• 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

There is NO debating, gun control reduces the shooting rate. That is just true.
Absolutely. You can't shoot someone if you don't have a gun.

The thing is, we want some shooting. We want the rape victim to shoot the perp. We want the home owner to shoot the burglar. Etc.

Reducing "shootings" is not a desirable goal since justified shootings are a good and desirable thing. Certain crimes should cost you your life in the act by the victim's hands.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

If that is so, then Canada should have a lot more murders than the US, and yet the opposite is true.

The truth is, more freedom is more dangerous.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

I don't know. Should we dismiss the dozens of other cultural/social differences between Canada and the United States? You know? Drug laws? Gangs? Population? Number of cities? Economic diversity? Ethnic make up?

No, not at all. In fact, some other factor must be the reason why there are fewer murders in Canada than the USA. Just listing possibilities, however, doesn't help unless you can make some sort of a connection between those factors and murder/violent crime rates.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

The truth is, more freedom is more dangerous.

If that is so, then stricter gun laws should make us more safe, yet that doesn't seem to be true either.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

I don't have a fire arm, so I guees the question doesn't fit well at the moment. However I feel it would violate the US Constitution to impose such an order. If I had one I would not turn it over, I wouldn't expect others to either.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

There is absolutely no debating that banning guns has resulted in fewer gun deaths.
Is that what this thread is about?

Let me tell you, that even if private gun ownership increased crime, it should remain legal. Even if more guns = more crime, private gun ownership should remain perfectly permisable and unhindered.

If you want to make the most improvement on crime, focus on local economy and intact homes. When it comes to crime, the presence or absence of guns have little impact.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Absolutely. You can't shoot someone if you don't have a gun.

The thing is, we want some shooting. We want the rape victim to shoot the perp. We want the home owner to shoot the burglar. Etc.

Reducing "shootings" is not a desirable goal since justified shootings are a good and desirable thing. Certain crimes should cost you your life in the act by the victim's hands.

Ah, now here is something we can debate! While I still thoroughly disagree with you, I recognise that this is matter of morals and conscious, not statistics.

To address that point: That sounds to me worryingly like vigilante justice, neverminding that I'd argue capital punishment is wrong entirely. Surely you would prefer a rapist or thief face due process?
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

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.

Of course! One round at a time.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Is that what this thread is about?

Let me tell you, that even if private gun ownership increased crime, it should remain legal. Even if more guns = more crime, private gun ownership should remain perfectly permisable and unhindered.

If you want to make the most improvement on crime, focus on local economy and intact homes. When it comes to crime, the presence or absence of guns have little impact.

Now, you may be on to something here.

Are there more intact homes in Canada than the US?
Has their economy come out of the recession more quickly than ours?

If so, then there may actually be a correlation between the economy and the family and lower murder rate, when there doesn't appear to be one between gun ownership and murder rate.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Ah, now here is something we can debate! While I still thoroughly disagree with you, I recognise that this is matter of morals and conscious, not statistics.

To address that point: That sounds to me worryingly like vigilante justice, neverminding that I'd argue capital punishment is wrong entirely. Surely you would prefer a rapist or thief face due process?
You will need to open a thread on it, as the moderators generally frown on this much drift away from a thread's OP.

Send me a link when you make such a thread :2wave:
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

I'm sure Canada's ethnic "make up" doesn't look anything like that of the US. they might have a couple of all races there, but that isn't what we see in the US. I would tend to leave race out of it as it seems crime rates are usually higher in dense populations. Canada doesn't resemble the US well in that aspect.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

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.

I'm not really sure. the way you described it, maybe because i wouldn't want to ruin my guns, but if the government sent out a message that sid we had to hand all of our guns to the police and we might not get them back, then no.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

If that is so, then Canada should have a lot more murders than the US, and yet the opposite is true.

I'm sure Canada's ethnic "make up" doesn't look anything like that of the US. they might have a couple of all races there, but that isn't what we see in the US. I would tend to leave race out of it as it seems crime rates are usually higher in dense populations. Canada doesn't resemble the US well in that aspect.

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

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.


Is Canada really all that different from the US? What are the differences that matter to the issue of murders and gun violence/gun control?
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

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.

A nation that is eager to kiss any oppressor's ass rather than fight for freedom certainly has less need of a right to keep and bear arms than a nation of people who value freedom and are willing to fight for it, if necessary.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Why were the pólice searching peoples homes for weapons? I doubt they were out in the open, so searching had to be done.

Do you agree with the pólice searching your house after a natural disaster?

There's a word that refers to people breaking into homes that they do not own or lawfully occupy, and taking property therefrom that does not belong to them; in the wake of a natural disaster or other similar major disruption. It's called “looting”.

A looter with a badge is still a looter.

In many places, it's considered justifiable to use deadly force against looters.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Why were the pólice searching peoples homes for weapons? I doubt they were out in the open, so searching had to be done.

Do you agree with the pólice searching your house after a natural disaster?

When it was first announced that the RCMP was taking guns they said they were in plain site, late it was reveled that they were searching the homes for them, in closets and under beds etc. The official reason for the searches was to find people trapped in their homes (ie elderly and invalids)
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

Is Canada really all that different from the US? What are the differences that matter to the issue of murders and gun violence/gun control?

I think the primary difference between the US and Canada, as it affects to gun crime, is related largely to drugs and poverty within the inner cities. Neither of these issues are as prevalent a problem as they are in Canada. Well, unless we're talking about that mayor from Toronto.



Then again, if the presence of guns were the sole cause of violence, Switzerland would be one of the most violent places in the world with their permissive gun culture. But their not, which further shows that guns aren't responsible for crime, but people are.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

I think the primary difference between the US and Canada, as it affects to gun crime, is related largely to drugs and poverty within the inner cities. Neither of these issues are as prevalent a problem as they are in Canada. Well, unless we're talking about that mayor from Toronto.


Then again, if the presence of guns were the sole cause of violence, Switzerland would be one of the most violent places in the world with their permissive gun culture. But their not, which further shows that guns aren't responsible for crime, but people are.

While the mayor of Toronto provides some comic relief, I'm not sure he has much to do with poverty and drugs.

Neither of these issues are as prevalent a problem as they are in Canada.

?? I'm not sure that statement came out as intended.

But, is there that much less poverty and drug abuse in Canada? If so, then that just might be the factor to look at.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

No, not at all. In fact, some other factor must be the reason why there are fewer murders in Canada than the USA. Just listing possibilities, however, doesn't help unless you can make some sort of a connection between those factors and murder/violent crime rates.

You don't seem to understand what I am saying here. I don't need to provide evidence for each of these potential variables in crime. My bringing these up is to undermine the premise that "gun control reduces crime." It does that by suggesting that "gun control" is a very narrow slice of the pie. There are literally dozens of other variables at play in a countries murder rate.

So keeping in mind that there are dozens of variables...what is the logic in increasing gun control...when there is no evidence to suggest this is the reason for a higher murder rate...and when the United States has a declining murder rate and declining amount of gun control? The logic is faulty.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

But, is there that much less poverty and drug abuse in Canada? If so, then that just might be the factor to look at.

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

Is Canada really all that different from the US? What are the differences that matter to the issue of murders and gun violence/gun control?
Pick a position already. Canada's gun laws prevent violence, US gun laws DONT prevent violence. It's all the same thing. It's not at ALL the same thing.

Bottom line...whatever argument is convenient, right?
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

I think the primary difference between the US and Canada, as it affects to gun crime, is related largely to drugs and poverty within the inner cities. Neither of these issues are as prevalent a problem as they are in Canada. Well, unless we're talking about that mayor from Toronto.



Then again, if the presence of guns were the sole cause of violence, Switzerland would be one of the most violent places in the world with their permissive gun culture. But their not, which further shows that guns aren't responsible for crime, but people are.
I'll see your Toronto mayor and raise you the mayor of Washington DC...

washington-dc-marion-barry-crack-crackhead-tax-evader-public-demotivational-poster-1236295906.jpg
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

A nation that is eager to kiss any oppressor's ass rather than fight for freedom certainly has less need of a right to keep and bear arms than a nation of people who value freedom and are willing to fight for it, if necessary.

We kicked oppressive American forces out of this country not once but twice. Maybe it is because America is not a true democracy but here democracy and peaceful negotiation is the way of things.
 
Re: Would You Surrender Your Firearms To Police Voluntarily During A Natural Disaster

We kicked oppressive American forces out of this country not once but twice. Maybe it is because America is not a true democracy but here democracy and peaceful negotiation is the way of things.


That is an awesome bit of history, thank you for that video!
 
Back
Top Bottom