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 17 of 24 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 238

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

  1. #161
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

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

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    Why not? It isn't uncomfortable. Mine actually is so comfortable I just don't take it off when I get home.
    I just would consider it rather strange. The thought that I would have to carry a gun when at home for protection is alien to the vast majority of Canadians. Even going out in public carrying a gun for protection would be an alien idea to most Canadians (excluding gang bangers of course). In general I think Canadians feel far more safe then most Americans, it may not be true based on overall crime stats, but I expect that is the most feel
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  2. #162
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,692

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ad_Captandum View Post
    Well, for one, we can conclude that you don't understand statistics. Let's compare to the City of Dallas, which is about the same size as Calgary, if we're only including city limits. Dallas had 152 murders in 2012. Calgary had 20.
    Does your 'statistic' show comparable population makeup and demographics or merely 'numbers'?

  3. #163
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

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

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    My guess? Calgary has better public education, less gang violence, and probably less crime overall. Hell. Aren't drugs less of a problem in Canada?
    Public education in Alberta is very good, it rates high on international comparisons being beat by South Korea and Finland all the time. Gang violence is generally low, a few years ago there was a small gang war between two generally Asian gangs. As for drugs, they are readily available, and the police do not go after users very much. Getting caught with an ounce of coke got someone I know probation and community service, no jail time. Two people I know crossing the boarder with 21 kg of coke had 3 years jail time for one, and the other just had a massive legal bill (he hired the best criminal defense attorney in Calgary)
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  4. #164
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,692

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post

    Can we just dismiss the obvious connection between stricter gun controls and lower murder rates? How do we know that there is no cause and effect relationship
    sure we can. All we have to do is look at the murder rates in cities and states in THIS country and the presence of restrictive gun laws there...that pretty much answers the questions, right?

  5. #165
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,462

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Serious View Post
    They also forced their way into homes to collect them also.

    And no I would not hand over my firearms for "safekeeping".
    Sounds like they were the looters.

  6. #166
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    I just would consider it rather strange. The thought that I would have to carry a gun when at home for protection is alien to the vast majority of Canadians. Even going out in public carrying a gun for protection would be an alien idea to most Canadians (excluding gang bangers of course). In general I think Canadians feel far more safe then most Americans, it may not be true based on overall crime stats, but I expect that is the most feel
    It's really an apples to orange though. For instance, drugs (which is one of the main drivers of murders in the US in my opinion) isn't the same level of concern as it is in Canada. You also don't have the history of racial issues (except for the native americans) nor do you have the same level of environmental factors. The following is a neat graph I found which shows levels of confidence between the two countries, and the UK.

    Crime Rate Lower in United States, Canada Than in Britain

    Edit: Out of Date Graph.
    Last edited by Hamster Buddha; 12-01-13 at 04:45 PM. Reason: Miss Post

  7. #167
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,462

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mordecai View Post
    You don't have to guess. All you have to do is read what I wrote.

    Yes, some people responded with some very reasonable alternatives. Leave them with a friend. One person even suggested leaving them with someone just up the road during a flood, which I found particularly amusing since it is likely that the family just up the road would also be flooded. Personally, I'd rather not give them to the Police for no other reason than because they have problems with logistics and I'm almost sure that I can handle my guns with more care than anyone else. They're mine, after all.

    But in addition to these alternatives, many people, including yourself, have framed your response within the the context of protecting your rights, which, again, I find interesting, since the OP's question was never about your rights. It was about whether or not you'd accept a service.

    Now, those of us who don't think that the American government would love to get its hands on everybody's guns (since even the most developed assault rifle probably isn't going to do much good against a missile launched from hundreds of miles away by one of America's 10 nuclear-powered supercarriers) didn't see that question as an issue of rights. That's why you didn't understand the cheese analogy. Placing cheese in a context of your rights is silly, which was your point, but your response doesn't make any sense to anybody who correctly perceived this question as a matter of pragmatic response and not as an issue of rights. So of course you couldn't understand that analogy. It caused a brief moment of cognitive dissonance because you are not capable of viewing any issues relating to guns as anything but a civil liberties issue. Responding to floods pragmatically by offering a basic service isn't a civil liberty issue, so why did your response and so many other responses take it that far? Was it a coincidence? An accident?

    Or...

    You were baited by the poster of the OP and you fell for it hook, line, and sinker. It was a very basic question--would you respond "yes" or "no" if the Police offered to safeguard your weapons in the event of a flood. The OP didn't even bother asking "why" because he knew that all the ra-ra-ra gun owners were gonna respond with litanies about government intrusion and their rights and all that.

    The purpose of this OP was to make gun-toting conservatives (or libertarian conservatives, or whatever they're calling themselves these days) look bad and that's exactly what it did.







    I don't really understand what that has to do with anything. Someone from Nigeria could have answered such a basic question. I related to the answers which had to do with logistical considerations, but you, yourself, took it way further than that. If you hadn't, we wouldn't have been discussing whether or not a socialist could form a decent answer to the relevant question.

    So is it a logistics issue or a rights issue? You don't know. Whatever sounds best at the time, right?







    Hold on. First London was a classic British example, wasn't it? You brought it up, not me. Suddenly the tables are turned and it doesn't represent Britain? Somehow, New York City isn't at all relevant to America?

    What kind of insanity is this?

    And what do you mean "you do things your way"? What, the conversation is over, now? We can't talk about it any more? I'm not from Canada or Britain, so phrasing it like you're talking to someone who isn't from the exact same country as you is kinda odd.







    No, you haven't explained anything about socialism. You threw a couple remarks at it to poison the well by referring to socialists as state-worshippers.

    As I said before, being able to carry pocketknives has nothing to do with socialism. Nothing in this thread has anything to do with socialism, which is government ownership of the means of production.

    How's it feel to have been successfully baited by the "Canadian OP"?
    The majority of people have any gunsd they are not using in a locked case, or they should, so why would you need to turn them over to law enforcement if they are already secure?

  8. #168
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,360

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    You don't know much about Canada

    The Vancouver region is heavily Chinese, Indian/Sikh. It has a nickname of Hongcover due to the number of Chinese there.

    Calgary has 140 000 east and south east Asians, probably 100 000 south Asians, 10 000 east Africans

    GTA (Toronto) has 500 000 Tamils, large numbers of Asian, Africans, etc.

    Montreal has a large number of Hatians

    Overall just under 20 % of the population is a visible minority group and the majority of them live in the largest cities.

    If you count Hispanics as being white, the difference between the US and Canada is 8%. Which would be predominately because of the much larger African population.
    Do you really want to get into a discussion on which country is more homogenous? Next we could discuss how Canada is an equal to the United States in relative income disparity too? Maybe that Canada has roughly the same amount of gang activity as the United States? We are talking a volume game here. We have roughly 10 times your population. You think that might add a little bit of a skew to the numbers?

    Last but not least.



    What on earth does this mean. It is ok to shoot minorities? or people from different ethnic groups
    Right. Because I must be a racist right? I am an American. I am pro gun.

    What the hell do you think it means? It means we have more people. We have more diversity. We have more gangs. Do you really think that racial tension isn't a cause of violence? So like I said...who exactly do you have to shoot if you are Canadian gangbanger? I'm not making a comment on "racial minorities." I'm making a comment on things that cause social conflict. And quite frankly it is slightly insulting that you would think otherwise.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  9. #169
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,360

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Public education in Alberta is very good, it rates high on international comparisons being beat by South Korea and Finland all the time. Gang violence is generally low, a few years ago there was a small gang war between two generally Asian gangs. As for drugs, they are readily available, and the police do not go after users very much. Getting caught with an ounce of coke got someone I know probation and community service, no jail time. Two people I know crossing the boarder with 21 kg of coke had 3 years jail time for one, and the other just had a massive legal bill (he hired the best criminal defense attorney in Calgary)
    So how do you think that equation would play out Stateside? The fact is treating guns as being a "cause" of crime and using US violence numbers as the "proof" is completely ignoring things like our "war on drugs."

    Hell I would add in that left over violence an poverty from the civil war...yes that far back...still causes some residual side effects that cause gangs to form on racial lines.
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

  10. #170
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,547

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

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    sure we can. All we have to do is look at the murder rates in cities and states in THIS country and the presence of restrictive gun laws there...that pretty much answers the questions, right?
    Actually, no, it doesn't.

    We had a long thread about this very subject not too long ago. The only conclusion was that there was no conclusion about whether restrictive gun laws had any effect at all on violent crimes in general.

    Here's an interesting article about the question of gun laws and violent crimes:

    Gun Laws and Crime: A Complex Relationship

    Do gun control laws reduce crime? Do they save lives? Is it possible they even cost lives?

    Justice Stephen G. Breyer, one of the dissenters in the 5-to-4 decision, surveyed a quite substantial body of empirical research on whether gun control laws do any good. Then he wrote: “The upshot is a set of studies and counterstudies that, at most, could leave a judge uncertain about the proper policy conclusion.”
    Does attempting to control the ownership of guns reduce violent crimes?
    Does individual ownership of guns discourage criminal activity?

    The answer to both of the above questions appears to be, "no."

    We've pretty much established that Canadians have a much lower murder rate than the US does, and that they are also an ethnically diverse country.

    So, we need to look beyond those factors to decide why we have so many more murders.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

Page 17 of 24 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... 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
  •