We haven't done one of these in a while, so I thought it might be interesting to do one on the subject of Second Amendment / gun control.
Important details:
1)If you want to participate in this exercise, your first post in this thread should be, "I'm in" or something related. After that, I will assign you to one of the two points of view above. You can request to be assigned 1 or 2, but that doesn't mean you'll get it.
2)You are not allowed to provide an opinion directly related to the topic of this thread unless you have previously been assigned a point of view (see below). If you comment on something related to the topic without being assigned a point of view first, I'm just going to delete your post. Sidebar commentary (i.e. "peanut gallery" comments) are allowed from people not participating in the debate, but providing your own opinion or substantively commenting on the posts of others participating in the debate is not allowed unless you, too, are in the debate as defined above.
3) Me assigning points of view means that you may have to debate this topic from a point of view that is different than what you currently believe. THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE. In fact, if I know that you have come out strongly on one point of view, I will assign you to the opposite side of the argument in this exercise. I assign points of view so not everyone chooses one over the other and to keep the level of outside commentary down. I also do it to help people think about an argument from the "other" view, which is an important thing to do when forming or re-examining your own point of view on a given subject.
4) After being assigned a point of view, you may make your own points, support the posts made by others on your "team," and rebut the arguments of the other side. You are free to re-frame your point of view in your posts to better suit the argument you are trying to make.
5) You do not need to caveat your posts with something like, "I don't believe this in real life" or words to that effect. That immediately undermines your argument and taints everything you say afterwards. If you do that, I'm going to delete your post. Act like you believe it; you'll do better research and make a better argument. There will be plenty of time to say what you really believe later.
6) We have done several of these exercises in the past, and people learn a lot. So keep it civil, keep it fun. There are no "winners" or "losers" in this exercise, we are all winners due to the education we receive from being exposed to well-researched and well-argued points of view on this topic.
... and with that, game on!
POV 1: Modern technology and US society have advanced to a point well beyond anything imaginable by our Founding Fathers. Incidents like Columbine, Sandy Hook, Fort Hood, and the LA cop shootings underscore the reasons why substantive gun control reform is needed not later but NOW. These measures include options up to, but not necessarily inclusive of, repealing the 2nd Amendment in its entirety.
POV 2: Gun control is anathema to our American values and should be resisted by every legal means available. History is replete with examples of what happens to populations who give up their guns: for every Sandy Hook there is an Auschwitz; for every Columbine, a concentration camp; For every Fort Hood, a Rwanda. Gun control legislation must be opposed in order to ensure that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, does not become the graveyard of the people.
Important details:
1)If you want to participate in this exercise, your first post in this thread should be, "I'm in" or something related. After that, I will assign you to one of the two points of view above. You can request to be assigned 1 or 2, but that doesn't mean you'll get it.
2)You are not allowed to provide an opinion directly related to the topic of this thread unless you have previously been assigned a point of view (see below). If you comment on something related to the topic without being assigned a point of view first, I'm just going to delete your post. Sidebar commentary (i.e. "peanut gallery" comments) are allowed from people not participating in the debate, but providing your own opinion or substantively commenting on the posts of others participating in the debate is not allowed unless you, too, are in the debate as defined above.
3) Me assigning points of view means that you may have to debate this topic from a point of view that is different than what you currently believe. THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE. In fact, if I know that you have come out strongly on one point of view, I will assign you to the opposite side of the argument in this exercise. I assign points of view so not everyone chooses one over the other and to keep the level of outside commentary down. I also do it to help people think about an argument from the "other" view, which is an important thing to do when forming or re-examining your own point of view on a given subject.
4) After being assigned a point of view, you may make your own points, support the posts made by others on your "team," and rebut the arguments of the other side. You are free to re-frame your point of view in your posts to better suit the argument you are trying to make.
5) You do not need to caveat your posts with something like, "I don't believe this in real life" or words to that effect. That immediately undermines your argument and taints everything you say afterwards. If you do that, I'm going to delete your post. Act like you believe it; you'll do better research and make a better argument. There will be plenty of time to say what you really believe later.
6) We have done several of these exercises in the past, and people learn a lot. So keep it civil, keep it fun. There are no "winners" or "losers" in this exercise, we are all winners due to the education we receive from being exposed to well-researched and well-argued points of view on this topic.
... and with that, game on!