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!!!

But, let me come upon a fellow wearing Nazi regalia, and I'll punch him till I can't punch him anymore..Oh STUPOR STUPID shows the Leftist approve of violence !!!!!!!! Keep speaking DUMMY
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Do you EVER look within yourself?TRY PUNCHING YOURSELF EVERY TIME YOU VOTE FOR THESE RADICAL NO RESTRICTION ABORTION SUPPORTERS!YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY VIABLE BABY KILLED FOR MERE CONVENIENCE!HYPOCRITE!
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

TRY PUNCHING YOURSELF EVERY TIME YOU VOTE FOR THESE RADICAL NO RESTRICTION ABORTION SUPPORTERS!I personally flail myself every time I take the lord's name in vain. I go full Opus Dei. Hence, I question your commitment.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

But the purpose of a gun is to kill otherwise it’s not worth having is it ?
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Guns are not evil, they actually perform a very necessary function in civilian life which is to allow weaker humans to defend themselves against stronger humans. I know of no other tool that can perform this task as effectively as guns do.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Where did I say guns are evil , I said they’re designed to kill you agree yet you dispute and downvote me ..... strange By the way a gun is not a “tool “
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Dermot it is strange that i own guns and i have not killed one person with my weapons and the intent of me buying weapons was not to kill anyone but i can hunt and protect my property and my family. You are right a gun is not a tool but a weapon. Intent of committing murder is in the mind of a criminal not the average gun owner.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Dermot it is strange that i own guns and i have not killed one personThat's awesome Outlaw. I own a rape kit but I've never raped anyone. Let's start selling rape kits in Walmart, right?
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

NOM fresh wild hog is a good set of pork ribs cooked on the grill.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Outlaw I said from the off they’re designed to kill othwise them wild hogs you shoot wouldn’t end up on a plate
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

I agree and you got it right. No disagreement here at all.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

What is your definition of a Tool?My definition of a tool is an object you use to complete a task.You use a Gun to Hunt.You use a Gun to Scare away a robber by firing a warning shot.You use a Gun to kill people.You can use a shotgun to help breach doors.You can use a Gun while on Skiis to compete in the Olympics.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Spoken like a true American, yous are the only people who call a gun a “tool “ such is your desperation and embarrassment at the staggering gun death /accident numbers yearly .....I wonder what you definition of a gun is ? Let me help ......gunɡʌn/Submitnoun1.a weapon incorporating a metal tube from which bullets, shells, or other missiles are propelled by explosive force, typically making a characteristic loud, sharp noise.synonyms: firearm, weapon; Ouch 🙀
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Weapons are Tools.I'm also tired of people stating "Gun Deaths" as if these exist on their own.You should never compare "Gun Deaths" in one country to another country.You should compare "Homicides". Who cares what item was used to kill the other person, the bad thing is that a person was murdered.It is your opinion that we have an embarrassing amount of gun death. If you eliminate suicides and gangs we have an incredibly small amount.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Weapons are Tools.For killing people. I notice you left that part out, Rambo.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Do you actually read my posts? Its on the list.I'm sorry if my reasonable and logical posts make you highly emotional.But please at least read the full posts before responding.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Do you actually read my posts?I stopped reading them the moment you tried to conflate attack with defence.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Which shows not only are you unreasonable.You also do not know what applies to Attack and Defense.Like I said before, Unarmed soldiers are known as "Defenseless". If you killed unarmed soldiers this is against international law. But if they are armed, then they are able to defend themselves.Did I explain attack and defense well enough for you to understand?
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Weapons are Tools.Using American speak yes , but the rest of us call guns weapons I'm also tired of people stating "Gun Deaths" as if these exist on their own.Who said they exist on their own ? They don’t happen in civilized countries mostly can you guess why ? Because we don’t have guns you should never compare "Gun Deaths" in one country to another country.I know because your country is more violent than most You should compare "Homicides". Who cares what item was used to kill the other person, the bad thing is that a person was murdered.Well Americans don’t care if you had no guns you would have no gun deaths , why are you not mentioning the 70,000 accidents a year and school shootings? It is your opinion that we have an embarrassing amount of gun death.Most non Americans agree with me , it’s your opinion there’s no problem  If you eliminate suicides and gangs we have an incredibly small amount.If , If ........
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Sigh, you miss the point entirely.Let's say we have 100,000 Homicides a year.Let's say 70% of these involved a gun. So we have 70,000 Gun Homicides.Then we waive a magic wand and all guns are gone from Society. And we look at next year.We have 100,000 Homicides again.But 0% involve a gun because they no longer exist! How Wonderful we stopped gun violence.Never-mind that we actually made 0 progress. We can use words in ways that make us sound smart. "We stopped all gun violence in 1 year by eliminating all guns!" Guns are not the problem. If people are committing suicide and you don't like it. Don't take away the gun, find out why they are committing suicide and resolve that.Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.If you have constant gang wars, yes that is a problem that needs to be solved, but I can easily pull up thousands of videos of people being hacked to death with Machetes in places where guns are hard to get. Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.If you have school shootings, taking away the gun does not stop bombings, or stabbings, or help the actual issue that we have people that want to commit such acts.Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.That was my point.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Then we waive a magic wand and all guns are gone from Society. And we look at next year.We have 100,000 Homicides again.So your "point" is make-believe statistics which you have literally invented yourself to "prove" a hypothetical point? Wtf?But 0% involve a gun because they no longer exist! How Wonderful we stopped gun violence.Denying the relationship between guns and violence is ridiculous. When you put tools designed to kill into the hands of everyday people then what do you expect they are going to do with them, you IDIOT? Do you think they are going to use them to make toast with?Would you buy a car and not drive it? Would you buy a swimming pool and not swim in it? Guns are not the problem.Clearly they are the problem and you are just delusional as a result of living in a culture which has BRAINWASHED you.Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.But it DOES resolve the issue, because if you make it DIFFICULT for people to commit suicide, then less people are going to commit suicide. When you ENCOURAGE it by selling them the means to end their lives instantly and relatively painlessly, then guess what's going to happen moron?Guns aren't the problem? Lmfao. You're retarded.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Denying the relationship between guns and violence is ridiculous. Hello history denier. How many people died in wars and assaults prior to the invention of the gun again? Give me those numbers.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

How many people died in wars and assaults prior to the invention of the gun again?A LOT LESS than died AFTER it, you retard.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

That’s incorrect.https://slides.ourworldindata.org/war-and-violence/#/3 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/globally-deaths-war-and-murder-are-decline-180950237/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/history-and-the-decline-of-human-violence/
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

That’s incorrect.No, it very obviously is not. I can blind link drop too, you complete imbecile.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NumberofdeathsintheSovietUnionunderJosephStalinhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldWarIIcasualtieshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldWarIcasualtieshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide Clearly it has escaped your rather limited attention, but the population of the world has exploded in recent centuries. In 1800 there were less than a billion people. Today there are over seven billion.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

I need your death toll numbers from 500 BC.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Battle of ThermopylaePersiansUnits NumbersFleet crew 517,610Infantry 1,700,000[5]Cavalry 80,000[6]Arabs and Libyans 20,000[7]Greek puppet troops 324,000Total 2,641,610http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Battle ofThermopylae#SizeofthePersianarmy
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Bronto, wtf does the size of the Persian army in the "Battle of Thermopylae" have to do with anything? Obviously a lot more people have died since the invention of guns, because since then we have had two world wars, which alone killed close to 100 million people.Nothing you say is true. Everything you say is false. You're a retarded neo-Nazi imbecile who is still stewing about the three years he wasted cheating the points system on CD only to have his account banned for systematic abuse.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Bronto, wtf does the size of the Persian army in the "Battle of Thermopylae" have to do with anything? It shows that battles in the past consisted of more ground forces by far, and battles in ancient times were to the death.Obviously a lot more people have died since the invention of guns, because since then we have had two world wars, which alone killed close to 100 million peopleFirst, you've given no evidence of this claim.Second, even if it were true, it would be because populations are greater. If the percentage of the population for sword kills was higher then than the percentage of kills for guns compared to populations now, your argument is dead.Third. Even if you could prove more deaths now, that would not disprove that without guns people still fight wars and still kill each other.Fourth. Most people don't fight in wars. Exclude two wars from 70+ years ago, and it was more dangerous for those not in the middle of wars pre-gun. Your position doesn't disarm the military. It disarms the citizenry. Disarming the citizenry wouldn't have changed the World War death counts. And vigilante justice was much higher pre-gun, which actually affects the non-war citizenry.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

It shows that battles in the past consisted of more ground forces by farNo, it doesn't. Cherry-picking one particular battle off a Wikipedia page says absolutely nothing about any other battles. You're literally stupid.First, you've given no evidence of this claim.Completely false. I linked the Wikipedia pages so you can check for yourself. Everything you say -- literally EVERYTHING -- is a lie.Second, even if it were true, it would be because populations are greater.So your first point was to demand evidence I've already given you, and your second point was to make a random statement of fact supported by absolutely no evidence?? OMG you're such a stupid hypocrite. It's absolutely endearing. Lol!!Third. Even if you could prove more deaths nowI have proven it. You need to use the past tense.that would not disprove that without guns people still fight wars and still kill each other.Then I suppose it's fortunate nobody except you has ever made that claim. All you seem to know how to do is LIE about what other people have said, isn't it, Nazi boy?FourthFourth, based on the first three, this one is going to be stupid too. Not even going to bother reading it.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

No, it doesn't. Cherry-picking one particular battle off a Wikipedia page says absolutely nothing about any other battles. You're literally stupid.Look up any ancient battles. Come back with your data. Old Testament armies were even bigger.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Look up any ancient battlesOK. How about the most famous battle in British history? Will that do?The exact numbers present at the battle are unknown; modern estimates are around 10,000 for William and about 7,000 for Harold.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BattleofHastingsGO TO SCHOOL. YOU'RE A RETARD.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

A LOT LESS than died AFTER it, you retard.Prove it. Next, tell us the world was safe and not dangerous pre gun. Please. You look ridiculous.Give me those numbers liar.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Homocide rates were much higher. We currently live in the most peaceful time in human history. I’ve already provided sources.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Homocide rates were much higher.But there were much less homicides because there were much less people. Instead of just admitting you said something stupid, you try to distort language around it. Homicide rates mean absolutely nothing to the topic under discussion you idiotic prick.I’ve already provided sources.No, you have not, you idiotic liar. A source is something you link to verify a claim. Your sources did not verify your claim, which makes them blind link drops.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

But there were much less homicides because there were much less people. Instead of just admitting you said something stupid, you try to distort language around it. Homicide rates mean absolutely nothing to the topic under discussion you idiotic prick.Less total homicides vs less percentage of homicides per the total population. If I put you in a room with 20 psychopaths, the room isn't safer because there are a total of more psychopaths outside the room. The percentage of psychopaths in the room is 100%. God you're a fucking no common sense dumbass.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

Less total homicides vs less percentage of homicides per the total populationThat's right. Well done for finally getting something right. Unfortunately however, neither yourself nor Amarel have been honest enough to mention that the increased historical presence and jurisdiction of law were responsible for declining homicide rates.If I put you in a room with 20 psychopaths, the room isn't safer because there are a total of more psychopaths outside the room.And you are back into retard mode again. I have no idea what this even means. I told you to go back to school an hour ago. You honestly should have listened to me.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

The percentage of psychopaths in the room is 100%. God you're a fucking no common sense dumbass.Wtf? The claim was that more people have died since the invention of guns. Nothing you are saying has ANY RELATIONSHIP to that claim. The mental gymnastics performed by yourself and Amarel in order to avoid admitting you are completely wrong is RETARDED.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Rates would be the only reasonable measure in the topic at hand because, as you said, there were less people.My links verify my claim.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

"If you put tools designed to kill into the hands of everyday people then what do you expect them to do?"Well lets see.Over 1/3rd of all Americans own guns. So that's over 105 Million people.Even if we include suicides, accidental deaths, gang killings, and police shootings that is let's round it up to 40,000 gun deaths a year.1% of people who own a gun killing someone would mean 1 million people are killed a year.0.1% would be 100,000.It's actually less than 0.04% of people who own a gun use it.And of those 0.04% 0.03% are suicides.So 0.01% of people use guns against another person. (Not on themselves)Oh and of that 0.01% most of those are Gang Violence.So it's about 0.002% of people who are not in a gang and own a gun will use it to shoot another person. And these aren't even all murders. This includes accidental, police shootings, Justified shootings, etc.This also means if you aren't killed by a gang, or commit suicide, your chance of being shot by a gun in the United States is about 0.00067%. Just to compare, the chance of getting killed by a Knife in the us is somewhere around 0.00050%. Matter of fact, if you put other murder weapons together, (including knives, blunt objects, fists/hands/strangulation, etc) then if you are murdered and not a member of a gang, you are more likely NOT to die by a gun in the U.S., but by other means.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

Sigh, you miss the point entirely.Sigh , you still won’t admit a gun is a weapon Let's say we have 100,000 Homicides a year.Let's say 70% of these involved a gun. So we have 70,000 Gun Homicides.Then we waive a magic wand and all guns are gone from Society. And we look at next year.We have 100,000 Homicides again.But 0% involve a gun because they no longer exist! How Wonderful we stopped gun violence.Never-mind that we actually made 0 progress. We can use words in ways that make us sound smart. "We stopped all gun violence in 1 year by eliminating all guns!"Guns are not the problem.Guns are a problem especially for Americans , so here’s the deal guns are the problem otherwise they wouldn’t call them gun deaths /accidents ....... Tricky stuff but hey you may work it out yet  If people are committing suicide and you don't like it. Don't take away the gun, find out why they are committing suicide and resolve that.Ah right you do like it ? Find out why but let them have their guns in the meantime ?Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.If you have constant gang wars, yes that is a problem that needs to be solved, but I can easily pull up thousands of videos of people being hacked to death with Machetes in places where guns are hard to get.Really , thousands of machete deaths in the U S yearly wow ! Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.Well maybe get rid of machetes as well ?If you have school shootings, taking away the gun does not stop bombings, or stabbings, or help the actual issue that we have people that want to commit such acts.Taking the gun away doesn't resolve the issue.That was my point.Thank you for confirming you Americans would kill and maim each other’s with just about anything
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

I can't believe you can literally read and respond to logic and just ignore it.Astonishing.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

I can't believe you can literally read and respond to logic and just ignore it.But you don’t do logic , you make stuff up because of your embarrassment at the appalling gun stats for the U S , now you claim there are thousands of machete deaths in the U S yearly ..... Astonishing.I agree your ignorance is truly astonishing
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: True.

I said I can pull up thousands of gang violence murders that are done with Machetes.I never said it was in the U.S. I was stating how gangs in locations that do not have access to guns operate.If I was your English teacher you'd get a very low score for reading comprehension.
Debate: Guns should come with a license agreement that it will not be used to commit murder.
Side: Wait..., what? No!!!

I said I can pull up thousands of gang violence murders that are done with Machetes.The fact that people kill each other with machetes is a reason NOT TO GIVE THEM GUNS, not a reason TO give them guns. Omfg. Am I really explaining this to you?If I was your English teacher you'd get a very low score for reading comprehension.Were. Retard.