USA should have more gun restrictions

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am TheBunnyAssassin. In this debate, I will be negating the topic "USA should have more restrictions". Contention 1: Fear Fear is one factor that supports gun users. In states such as Texas, where citizen are allowed to carry guns in a way known as "concealed carry", there is relatively less crime related to firearms. Why? The reason for this is because no criminal armed with a firearm would be paranoid enough to attempt to kill citizens who have a high chance of owning a firearm. Imagine as a criminal rushes into a mall with a little pistol and assault rifle in Texas. The moment he pulls out his gun, about 10-12 men pull out their pistols, which are pointed at him (or already discharged at the criminal). Here is a poll from prisons all over the United States: Have you ever been scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim? No: 66%, Yes: 34% Was there ever a time in your life when you decided not to do a crime because you knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun? No, never: 61%, Yes: 49% [H]ave any of the criminals you have known personally ever been scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim? No, none: 31%, Yes: 69% As we can see above, there has been a good amount of criminals who abstained from crime or got wounded due to their armed victim. We can conclude that fear caused by these victims may cause criminals to think twice about raiding one home. Contention 2: Irony My opponent argues for his affirmative side, therefore, we can conclude that he wishes firearms to be abolished. Let me arrange a situation which would occur immediately once firearms are banned or restricted in the United States. When guns are prohibited, the government will order every single citizen to turn in their firearm. I will ask every viewer this question. Do you think that the criminals in the United States will turn in their firearms? Their illegal guns? The ones obtained from their black markets? Does everybody believe that when the gun restriction law is passed, the common criminal who has taken countless lives with his gun will walk to the police station, and say, "Here, take my AR-15 and AK-47 which I got from Russia! I will follow the government standards because I am a good citizen!" Obviously not. In addition, when the citizen's firearms are taken away, they will be left defenseless against the marauding criminals who now know that citizen's guns have been taken away. This is why there is a quote about how people "don't bring a knife to a gun fight". How does a United States citizen defend his home when he gets shot the moment, he raises his melee weapon against a thug? By the time the police even get halfway to the home, the man who tried to defend his family is dead, shot because he couldn't even intimidate the intruder. This is one of the greatest ironies of the gun control debate. By taking away firearms from citizens, the government might as well threw them out for slaughter. Taking away firearms does not reduce death. It increases it. Thank you for viewing my arguments, TheBunnyAssassin The next round is rebuttal. Source(s): -[117] Michigan Law Section 28.422: "License to purchase, carry, or transport pistol; issuance; qualifications; applications...." Accessed September 2, 2010 at http://law.justia.com... -Report: "2008 Crime in the United States, Murder." Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, September 2009. http://www2.fbi.gov... -The calculations that determine this fact were performed by a licensed actuary using two different methodologies, both of which yield the same answer. An Excel file containing these calculations is available upon request.