# data[].attributes.headline
2nd Amendment / No bans or restrictions 

# data[].attributes.subject
2nd Amendment / No bans or restrictions 

# data[].attributes.body
My opponent would say that Assault rifles and AK-47s should not be banned from the right of citizens. They state citizens should have the right to defend tMy opponent argues that assault rifles and AK-47s should not be banned and that citizens have the right to defend themselves. They believe that since most crimes occur in public places, individuals should be allowed to carry weapons for self-defense if necessary. In a dangerous situation, having a gun could be essential, and being prepared is important. Additionally, mental health plays a significant role in many gun-related crimes. The saying goes, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." Ultimately, it is individuals who choose to use a gun, not the gun itself that make that decision. themselves. My opponent would also state that most crimes happen in public places. Citizens should be able to carry weapons to defend themself if needed. If you were in a situation to protect yourself a gun would be necessary and it's better to have it with you.

assault guns are responsible for very few deaths in the United States;

banning assault weapons will not reduce crime and will only lead to the right to erosion of the right to bear arms

# data[].attributes.headline
2nd amendment banned on assault rifles/restrictions

# data[].attributes.subject
2nd amendment banned on assault rifles/restrictions

# data[].attributes.body
Let's ban all assault rifles, I think this because you have noticed that 60% of murders are due to the use of rifles. 26 clones of the semi-auto had caused over 28 deadliest mass shootings. In 2017 in Las Vegas, there was a mass shooting that was also caused by a semi-auto that had killed 58 people. The year between 1994 and 2004 the government had to have two mass and only one auto. Each year there is a 1070 decrease in the human population making 650 shootings per year. In the recent shooting, there were 98 recent shootings and 16% of guns were illegally bought the rest 84% were legal guns. 60% of people in the USA want to ban AR. AR was invented for soldiers/war faces not to use to kill innocent people ( Arc-IS & m-16). The U.S. annual gun deaths usually top 30,000 including suicide and accidental death, this is the reason for the decrease in the population. With the rifles banned we would have a bigger population of humans in the U.S. Many people are also fearing when they go out because of the uses of the rifles. Without the rifles, people would not be fearing to go out. But if we allow citizens to have the right to carry weapons in public spaces they could make our crime rate go up due to people who don't know how to shoot are more likely to hurt the innocents. My opponent is saying there should be no restriction on weapons but a human brain doesn't fully develop until 25 years old.

# data[].attributes.body
We need more laws to address climate change, which is causing an increase in natural disasters. Burning fossil fuels traps heat from the sun, leading to global warming. This phenomenon can result in extreme temperatures, heat waves, and rising sea levels. Climate change can also release harmful gases into the atmosphere, potentially causing various health problems for all living beings. Additionally, climate change is causing more rainfall, which can lead to significant flooding. This flooding often results in the loss of homes and habitats. Moreover, rising temperatures can cause droughts, leading to a lack of water for humans, animals, and plants. Without these essential resources, life becomes difficult. The consequences of climate change contribute to the loss of homes, habitats, and overall population stability. We need more laws due to climate change, which is causing more natural disasters. Burning fossil fuels can trap heat from the sun. When the heat is trapped by the sun, glam warming can happen. Glam warming can cause extreme heat, heat waves, and rising sea levels. Climate change can lead to gasses being released into the atmosphere, which could cause multiple health problems to life all around. This is also causing more rain which could lead to major flooding, which the flooding could lead to home loss and habitat loss. It also leads to temperatures rising dramatically and causing droughts, these droughts could cause a lack of water for the living things around. these living things are human life, animals, and plants. without all these things it would be hard to live. All the stuff that climate change causes leads to home loss habitat loss, and loss in all populations.

reduces pollution and labor laws set standards for working condition wages and safety to ensure fair treatment of employees

# data[].attributes.body
Same fair taxes for all. Tax breaks for wealthy people.

Tax breaks for the rich because money will trickle down. The Wealthy will create jobs with extra money. All this new spending = more jobs. It also increases money for all classes. More money in taxes to The Government funds all society. Competition to be a top money earner = creativity. Competition to get to the top = good for the nation's invention. Everyone has the potential to be a top earner. Reducing taxes such as corporation tax should encourage businesses to invest, which would in theory increase wealth. If the wealthy would invest in businesses creating new jobs and increasing the incomes of those employed. The increased wealth of these individuals and corporations would result in an increased demand for goods and Everyone should pay the same fair taxes, but currently, there are tax breaks for wealthy individuals. The idea behind these tax breaks is that money will "trickle down" — the wealthy will use their extra funds to create jobs, which can lead to increased spending and more job opportunities for everyone. This, in turn, would generate more tax revenue for the government, benefiting all classes in society. Competition to be a top earner fosters creativity and innovation, which is beneficial for the nation's progress. Everyone has the potential to become a high earner. Reducing corporate taxes, for instance, could encourage businesses to invest, theoretically increasing overall wealth. If wealthy individuals invest in businesses, they can create new jobs and raise the incomes of their employees. The resulting increase in wealth for these individuals and corporations would lead to a higher demand for Goods and services.

Tax fairness means the tax system is equitable to all citizens. This is not just a concept - it is the law. The right to a fair and just tax system is one of 10 rights in the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, which clearly outline the fundamental rights of every taxpayer.

# data[].attributes.body
My opponent concedes that high taxes on the wealthy can harm job creation and businesses. They reference Bill Clinton's decision to increase taxes on top earners from 31 percent to 39.6 percent, yet it's crucial to understand that such tax hikes can stifle economic growth and innovation. But increasingly.