Outlawing guns will not stop terrorist attacks.

I accept your challenge, however the question we are debating is not entirely clear, as you state that we are debating the "theory that banning some/all guns will stop mass killings", but you then talk about semi-automatic rifles in your initial argument. Therefore, I will defend the following statement: Making guns illegal will help to prevent terrorist attacks and mass killings. I will be mainly using the US as my prime example (although not exclusively) as it is an area of controversial gun laws and regulations, as well as suffering from mass killings and shootings in recent years. Mass Shooting: an incident involving multiple victims of gun violence. Terrorist Attack: the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear. coup de main, surprise attack. Your first argument was "banning semi-automatic rifles with a lot of ammo will not stop terrorist mass killings. There's plenty of ways to get these, and automatics, illegally." Yes, this is true, however, nothing ever will completely obliterate the threat and possibility of mass killings. There has been mass killings as long as humans have existed on this planet. In May 1182 in Constantinople, there was a massacre which killed between 60,000-80,000 Latin inhabitants of the city. This was before the firearm was invented in China in the 13th century. What making guns illegal will do, is make mass killings much more rare. You don't hear about it on the news, but almost every day people are shot, injured and killed by guns in the US. You can simply look at the Gun Violence Archive to see the damage that guns really do for yourself, and to see why it is so important that guns are made illegal. You also state that "There's plenty of ways to get these, and automatics, illegally." However you 'forget' to name any ways in which people can get semi-automatics and automatics illegally. The argument of "There are many more ways to kill hundreds than with a semi-automatic/ automatic gun, that is just the most convenient. Taking guns away though will not stop terrorists, it would be a mere inconvenience. They will find ways to kill." is not entirely true at all. You also seem to switch between "Mass Killings" and "Terrorists" in your argument which makes it hard to decide what you're really arguing about. Mass Killings are not only committed by what you and I would most likely label 'terrorists', but also mentally unstable people and others. Not all mass killings are committed by firearms, and attacks through bombings can be more deadly than with firearms. However, a fair proportion of mass killings are done by firearms, therefore making guns illegal will reduce the number of deaths, especially through impulse killings, as it is easier to fire a gun than to create explosives capable of killing many people. To conclude this round of the debate, making guns illegal will reduce the amount of mass killings/shootings as people such as the mentally unstable and insane will not be able to do them anymore due to not being able to possess or obtain a gun. It will also help to reduce the amount of terrorist attacks and shootings as people will not be able to get a gun easily at all and shoot up schools, churches, malls or places with large amounts of people. Although bombings/driving through crowds (Such as the Nice - Paris Attacks) will still occur, making guns illegal is a leap in the right direction.