• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 1.2%

  • Depends

    Votes: 11 12.9%

  • No

    Votes: 73 85.9%
  • Total voters
    85
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Where I live gun safes are almost as common as refrigerators. I don't think I'd have a problem finding a friend to hang on to them.

BTW I'm an emergency responder. If there is a disaster I'm pretty much expected to be armed.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

As I am not a gun owner nor have plans to be one, this would be very theoretical of me to respond. Nevertheless, what strikes me as odd is that the police would really even come up in my head as an option for storage (regardless of weather conditions). The nearest entity I could potentially see being fine is if you are a university student and in order to comply with the campus regs, you store them over their police department. No big deal, my friends did that plenty of times. Otherwise, I would be pretty hard pressed to think of a reason why I would really want to give a state entity expensive property that could easily be misplaced or held up through some bureaucratic hell. On top of that, what if large numbers of people actually take advantage of such a thing? Would it be possible that with more weapons to keep track of, more mistakes would occur?
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Carjosse said:
Recently the extent of the political pressure the RCMP got when it seized firearms from people's unsecured homes during the summer flooding in High River, Alberta was revealed. The Conservatives demanded the seized guns be returned to the owners. What the RCMP like to point is most of the firearms (more than 600 to be exact) they had in storage were voluntarily given to the police to be safeguarded during the disaster along with half a million rounds of ammunition. My question to you is if say your house was damaged and flooded, torn apart, burned, etc. by a natural disaster and have no safe place to store them would you surrender your firearms voluntarily to the police for safe keeping until you could return home and store them safely.
Click to expand...

NO, not just no but hell no. I got plenty of places that I trust to keep them.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Lord Tammerlain said:
Potentially there is, but it would have been a law from the early 1800s and if it exists, it has no planning for it, and I would suggest no one knows about it
Click to expand...

It sounds like a "market failure" in leadership.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Fiddytree said:
As I am not a gun owner nor have plans to be one, this would be very theoretical of me to respond. Nevertheless, what strikes me as odd is that the police would really even come up in my head as an option for storage (regardless of weather conditions). The nearest entity I could potentially see being fine is if you are a university student and in order to comply with the campus regs, you store them over their police department. No big deal, my friends did that plenty of times. Otherwise, I would be pretty hard pressed to think of a reason why I would really want to give a state entity expensive property that could easily be misplaced or held up through some bureaucratic hell. On top of that, what if large numbers of people actually take advantage of such a thing? Would it be possible that with more weapons to keep track of, more mistakes would occur?
Click to expand...

That is another concern I would have. I worked for a state agency at one point. The amount of incompetence was staggering. Excess spending, poor storage methods, 0 organizational skills, ridiculous red tape for no other reason than to be annoying, thieving employees, and just general crap all the way around. I wouldn't trust them with a penny...let alone my gun.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

stonewall50 said:
That is another concern I would have. I worked for a state agency at one point. The amount of incompetence was staggering. Excess spending, poor storage methods, 0 organizational skills, ridiculous red tape for no other reason than to be annoying, thieving employees, and just general crap all the way around. I wouldn't trust them with a penny...let alone my gun.
Click to expand...

And the thing is, the red tape could be specifically used to protect the property ownership of the legitimate gun owner, but the burden of proof would likely fall on the individual to prove that they are indeed the rightful owner of the gun. During a natural disaster the likelihood of losing your proof exponentially increases, as people make rush judgments as to where to store things, whether to store things, forget entirely, or lose it during the disaster itself.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

In the US, I believe we could end our expensive Wars on Crime, Drugs, and Terror, merely by faithfully executing our own Second Amendment.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Fiddytree said:
And the thing is, the red tape could be specifically used to protect the property ownership of the legitimate gun owner, but the burden of proof would likely fall on the individual to prove that they are indeed the rightful owner of the gun. During a natural disaster the likelihood of losing your proof exponentially increases, as people make rush judgments as to where to store things, whether to store things, forget entirely, or lose it during the disaster itself.
Click to expand...

Yep. What if they decide you need to have a birth certificate and not just a driver's license? Or maybe 3 forms of ID? Anything like that would hamper your ability to get what is rightfully yours back.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

The fire arm would be safe on my person.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Carjosse said:
Recently the extent of the political pressure the RCMP got when it seized firearms from people's unsecured homes during the summer flooding in High River, Alberta was revealed. The Conservatives demanded the seized guns be returned to the owners. What the RCMP like to point is most of the firearms (more than 600 to be exact) they had in storage were voluntarily given to the police to be safeguarded during the disaster along with half a million rounds of ammunition. My question to you is if say your house was damaged and flooded, torn apart, burned, etc. by a natural disaster and have no safe place to store them would you surrender your firearms voluntarily to the police for safe keeping until you could return home and store them safely.
Click to expand...

Hell no! I may need that gun to protect myself against looters or whomever else may come out of the woodwork once the full of the police force is occupied.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

UOTE=Hamster Buddha;1062610627]We really are talking apples to oranges when comparing Canada and the United States. It be like comparing obesity from state to state and country to country. There are just some cultural different that comes into play. The statistics cannot be denied though, and what is most damning is what I didn't put into that. The District of Columbia, has the toughest gun laws in the country, and also the highest murder per capita as well. At some point you have to start drawing a correlation.[/QUOTE] I don't think strict gun laws bring down the violence. I think gun laws would prevent some people from killing, but it leaves other defenseless, and they might be killed by someone that obtains a fire arm illegally.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

The experience of New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina should be a good example of what not to do in regards to your guns. My experience has been that you should become very good at dismantling and hiding your tools for swift access at a later time.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

No. Why would anyone do that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom