English Debate

Research/Points to be made

The United States should require universal background checks for all gunsales and transfer ownership.

First Point:

Opponent: Bring up a statistic on how many guns have accidentally gone off

It's just an extra means of security

Our Point:

The second amendment states “ A well regulated militia, being necessary the the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

This deals with man's freedom of guns and their ability to have them without certain background checks
that might impose into their life

Sure, there are accidents, but according to Gun Owners of America, guns are used 2.5 million times a
year in self- defense

Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every
year

Less than 8% of the 2.5 million would kill or wound the intruder. Nearly 92% fire a warning shot

Because of this, not having a background check could allow for easier access and more protection faster
since this 92% was used

Handguns people use in their household are rarely used according to Gun owners of America

Vermont one of the five safest states in the country. This being said, they can carry a firearm without
getting permission, or going through a government-waiting period.

Background checks are not required for private sales under federal law
Law enforcement officers have a background check yet sometimes use their power inefficiently as we
see today. An example of this includes...

According to the Washington Post, Officer Coleman Brackney pursuited a drunk driver by following his
car at nearly 100 mph. This abides with the law. This being said however, when he reached the car, he
opened fire and the rear window and repeatedly stuck the driver. They charged Brackney with felony
manslaughter.

Public Forum Case Outline: Affirmative (Pro) Writing the Constructive

Opening: I negate the resolution that states the United States should require universal background
checks for all gunsales and transfer ownership.Guns, freedom, and protection. These 3 words represent
the whole meaning behind our upcoming confliction

Definitions:

Universal Background checks- Looking up and compiling or criminal records, commercial records, AND
financial records of and individual or organization

Require- cause to be necessary

Gunsales- Firearm sales privately or publicly

Transfer ownership- ownership of a gun (in this case) is transferred from one hand to another

1. Main Argument One: Background checks have no relation to how a person might use a gun.

Point: A background check does not tell you for certain WHY the person bought the gun

Evidence: Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million
times every year(Source: Gun owners of America). Law enforcement officers have a background check
yet sometimes use their power inefficiently as we see today. An example of this includes...
According to the Washington Post, Officer Coleman Brackney pursuited a drunk driver by following his
car at nearly 100 mph. This abides with the law. This being said however, when he reached the car, he
opened fire at the rear window and repeatedly struck the driver. They charged Brackney with felony
manslaughter.

Explanation- Law officers have a clear background check and are said to be eligible to get a gun/work for
the government. Despite this, crimes like this happen more than we see. Background checks do not stop
bad things from necessarily happening.

2. Main Argument Two: Guns can be put together and taken apart by anyone. Everyone has access to
parts of guns online. This makes background checks an unnecessary call of action

Point: People can order parts of guns online or from anywhere and put them together in their own
households.You can not stop the selling of every single part of every gone or restrict it. This being said, it
would not stop people from getting parts and putting one together themselves if they can not purchase
a normal gone if background checks were put into place.

Evidence: A quick search online brings you to millions of results where you can order gun parts. eBay
had thousands upon thousands of options for gun parts, and the website Brownwells had sections
dedicated to ammo, pistol handles, ammunitions and gun magazines.

Explanation: The rule stands that if you’re going to buy a gun from public gun owners or some kind of
gun industry. “The Trace” writers MILES KOHRMAN AND JENNIFER MASCIA wrote an article explaining
how background checks work. The buyer fills out a 16 question packet about their history (if any) with
drugs, violence, alcohol, and weapons of any kind. Once they fill this out, it is sent to the FBI, where they
check to make sure the person is being honest and everything else matches up. This test, however, is
very easy to get around. Some records of criminal, medical, and alcoholic history doesn’t always make it
to the database in which the FBI gets their information from. In most cases, the info that the FBI is
getting is all filtered through the state in which the person is a resident from. If the state doesn’t get all
the info through, that’s possibly dozens of criminal backgrounds that the FBI could never be made aware
of.In the case of the Texas church gunman Devin Kelley, records from his Air Force court-martial for
choking his then-wife and fracturing the skull of his baby stepson were never entered into the FBI’s
system. He was able to buy at least three guns from licensed sellers, passing a background check each
time. (The Trace).

3. Main Argument Three: We understand transfer ownership does happen illegally. This being said, even
if there were rules blocking this, the people would still find ways to bend through them.

Point: If someone needs a gun bad enough, the can shift the rules to find a loophole.

Evidence: The federal bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives says that under federal law
there are no record keeping requirement pertaining to the transfer of a firearm between 2 unlicensed
individuals. This being said, it is a part of our freedom to trade.
The second amendment states “ A well regulated militia, being necessary the the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This deals with man's freedom of
guns and their ability to have them without certain background checks or transfer ownerships that
might impose into their life

Explanation: We are allowed to bear arms and get them in means of our own safety. If someone needs a
gun bad enough, no matter the rules many people still break them. Think of a teenager. Adults tell us all
the time not to do something or to stay away from something but we are naturally inclined to go
towards them, or do what we are told not to. This rule applies to guns. If a person wants something
enough, they have a teen mindset and are willing to go and get what they want even if they are told not
to if there were transfer ownership laws or regulations set.

Notes from opponent’s debate

 Any negatives in extra gun security

 Check every aspect of a persons life
 Psycjopath- mental disorder
 Main point- there are no proper rules for guns
 Inspections are not thourough
 A man with expired licese got a gun
 Ar-15 the same gun used in the massacres at sandy hook
 All have had criminal background or menal illness
 Buyers dont require background check
 Marami valander
 You should not be allowed to just sell guns (neighbor got his convicted son a gun)
 Federalists proved false
 Protecting the citizens
 40% gun sales originate from private sellers
 Depressed kid can get a gun
 Easier to get a gun then get mental help these days
 Any criminal can get a gun without
 Shooter passed all background checks
 Gun violence down as mental health goes up
 Broken system sellers regulate at
 Inconsistency in gun purchases
 40% gun purchases are conducted without a background check
 Not required
 Record of all guns sold and a history of guns sold
 Guns are primarily meant to kill people
 Cole could get a gun from anyone
 The more you can do, the less violence
Crossfire

You stated “there is an inconsistency in gun purchases today”. This further proves our point on how
even with them, the amount of machinery you can buy outside of the law would not be increased or
decreased with a background check

40% guns are conducted without a background check. If they are conducted without a background
check, what of that 60% of people have actually committed a crime?

Universal background check is compiling of criminal record, commercial records, and financial. You
mentioned psychotic. A person who is psychotic can do what they want without control. It never
mentions ‘depressed people” as you stated in the definition for a universal background check.

If someone used an expired license, what's to say they are any better laws to stop this?

Shooter passed background checks= use example

Criminals =

Copy-cat criminals

Shooter = background check? What’s your source?

Required for the receiver to be checked by a background check. Source?

Our evidence

According to the washington post, Converting receivers, the part of the gun you said you need a
background check for, into firearms is relatively simple: use a drill press to create holes in the receivers,
well out certain areas and then combine the pieces with other parts to make a fully functioning
semiautomatic rifle.

This proves, even with the check, it is easy to make it and find loopholes to create their own gun through
this process.

Right now, with gun laws you can still go on the black market, do transfers illegally, find loopholes, and
get under the law