Resolved: That the private ownership of handguns should be banned in the United States.
ForensicsOnline.net says it was changed this morning. There is nothing on the NFL site except for the new wording.
Public Forum Debate News & Information
-
Crossfire Briefs
Crossfire Briefs are published 10 times per year for the September through April NFL topics, the NCFL Grand Nationals topic, and the NFL Nationals topic.
For more information about Crossfire Briefs, visit the PFDebate Shop
Crossfire Briefs
2008-09 Subscription
10 Issues
$140
Crossfire Briefs
September 2008
Military Draft
$20
Available Now!
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Tim Averill from the Public Forum topic committee has provided a brief explanation for the change: http://victorybriefsdaily.com/2007/05/18/public-forum-nfl-resolution-update/
The change is a good change. With computers and debaters on line, everyone should get word. When I called my team, one of the girls was jumping up and down because the topic is now debatable.
We didn’t find any articles that supported a firearms ban, and the logic of trying to persuade judges on some type of affirmative position was mind boggling.
Handguns yes, and the DC case will be a great place to start.
I agree that the change is good, I am a little bummed I just bought a handbook on the topic yesterday and about 1/2 is completely worthless. What discussions are being made to avoid this problem in the future?
On another web site a person on the selection committee suggested that the topic be released two weeks ahead of time so no one can get a handbook.
I think you will see most handbooks make good on the changed topic. Contact them and ask.
There is a lot of stuff out on the web, and the Parker Decision in DC has a lot of legal and main stream media articles that do a good job disecting the topic.
Why can’t PRO teams just say that this debate about the desirability of banning handguns. It does not matter whether it is done legislatively or by Constitutional amendment. There is no plan. This is basically a pre-policy debate and we would let our CX friends (or Congress) work out the implementation details.
Given the number of gun restrictions currently on the books, I’m not sure the CON can argue that that the Second Amendment is absolute or that there is a bright line standard. They could argue that this is a slippery slope toward firearms prohibition and use that firearms prohibition bad stuff we found last week.
It seems to me that the 4th Amendment implications in terms of getting any real reduction in handgun ownership is a much more compelling argument than the 2nd Amendment stuff.
I am not worried too much about the handbooks issue. Actually I think the Con can make a case on the 2nd Amendment issue after the recent ruling by the appealatte court on the Wahington Ban. I think that this wording gets at the heart of the issue of gun control vs. gun rights.
I know my girls will be excited to hear about the change.
Leave a Comment