun violence in the United States, and does not actually state why he wants more control. Therefore, its hard for me to debate off of nothing. Why my side is correctNow, this section will in the most simplest forms, wrap up why my side is correct. Why we need to stop restricting gun laws further and further, for they are strict enough. Now, my opponent has never actually stated specific reasons on why we need more strict laws than already in place. Here 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://codes.ohio.gov... . http://forum.pafoa.org... Now whether you agree or disagree with Wikipedia, I would just like to post this article on gun laws in ALL the states. . 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... Now, those are some laws in the simplest of forms. If you would like to, you may check those sources, for which those are where I have collected most of the information. (Excluding Wikipedia)My opponent stands for stricter gun laws, and aren't those good enough? I mean should we have to wait until we are fifty years old to own a handgun? And also criminals, illegal aliens, and mentally unstable people cannot own guns, so who else shouldn't? Should we remove guns from more and more social groups? Gun laws are strict enough, we need to stop adding more and more restrictions so we don't loose our second amendment. Closing StatementBased on the facts, based on the sources, based on the common sense, gun laws are strict enough. We need to stop adding more and more restrictions. Like I said earlier, our soldiers die for our freedom, and part of our freedom is our right to bear arms. Our country is a fantastic country, because of our freedom. Lets not restrict our freedom, lets savor it. Part of further gun control is further restrictions. Lets stop taking away. Thank you all for reading both mine and my opponents debate. I hope you enjoyed the debate, the topic, and the facts. I can't wait to see what everyone thinks about the debate. A special thanks to my opponent for providing an entertaining debate and being a great opponent. I hope everyone enjoyed, and may the best argument win! All the sources used in this round: . http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org...(by_state)http://codes.ohio.gov... . http://forum.pafoa.org...My opponents previous argument.