The Instigator
Gibb
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
Mulan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

australians should be banned from staying in there homes during a nutural disaster

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Gibb
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 246 times Debate No: 86351
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Gibb

Con

We would argue that a blanket ban on Australians from staying and defending their property during natural disasters is a very poor outcome as it does not consider the variations and differences between natural disasters and the very real possibility that leaving you homes could be a far more unsafe option.
First we need to talk about what is a natural disaster: fires of course but also in Australia - floods, cyclones, hurricanes and earthquakes. The current policy for cyclones and hurricanes is for people stay indoors and clear of windows. That is the right policy because it is more unsafe to be on the roads in your car and also homes these days are more likely to be cyclone resistant.
Each natural disaster is unique in terms of its speed and impact, and there is great variation in how individuals and communities plan for and respond to natural disasters. For example in the case of the Black Saturday fires in Victoria in 2009, A stay or go policy was implemented. While it was agreed that there were shortcomings in this particular circumstance they did agree after the fires that any policy put in place needs to accommodates the diversity of natural diasters and human responses.

It"s a free country/civil right and freedom of choice
It"s a choice you make it is your property
Some might not have insurance so it is the only thing they have
The property is their livelihood
Some properties have been in the one family for many generations and the owners feel a great responsibility to protect it
In a study done in 2010 (bush fire CRC) they surveyed 584 people and the result was more than half would either wait and see how they fire developed or stay and defend their property.
Being prepared is vital and is a very strong argument for being allowed to stay and defend your property.
Examples of preparation for fire disasters could be providing a fire clearing around your property to minimise potential damage. Installing large water tanks to help defend and in some cases building under ground bunkers.
Defending against cyclones you would tape up all windows, sandbag all entries. Australia has very stringent building codes when it comes to premises being cyclone resistant.
Mulan

Pro

well i jus think that austeralians are pretty much immoral. and how come they dont believe in god? they say that well "you can not know, but they dont know that" because they jus think the bible is not all that great. idk it doesnt make sense to me
Debate Round No. 1
Gibb

Con

agh that has nothing to do with this debate and you cant spell. dude this took me hours of work and you just wrote rubbish
Mulan

Pro

im sorry im stupid
Debate Round No. 2
Gibb

Con

Gibb forfeited this round.
Mulan

Pro

i felt bad because im an idiote. but ill do my best anyway cause my dad told me "even thought your stupid you shouldnt give up in life" so i dothat. ok australia should be respectful of the law because goverment is trying to do right thing and u say it ur right ur poperty but rlly they just trying to save ur lifes so u should just abandon them in nutural disaster .
Debate Round No. 3
Gibb

Con

Gibb forfeited this round.
Mulan

Pro

Mulan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Gibb

Con

Gibb forfeited this round.
Mulan

Pro

Mulan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Oppenheimer1934 1 year ago
Oppenheimer1934
When you so stupid that you think God gives a damn about Aussies staying in their houses
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Oppenheimer1934 1 year ago
Oppenheimer1934
GibbMulanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is the only person to have valid arguments. I'm 99% sure Mulan is an idiot based on their past debates.