Claim, Data, Warrant

[boost]

Ok I have this debate/speach class and for some reason I just cant focus on the technical part of the class. I enjoy the class as a whole since we talk about intersting stuff and the teacher is cool, but I get ADD anytime he starts talking about the technical mumbo jumbo.

I know the stuff is really easy but I cant seem to get this assignment done. He gave us a topic "Resolved: gun laws are effective" the other half of the class got "ineffective" ofc. Now we have to give an opening statement and three CDW's. Here is waht Ive done so far, and Im kinda embarassed to say Im having a hard time figuring out what to do next.

Resolved: Gun control laws are effective
Opening statement: Gun control laws may not be perfect but none the less they are an effective way to lower the occurrence of gun related crimes

Claim: Many countries have enacted strict gun control laws to curb rising gun related violent crimes.
Data: In 1997 Australia enacted laws that made personal firearms in most cases illegal and seized over half a million guns. As a result firearms related deaths dropped by 47%.
Warrant: When strictly enforced gun control laws are effective in lowering gun related violent crimes.

Part of the problem is that Im not sure Im doing this right, and the other part is that I dont really agree and am honestly having a hard time finding much through google that supports my assigned position. Can anyone help me out, am I doing it right so far? What are a couple good claims to make?

cliff notes: boost has to wake up at 3:30am for class and is too tired to do his own homework.

[BankItDrew]

When debating, never use negative words to describe your point of view ie. 'may not be perfect.' Your opening claim should be more along the lines of: "Gun control laws are an effective way to lower the occurrence of gun related crimes."

I would re-word your claim and data a little bit too, including grammar. to something like:
Claim: Many countries have enacted strict gun control laws that have lowered gun related violent crimes.
Data: In 1997, Australia enacted laws that made handguns illegal and seized over a half million guns. As a result, firearm related deaths dropped by 47%.
Warrant: When strictly enforced gun control laws are effective in lowering gun related violent crimes.

Try to avoid thoughts of 'i don't agree with what I'm trying to say.' Because, the professor would not have provided such a two-sided case without strong arguments on both sides. It's easy to do the research, take your time, and textually argue something you may not agree with personally. It's difficult to do it verbally - so try to psyche yourself up before presenting. I do this by convincing myself that what I am presenting is not only important, but also 100% truthful. Sometimes I lie to people, I'm human. Lying takes the same preparation.

[Lukie]

you got the short end of the stick on this one. it's far easier to argue that cun control laws are generally *not* effective, but there's nothing you can do about that.

if you want to make this VERY easy, I'd recommend an actual gun forum. just explain your situation and they might be able to give you some good data. again, it would be a lot easier to argue the other way around, but whatever.

www.thehighroad.org
www.glocktalk.com

both are good

[Lukie]

actually, on second thought, it would be a lot smarter to try to find some kind of anti-gun forum. you're gonna have to google that yourself though.

[Ragnar4]

I think the first, most important question is: Are you actually able to debate, or is it a series of turns being taken giving CDW in opposition?

Second: On the collegiate debate circuit, it's far easier to win "effective", than it was to win ineffective. It's because the "effective" arguments are very high brow, and technical, while the "ineffective" arguments seem to be anything a redneck yokel protecting his right to hunt with a bazooka will throw at you.

Anyway: Back on topic. It seems to me, that you give an opening statement, and 3 CDW's It would read something like this.

Opening statement: Today I have been asked to review the statement: Resolved: Gun control laws are effective, and I find myself firmly entrenched in the affirmitave stance of that statement. I have 3 contentions contributing to the affirmation of this resolution. My first contention is.
Boosts revision to your claim is nearly perfect.

Claim: Many countries have enacted strict gun control laws that have lowered gun related violent crimes.
Data: In 1997, Australia enacted laws that made handguns illegal and seized over a half million guns. As a result, firearm related deaths dropped by 47%.
--- You said countries. So talk about multiple Countries. I suggest you look up thailand, sweden, norway, denmark. Give 2 more sources.
Warrant: When strictly enforced gun control laws are effective in lowering gun related violent crimes.
The warrent needs to be short, sweet, one sentence and support the claim THROUGH the data. Not easy, this does it, but it can be streamlined, if you wish.

From my understanding of your post, all you need to do is give 2 more CDW's

"My second contention is."

Some claims you can perhaps look up.

Claim: The notion that when owning guns illegal, then only criminals will have guns is a lie. "direct supreme court quote here... won't be hard to look up."

Claim: The notion that people need guns to protect themselves is faulty.

Claim: The freedom to bear arms is only within a well ordained militia, we should enforce our constitutional laws to increase american safety (This argument is a winner, but it's a nestled argument. I don't know if your class has gotten this far.)

Anyway. If you have any more questions. I was a national Champion debater, and a national champion Student Congresser, and a national champion impromptu speaker and national champion extemp speaker at the collegiate level. In short a debate baller. I'm pretty sure I can help

Lemmie know if you need anything.

[will641]

I was a national Champion debater, and a national champion Student Congresser, and a national champion impromptu speaker and national champion extemp speaker at the collegiate level. In short a debate baller. I'm pretty sure I can help

thats pretty cool. i wish they had a debate team at my high school. unfortunately they were really gay and probably thought debating was too negative.

[Ragnar4]

Yeah it's too bad they didn't Will.

It's a proven fact that Kids that do debate end up being far more successful than kids that do all the other sports combined.

You learn neat things about communication too. Did you know that the person most likely to get a raise isn't the person that works the hardest in any working environment? It's the person who works hard, and communicates the best THAT they work hard. There is in fact some creedence to kissing your bosses ass to get to the top.

[will641]

or if youre a woman sleep your way to the top, lol. have you seen bowfinger? i love how they have heather graham start off sleeping with like the writer, then she works her way up to the director, and so on.

but yeah i would believe that for sure. and as a slacker and decent communicator, i feel much more optimistic about life.

[a500lbgorilla]

What is this class? Where you argue in the format of Claim, Data, Warrant? Counter-Claim, Data, Warrant?

I hate the fact that data is the basis for giving an claim value.

[boost]

well we have to take a speech class, and its either this debate class that Im in or a formal speech class. I really hate public speaking, so the debate one is pretty awesome to me.

I ended up finding this girl who had the same side as me and we kinda did it together. While doing it we realized why it seemed so hard. If you are ineffective you can argue from both a pro gun rights or pro gun control point of view. If you are effective you have no choice but to argue that the current laws are perfect and that they dont need to be changed in either direction. A more even sided debate would be gun rights vs gun control. Not sure how it would be worded, but I think thats what my teacher was going for but didnt fully think it through.

Either way me and this girl did it together and we did pretty well in the debate, better than the other team at least. Now I have an easier position, the negative of "video games cause violent acts."

Ragnar, Im def gonna be hitting up your pm box, or maybe just posting here if I have anyways questions. I feel like I am pretty good at this stuff, but I just have a problem formatting my arguments into CDW's.

thanks for everyones help, I love this forum

[Ragnar4]

Not a problem dawg. I'll do what I can to check it out daily and make sure I don't miss anything...

Gonna be honest though, I think you're wrong about what you're stuck arguing in Pro Gun Control. Arguing that the laws are perfect is silly, because there's no such thing as a perfect law. (No not even the law of gravity). The problem is, like I said before. Pro Gun control is a much higher form of thought, while Neg Gun Control is easy to grasp.

Think of it like the difference between super small stakes, and the stuff you think about there (neg gun control) versus high stakes and the stuff you think about there (pro gun control). I digress

Anyway. Video Game Violence. LOL.

Data: Jack Thompson sued Rockstar video games for every GTA ever made, and Bully. (For many various reasons)
Data: Jack Thompson won one case, the "hot coffee mod", and got 50 thousand dollars in payout, divvied up into $50 bitesized chunks to re-purchase a copy of GTA without the Hot coffee mod.
Data: Jack also took 1 million dollars for himself in said class action "hot coffee mod." Lawsuit.
Claim: Jack Thompson is a dick
Warrant: The dichotomy between class action reward, and payout of damage to suffering individuals belies his "dickness".

[boost]

ok well the problem is that arguing that the laws are effective does not mean Im arguing pro or neg gun control. The reason is that both pro and neg gun control would be arguing for either tougher laws or more lax laws. So theres not a ton of easy to find info already compiled for my position that the current laws are effective.

A+ on cdw on the video games lol