The Gun Control Debate

Two researchers from West go head-to-head on each point of the gun control debate.


English 10 Honors. Two sophomores, Daniel Stewart (left) and Steven Yuan (right) wrote competing research papers about gun control, diving into the details for each reason gun control is good or bad, creating chains of logic and statistics. Here, they answer each other’s points, until every argument is resolved, and every study analyzed.


How it works

Each debater gets an advantage — that is, a reason why gun control is good or bad. The “Homicide” advantage is a toss-up; it will be claimed by whoever argues it the best.


For the first round, the debaters will split their advantage into its components, with evidence at each step. For example, “Background checks deter poorer people from seeking guns” and “That leaves poorer people defenseless” are components of the “Crime Advantage”

The debaters will question each other about certain parts of their advantage, trying to undermine the other’s points.

The rest of the debate, each round a debater defending from each attack on their advantage, while trying to undermine the opponent’s advantage at its weakest point.

This is ROUND 1 — both debaters will forward their first arguments.

Click on the arguments to see their source (many arguments come from the same source)