View Poll Results: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster?

Voters
106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 2.83%
  • Depends

    11 10.38%
  • No

    92 86.79%
Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 238

Thread: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster?

  1. #131
    Sit Nomine Digna
    Carjosse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,201

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    .....or the federal parliament began producing gun control laws to hinder the RedRiver Rebellion. Canada maintains strict gun control laws because if it didn't, there would be another rebellion. There are significant demographics within Canada which don't appreciate certain actions taken by the government. Such demographics are growing in the US, and that's why there's a push here for more gun control.
    There wouldn't be the ones that are rebelling are the Freeman on the Land movement and I think it is reasonable to seize their guns and arrest them. Should we let them have guns hell no. There would be no rebellion as almost everyone but those pathetic Freeman on the Land support Canadian gun control.

  2. #132
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    02-18-14 @ 08:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,660

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Carjosse View Post
    We never wanted one, we saw yours and thought it was a stupid idea. There is just so much potential for abuse it is astronomical.
    How so, using your rules only criminals have the guns.

  3. #133
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Carjosse View Post
    There wouldn't be the ones that are rebelling are the Freeman on the Land movement and I think it is reasonable to seize their guns and arrest them. Should we let them have guns hell no. There would be no rebellion as almost everyone but those pathetic Freeman on the Land support Canadian gun control.
    If there would be no rebellion, then there's no logic behind Canadian gun control.

    This is all besides the point, though, that Canada has no right to keep and bear to guard against, to then refuse police confiscation as we would here in the US.

  4. #134
    Sit Nomine Digna
    Carjosse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,201

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocketman View Post
    How so, using your rules only criminals have the guns.
    First of all you get people who want to won what are now prohibited weapons and we have people running around with handguns.

  5. #135
    Sit Nomine Digna
    Carjosse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,201

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    If there would be no rebellion, then there's no logic behind Canadian gun control.

    This is all besides the point, though, that Canada has no right to keep and bear to guard against, to then refuse police confiscation as we would here in the US.
    We don't think it is reasonable for people to run around with handguns and 30 round Ar-15s. We are afraid what individual and stupid people will do with them.

  6. #136
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Carjosse View Post
    We don't think it is reasonable for people to run around with handguns and 30 round Ar-15s. We are afraid what individual and stupid people will do with them.
    Which is why you have no problem handing such items over to the police.

    We think such items are reasonable and prudent for your typical adult to own, and so we have a problem with the police holding them "for" us.

  7. #137
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Britain, Mother of Civilisation
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    468

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    If there would be no rebellion, then there's no logic behind Canadian gun control.

    This is all besides the point, though, that Canada has no right to keep and bear to guard against, to then refuse police confiscation as we would here in the US.
    Sorry, did you say that if there's no rebellion, then there's no logic behind gun control?

    What about reducing the number of guns in the country, and thereby reducing the number of shootings?

  8. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Ad_Captandum View Post
    What about reducing the number of guns in the country, and thereby reducing the number of shootings?
    That's a myth, if not a lie:



    Sources used in the video:




    Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive
    Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?
    A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence.
    Din B. Kates* and Gary Mauser**


    The study, which just appeared in Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694), set out to answer the question in its title: "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence." Contrary to conventional wisdom, and the sniffs of our more sophisticated and generally anti-gun counterparts across the pond, the answer is "no." And not just no, as in there is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, but an emphatic no, showing a negative correlation: as gun ownership increases, murder and suicide decreases.

    The findings of two criminologists - Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser - in their exhaustive study of American and European gun laws and violence rates, are telling:
    Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population)
    .
    EDITORIAL: Guns decrease murder rates
    In Washington, the best defense is self-defense
    By THE WASHINGTON TIMES


    More guns in law-abiding hands mean less crime. The District of Columbia proves the point.

    <snip>
    Few who lived in Washington during the 1970s can forget the upswing in crime that started right after the ban was originally passed. In the five years before the 1977 ban, the murder rate fell from 37 to 27 murders per 100,000. In the five years after the gun ban went into effect, the murder rate rose back up to 35. One fact is particularly hard to ignore: D.C.'s murder rate fluctuated after 1976 but only once fell below what it was in 1976 before the ban. That aberration happened years later, in 1985.

    This correlation between the D.C. gun ban and diminished safety was not a coincidence. Look at the Windy City. Immediately after Chicago banned handguns in 1982, the murder rate, which had been falling almost continually for a decade, started to rise. Chicago's murder rate rose relative to other large cities as well. The phenomenon of higher murder rates after gun bans are passed is not just limited to the United States. Every single time a country has passed a gun ban, its murder rate soared.


    <snip>

  9. #139
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    Quote Originally Posted by Ad_Captandum View Post
    Sorry, did you say that if there's no rebellion, then there's no logic behind gun control?

    What about reducing the number of guns in the country, and thereby reducing the number of shootings?
    The history of gun laws in Canada reflects political struggle, not crime prevention. With regard to Canada, gun control has little to nothing to do with crime prevention.

  10. #140
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,703

    Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

    To answer the question posed by the OP...why would conservatives have to 'demand' that those weapons be returned?

Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •