Res: The United States should institute a ban on automatic and semi-automatic firearms.

As the Pro side of this debate, I urge an affirmative ballot on the aforementioned resolution. With this in mind, I would like to present a plan defending this ban. Plan: Plank 1: Congress and the President will establish a legislative ban on all firearms meeting the semi-automatic or automatic qualifications established in Round 1"s definition, including transfer, importation, and manufacture. Plank 2: The federal government will establish a gun buy-back program similar to those established in Australia or the United Kingdom. Plank 3: Money for the gun buy-back program will come from the Navy Procurement fund for destroyers and battleships, a 100 billion dollar funding source (1). Other sources of revenue will come from eliminating the repatriation tax loophole. Plank 4: Guns used by police forces, state defense forces, the National Guard, and the US military are exempt from the ban. Plank 5: The federal government will establish a Federal Weapons Task Force, equipped with state-by-state branches, for oversight of this project. I have three contentions to support this plan. Contention 1: Significantly decreasing the number of automatic and semi-automatic firearms in the USA is critical for national security. Looking at the number of total gun deaths in the United States, we see an overwhelming number of people killed each year by assailants with firearms: 32,163 in 2011 alone. Approximately 11,000 of these were from homicides (2). Furthermore, gun massacres have proven a huge threat to our national security. 12 died at Columbine in 1999, 32 at Virginia Tech in 2007, 12 in Aurora in 2012, and perhaps most tragically of all, 20 children and 6 teachers in Newtown (3). The number of deaths has steadily risen over the past few years. Trends from Bloomberg analysts indicate, by 2015, gun deaths will actually exceeding the number of automobile-related deaths in the US (4). These trends are both shocking and appalling. Conversely, guns are rarely used for self-defense, used only about 67,740 times per year. In 2010, there were a mere 230 justifiable homicides, while there were over 8,000 criminal homicides. The guns themselves are designed for extreme lethality. The multi-firing capability allows an assailant to fire again and again without fear of having to pull back a hammer or other mechanism. This allows a deranged assailant to kill multiple people quickly, a tragic occurrence not removed from reality. For sake of American safety, a ban on such weaponry is necessary. Contention 2: A ban on automatic and semiautomatic firearms is morally correct. When examining morality, there are several modes of thought. In this case, the most compelling is Jeremy Bentham"s utilitarianism, and the famous "greatest happiness principle." Namely, the most moral decision is that which increases the greatest overall happiness of society and reduces the greatest overall pain of society. This is measured in 6 dimensions: intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, and purity (6). The current world has an extreme amount of pain due to firearm violence, as evaluated by these categories. 1. Intensity: Death by firearm may be quick, but one cannot deny it hurts. Furthermore, for those hospitalized by gun violence, a lifetime of paralysis and misery could ensue. 2. Duration: Perhaps the pain is quick, but our nation"s issue with gun violence has been around since our nation"s inception. 3. Certainty: So long as a weapon exists, there will always be someone to abuse it. Gun violence is certain in any world, but becomes more and more probable as more guns are available. 4. Propinquity: As my first contention indicated, mass shootings are becoming more and more common. Tragedies are occurring sooner than ever. 5. Fecundity: Since semi-automatic firearms repeat easily, it is highly likely to presume a person will shoot again. Thus, the fecundity, or likelihood of something happening again, is extremely high. 6. Purity: Death by firearm is rather devoid of pleasure. Looking at a federal assault weapons ban, we see a drastic decrease in the amount of pain. 1. Intensity: If the assailant does not have a gun, death is far less likely. 2. Duration: So long as the ban is in place, one is far safer from firearms, and will likely live much longer. 3. Certainty: This is best defended by my third contention. See below. 4. Propinquity: The positive effects of a gun ban happen rather rapidly. Once most guns are removed via buy-backs or manufacture decreases, there is a very swift increase in not dying. 5. Fecundity: If there are fewer guns around a person, it is far more likely for the person not to get shot. 6. Purity: Perhaps NRA advocates will be unhappy, but the loss of property (with a refund) is small compared to the loss of life. Furthermore, looking at a different school of thought, eliminating most of our nation"s semi-automatic and automatic weapons protects the most important of our three natural rights as established by John Locke: life. Without life, one cannot exercise any other right. Thus, the policy best respecting life is best for the nation"s morality. However, a policy will only best respect life if it works, bringing me to my third contention. Contention 3: Assault weapons bans have proven feasible and effective. Now, I know what you are thinking: "An appeal to history is a LOGICAL FALLACY1 Therefore, you are wrong." Allow me to explain one thing: just because something is logically fallacious, it is not necessarily false. In fact, precedent is considered in nearly every government decision. The US has never decided to wage a land war in Russia during winter, partly due to the failures of Charles XII of Sweden, Napoleon, and Hitler to do so. The Supreme Court uses precedent constantly. If we are not to include precedent as part of arguments, then "examples" as we know them do not exist. Thus, it is fitting to look at other nations" semi-automatic weapon bans as mirrors to our own. UK gun bans have been immensely successful, with most criminals resorting to "archaic flintlock pistols" and "retrofitted flare guns" (7). This is due to the British gun buyback program, which proved immensely successful. Indeed, British gun bans have eliminated more 200,000 guns from the streets. This has saved countless lives. Australia has had similar successes. For the general population prior to the Australian gun buy-back program, "the average annual firearm homicide rate per 100,000 was .43 (range .27 to .60); after the buy-back program came into place, the average annual firearm homicide rate was .25 (range .16 to .33). And this is not a simple case of correlation not equaling causation. For the primary decreases in gun violence were from the guns purchased in the buy-back program. This is a significant case of cause and effect. With this in mind, we ought to consider what is truly best for our nation and the American people. If we truly treasure our public safety, then it is our obligation to establish a ban on automatic and semi-automatic firearms " the plan Side Pro has provided. Thank you. 1. http://www.gpo.gov... 2. http://www.gunpolicy.org... 3. http://www.motherjones.com... 4. http://www.bloomberg.com... 5. http://www.vpc.org... 6. http://www.uri.edu... 7. http://www.washingtonpost.com... 8. http://www.hsph.harvard.edu...