azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

My AR-15 and AK are very nice weapons for which i can legally purchase !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

In order to fully comprehend the threat of gun violence in the United States in 2018, here are five shocking facts.Three of the 10 deadliest mass shootings in modern American history have occurred in the last eight months.It is more dangerous to be a school student than a deployed service member in 2018. You are twice as likely to be shot dead at school, than in active service.An American woman is shot dead by her partner every 16 hours.One in three children live in a home with a gun.In an average day, 20 American children are shot.With statistics like that, it’s only a matter of time until we’re covering the next horrific – yet entirely inevitable – mass shooting.Wonder how many children will be shot today in the U S ?
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Where did you get any of these numbers? You haven't sourced anything.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

What not do a bit of reasearch ? .........................................
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

When you provide statistics, it's your job to source those claims. It isn't my job to search around to source your claims.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Well don’t then , I’m sick and tired of constantly posting up links to every stat when it comes to the gun debate as you’re just told by Americans “ your source is biased “ ......I just posted up another reply to your fellow gun nut with reference to stats
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

This debate is premised on an appeal to emotion. Lets see how many logical fallacies you can fit into one debate! :-)
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

how is it an appeal to emotion? this issue is a pure intellectual issue
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Statistics does not lie. 33 dead a day in US by usual legally owned guns. That's more than rest of the civilized word together.Nothing better than stressed 40 years old High School teacher on heels with automatic weapon... off course unless she undergoes Marines boot camp and a turn in Afghanistan...:D
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Yes, but this is one sided. How many are saved my legally owned guns? And if i was a killer and i wanted a AR-15 and it was illigal i would get it none the less. Buy it from the underground or somthing. They will allways find a way. THe AR-15 was also not Automatic, it was simiautomatic.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

The argument that he would get the gun elsewhere is BS. First Assault rifles on black market are $4000-5000 which is far from his budget. Second he took the weapon after murdering his mother is she had no weapons there will be no shooting in a first place.Weapon smugglers with military grade stuff do not sell to random people because it may attract unwanted attentions.When assault rifle saved someone? Why do you even need that like weapon? Enemy soldiers would kill you anyway, same as anyone else who would surprise you.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Many buy assult weapons as a hobby, sport shooting, target shooting or to just have a good time. I am one of these people, i own a M1 Carbine for target shooting and just to shoot for fun. Assult weapons save many in the military, which is besides the debate but i thought it would come up. I don't need an assult weapon but others do for a few reasons.1. Fear of others. They fear their nabors. My cousin lives in a bad naborhood and bought a gun for his protection.2. Fear of the government. This fear is irrational yes but there are people who think that our government is out to become a monarchy or communism. Once again, this fear is irrational and i understand this but they buy these guns for protection out of their own fear.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Could't you hire a weapon at shooting range?1. fear from neighbors, I would rather move out than living in fear.2. Fear of the government. irrational, unlikely to happen and even if it will be bunch of rednecks with rifles against tanks, bomber and proper trained people...It should be limited like one gun per person max cal .22. Two full clips limit. It's enough for self defense.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

1. Some people can't afford to move away from their job in this economy. 2. Exactly my point when i meet them but it makes them feel better. 3. People who hunt have more than one rifle, a .22 a mussle loader, and other higher powered rifles for bear hunting. Shooting ranges don't have the guns i shoot. :P
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

According to havocscope an AK47, an actual automatic assault rifle, costs about 400$.That's less than a video game counsel these days. And illegal arms dealers pay towards anyone with the right cash.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Last AK47 was made in June 1953 and it's in museum. Authentic ak-47 type 1 costs more than $30 000 (it's a collectible stuff) You and your havoc scope are most probably talking about AKM and it's clones. Those $500 AKs are build from "decommissioned" pieces (kissed by automatic hammer) with some home made parts. I saw them, yes they shoot but not in full auto, it would just blow up. You can buy them in Ukraine, Poland, Slovakia... You cannot buy these in US.Proper AR in good condition costs 10x more and again it would not to be sold to random guy it's very very risky. You cannot buy it for less that $2000. Those weapons are imported to US if you would be willing to sell them for $500 why do so in place where is it illegal? For same money you may sell it in places where no one cares without paying smugglers.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

According to this roughly 75 million AK47s (don't blow up in your hand) exist today, only 5 million being originals.That's the sourced part. Unsourced says that small tribes use them. And havocscope, a meta collection of criminal databases, confirms the prices.However, I would like to know more about how non-authentic AK type weapons will just blow up in your hand... You'd think they wouldn't be one of the most popular black market weapons if they were unreliable.The modern AKs are actually one of the most reliable black market weapons because of its durability. Even the M16 and M4s could never match up to its durability until recently.And, according to the original link, in California an AK47, knockoff or not, is less than 500 dollars.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

most of aAKs are decommissioned the way that something like huge hammer hits it in barrel and around the trigger. After that it's classified as a metal scrap and it's not controlled anymore. After that they are being repaired from home made spare parts usually made from random metals/materials that tends to expand after heated up. Cheap something-like barrel gets slightly thicker and bullet stuck... full auto is a bad idea... I've had this way restored cz58. The Californian AK will be something very similar.AKs are reliable because of loose parts m16/4 are build differently. You are comparing apples with oranges.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Here is a little statistic for you, America ranks 107th homicide rates, but ranks 1st in gun ownership. From 1960 to 2010 our homicide rate has dropped from 5.1 per 100,00 to 4.8 per 100,000 however violent crime rates have risen from 160.9 per 100,00 people to 403.6 per 100,000. After 70 years of gun control you have slightly lowered the homicide rate but drastically increased violent crime.Gun control doesn't stop illegal gun sales, its like saying "lets make drugs illegal, it will take them off the street." Criminals will still get the banned guns, the problem with mass shootings is not guns, but its crazy people, you can't fix crazy by banning weapons.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=joBMq6b4MmE&NR;=1
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

USA roughly 150 dead from psycho shootingUK 0gun control works .
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

UK: Cumbria shootings and Dunblane school massacre.Regardless of gun control laws people can still acquire illegal arms. Only difference is that law abiding citizens can not have them but criminals can. When you bring any weapon into a school zone you have broken a ton of laws, a few more about firearms would not have stopped anything. Gun control fails.You didn't address that since we have started adding more and more gun control that violent crimes have gone up and how even though America is #1 in gun ownership it tanks only 107th in homicide rates.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

30 000 shot people in US a year, more that whole Europe together That's quite extreme. Why do you need automatic Assault rifle for self defense? What about mortar? Wouldn't be better?Look at countries where you cannot have any weapons? What about UK or Japan?
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Why do you need automatic Assault rifle for self defense?You don't have assault rifles so you can shoot at deer, you have it to resist oppressive governments.Look at countries where you cannot have any weapons? What about UK or Japan?What about the 2011 UK riots? In places where only the government have weapons its called a police state. In the UK criminals have more access to guns that law abiding citizens, seriously, its illegal to buy an airsoft gun unless you are part of a club.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Common UK police man has no weapons same in Japan.Resist oppressive governments? Sounds like Kentucky redneck thinking that he and his cousin-father can beat Air force.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Most UK police have no weapons? Oh, that makes sense, so when they see someone with a weapon committing a crime they have to call for someone who actually has a gun to help, great job protecting people.You and your cousin can't beat the air force, a large citizen militia could stand a chance against an army.If you don't think that bad things can happen in government and that you shouldn't be able to defend yourself, well, that says a lot about you.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

In UK nobody has gun, there is practically no gun crime, it's extremely rare. I've never seen police man with a weapon.Militia may work in Africa. No chance against proper army. How would you untrained redneck squad take out armors or planes artillery, mortars, snipers, missile systems?... ? By praying? How many untrained rednecks you can accumulate on one place with food and ammo 50, 100? That's one hour fight without looses... One drone will wipe you all out.You cannot defend yourself against government, whole that idea is a stupid fallacy.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Militia may work in Africa. No chance against proper army. How would you untrained redneck squad take out armors or planes artillery, mortars, snipers, missile systems?... ? By praying?Most "Red necks" don't just buy a pistol and go "we'll lordy lordy I can take down the whole army" and our military is not constantly drilling and preparing. You have to remember two things: 1. many people who own high powered weapons practice 2. our army is made up of mainly weekend soldiers that have never seen combat, most of them just went to boot camp and then were labeled as part of the reserves. How many untrained rednecks you can accumulate on one place with food and ammo 50, 100? That's one hour fight without looses... One drone will wipe you all out.Boot camp is two week training, most of these "rednecks" use their guns on a weekly basis. Also you fail to understand how a war on civilians works. You send a drone in and kill 10 rednecks. You can guarantee that there will be a good amount of their friends and family that will take up arms against the organization that killed them. Also if a country is opening fire on their civilians and is killing a large amount that nation also has to worry about foreign opinion and intervention.You cannot defend yourself against government, whole that idea is a stupid fallacy.You seem to have this view of the government that they don't bleed or die, they are people, they can perish.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Basic military training (boot camp) is 4 months followed by another 6 month. Rednecks practice/? ...like shoot a magazine into barrel and get drunk?You cannot compete Army, just Marines are about 200 000, 420 000 active soldiers, Air force has about 18 000 planes also there are 9000 tanks, 35000 Tomahawks ...nobody will follow you because it's a suicide run.You do not need weapons, you cannot fight Government or anybody else, you are just danger to yourself and innocent people walking around. Statistically 12 drunk rednecks will shot each other before I respond to your next reply.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Its rather biased of you to assume that anyone to think about rebellion must be a drunk redneck, actually, thats really biased of you.Even if you couldn't fight the government during a time of oppression (which you could) you would still need guns to defend yourself against criminals.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

hand gun, lower caliber .22 or so is for self defense enough, two clips limit. Psycho tests and compulsory training... Similar system is in Czech Rep.One must be really idiot or mentally f*cked redneck thinking that Gov will oppress him and he will fight back :D
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

One low powered hand gun with two clips, thats it? By the way, there is no such thing as a pyscho test, if you are refering to a mental health test these are usually expensive.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Yes one low powered gun is enough to stop aggressor/s. That testing isn't so expensive and I find quite important that a person who wants to carry deadly weapon around is not some sort of mental.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

So deadly weapons should require testing? Alright, better make tests for knives, bats, crowbars, chainsaws, gasoline, cars (mental tests to), hanging out in groups ect.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

guns are designed just and only to kill another people, you are just blabbing.Psycho tests does works.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

"That testing isn't so expensive and I find quite important that a person who wants to carry deadly weapon around is not some sort of mental." - Banana_Slug knives, bats, crowbars, chainsaws, gasoline, cars, even just hanging out in a group are all deadly weapons. So should you be required to take a mental test over all these simply because they have the potential to be deadly? Seriously, from the products in your laundry room you could make chlorine gas, which is a deadly chemical weapon (was used in WWI)Its not babbling its an argument you just don't want to get into, you can kill a ton people with things other than guns.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

As I said before, Guns are item designed to kill another people, they have no other use, you cannot cook with them or build a house. It's an item with only one purpose, to kill another human being. So if someone is going to buy weapon there could be only one reason why... that's why civilized countries tests potential gun owners.Yes you may kill person with pencil but the purpose of pencil is to write things down and wast of majority of them have been are and will be used that way.You are blabbing, people does not need guns.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

Yes, we do need guns. You know what else only has one use? Screwdrivers, hammers, nails, light bulbs. Guns are for hunting, sporting, and defense. That's 3 uses right there. They are a tool. Bad guys are the people that give guns a bad rap. Guns are an equalizer; a way for the weak to defend against the strong. Every firearm owner knows that since they own a weapon, they must carry the responsibility of owning it, taking care of it, and being smart with it. The vast majority of guns do NOT kill people. Let me give you an example:99.9% of guns in American are not used in a crime, only .1% are. Only 4% out of that .1% were guns that were obtained legally. Guns are used 4 times more in self defense and in those cases, 98% of the time it is not fired. Cars kill more people than guns annually. There were 33,883 car fatalities in 2009, versus 9,146 gun homicides in 2009. Out of those gun homicides, 366 were caused by a legally obtained firearm. The rest were illegally obtained. And I don't think it conditions people that killing is okay. Criminals do not have the same values as the general populace, so they view killing as okay, but not some average joe defending his home. Gun control does not work.These facts came from the FBI and the CATO Institute. You want to deny the FBI?
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Guns are designed to kill. Handguns and assault rifles are specially designed to kill another human begin. Why do you thing that 5.56 was chosen for assault rifles as a standard? I was not for it's long range accuracy nor ability to penetrate materials, it was specially designed to cause maximum harm to human beings. Shooting isn't real sport same as poker isn't. You can use low powered weapons for shooting.0.1% of guns in US = 300 000 guns used in crime. Your .4% number is a BS, wast majority of guns used to kill people in US were legal purchased in gun stores but one buys guns for multiple people and that makes them "illegal". Guns that killed people in the latest shooting are technically illegal too because they were his mother.... In US about 30 people a day being shoot.UK & Japan no guns allowed 0 shootings a year.It's just a stupid fallacy forced into your simple mind by gun companies that you "need" a gun. Nobody does.Buy a Pepper Spray - it works!!!
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need our guns

The 5.56 was designed to wound, not straight out kill. The idea behind it is that if you wound a soldier, he has to have 2 other people carry him out, thus you have 3 hostiles out of the fight. It does kill, that is true. Any well placed round can kill. Now I cited guns used in homicides, not all gun crimes together. If we go to the 300,000 guns used in any crime, that is still 12,000 legal firearms out of 300,000 firearms used in crime. Lets say legislation makes it so that there are no guns allowed. Congratulations, you have now prevented 12,000 gun crimes. But what about the other 288,000 that were obtained illegally? You have now disarmed the law abiding citizen and made a haven for the criminal. The 4% number came from the FBI. Do you want to contradict the head law enforcement agency in the United States? In the United Kingdom, including N. Ireland, there were 46 deaths from guns in 2010. Granted, it is a lot less, but it is still there, not the 0 you claim. This comes from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. However, even though there were less deaths, there was a surge in gun crime, death and non-death related, after the ban on guns. It increased 35%, while handgun use in crime went up 46%. But how can this be? You can't get a gun in the UK! It's illegal! Surprise! Criminals don't care. It is only less violent because the UK has a CCTV camera for every 14 people in the UK. That's more than Communist China! Cameras would be a good idea in the US, but it is not feasible. We are too big. I am not influenced by gun companies, I am influenced by facts. I could claim that your "simple" mind was influenced by the liberal media machine, but you would just deny it. Or would it be a compliment? We need guns. The founding fathers used guns to gain our independence from Britain. The only way for us to stay free is to even the playing field. One of the reason we are the country we are is because of our right to own guns. It is not something that the government can just take away. It is a GOD GIVEN RIGHT! Be it from Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the Father of Jesus Christ, which I believe in. You can pry my gun from my cold, dead hands. By the way. Merry Christmas!
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

You have used land mine argument for ammo. 5.56 is designed to maximize damage not to wound.Those 300 000 guns are from legal gunships thing that made them "illegal" is just formality they were brought in Licensed gun shops.Now you are comparing 46 dead from UK with 11000 in US? I'm missing your point.CCTV is not observed in mealtime they used only when they look for someone.The obsolete 2nd amendment was not given by god but by people whose intention was to make people able to protect them self against British Imperialism. That's long gone, so there is no reason for 2nd amendment anymore, it's became obsolete. The only use for it is to increase weapon sales to rednecks, you are definitely one of them.
Debate: Gun Control - should we have it?
Side: We need gun control

Nice citations of a philosopher, murder , few politicians, essay writer... all of them long time dead and don't have vote. They lived in different world where ordinary people with percussion weapons could do a difference. Now they can do only harm. It's not 18th century anymore there are no more British sailing ship waiting for goods....