RCMP seize firearms from evaxuated homes

[charliep]

The thread here brings back memories of working security at the Edmonton Folk Festival about the time the smoking laws changed so you couldn't smoke in the beer gardens. I seem to remember being called called a nazi and many other things mostly unrepeatable when you asked people to follow the rules. Know how to handle/didn't take offense but my main comeback was that was the rules put forward by society.

I will note today that the rules have been around for long enough most people understand and abide by them.

The rules are guns need to be secured. There was a recognition that houses couldn't be monitored 100 % of the time. Unless things are different elsewhere across the prairies but in the rural community my family lives, guns are almost always the first thing to be stolen in a break in. Was this the right thing to do in this situation. Open for debate.

[wd9]

I'd say not. These people have been thru
enough, locked out of their homes for
too long, only to find out the police
have busted their door down, invaded
their house, and took their stuff.

They can't do that without probable
cause normally, why do it now in a
locked down, patrolled town? That's the
issue and the question.

Enforcing the rules (telling people no
smoking because the law says so) is
different then breaking and entering
(breaking the law) to 'serve and
protect'

[charliep]

Perhaps the reason the RCMP were entering the houses was not guns. I would bet the reason was to ensure no one was in the houses. Others have suggested that the RCMP/other officials should have a record of who had safely evacuated but I would bet this is one place where the system failed - no one knew for sure which houses had been evacuated to a zero risk tolerance. People would have scrambled here, therre and everywhere is no record of them leaving. Everyone here likes to make a political statement but most decisions like this are based on risk assessment and a plan to mitigate bad things happening. From there, human judgements. Will be lots of time to analyze.

[burnt]

charliep - one difference between your past festival experience and the present situation is that you were enforcing a policy that applied to a public area, one that directly affected other people.

However, if you were to have entered someone's home - uninvited - and tried to tell them they may not smoke, would you have been surprised to find yourself ushered out the door on the toe of the homeowner's boot?

When we try o replace personal responsibility with rules, we reduce ALL of society to the level of the lowest, stupidest, most incompetent part of that society.

Strange as it may seem to some, I resent being relegated to the playpen of the weak-minded.

I am becoming increasingly reactive to having the state dictate to me how I am going to live and/or operate my affairs.

Especially when an increasingly corrupt, unprincipled state is trying to tell me that I must accept and embrace their sick values.

So when that misguided state enters my house - UNAUTHORIZED - and takes away my personal property, they have gone a bridge too far and will meet with the appropriate response.

wilagro, you better not venture outside today unless your nanny is holding your hand.

You just might get hit by a truck.

Or stub your toe...

Play it safe, baby, play it safe.

[wmoebis]

Did they enter the peoples houses that
defied the evacuation order? Ie: Harper's
father in law, and check for guns etc.
Since the town was closed off, they were
the most likely to have access to
vacant/locked houses and get at the guns.

[ado089]

They found hundreds of firearms just
laying around while searching for
missing people. Ok sure. If you believe
this you need to give your head a shake.
There is absolutely nothing grey about
this. The only reason there are not wide
scale riots over this is because the
private property stolen were big, scary
guns and there are enough people out
there simple enough to think guns kill
people.

[wilagro]

burnt: "Strange as it may seem to some, I resent being relegated to the playpen of the weak-minded."

Too late...you're there already...play nice and they might let you out or...maybe not.

[sumdumguy]

Maybe they wanted to perform the 21 gun salute
and were short a few. Tsk-tsk. I suspect that
during evacuations, the police have certain
unusual rights. Sort of reminds me of the saying,
" nobody leaves, nobody gets hurt".

[rockpile]

I've come to the conclusion by the nature of many
comments posted that most of you are so far
removed from the disaster that occurred that you
have no concept of the scale and magnitude of the
problems, confusion and logistical challenge
everyone faced. As I write, they are preparing a
camp in an industrial area of Calgary for 1,000
temporary housing units mostly for people from
High River who may never have a home to return to.
It wasn't just a little water in the basement or even
some on the main floor - that can be fixed. It was
the 4 ft above the roof that really screwed things
up.
Immediately after the size of the disaster was
understood, the 'Emergency Measures Act' was
invoked, which if you're not familiar with it means
that all Constitutional rights, including Section 8,
are suspended. Only the RCMP had the manpower
to do the house to house searches once it became
safe to do so. And that is a mandatory procedure
under the EMA.

[wd9]

If it was safe for the police to go house
to house, why weren't the homeowners
allowed to save their own guns? You know,
the ones with the keys to the front
doors? Not the ones with the big boots!

[charliep]

To highlight what rock pile said, it wasn't the RCMP
that made the decision. Government (provincial and
municipal) made the calls including the call of state of
emergency. RCMP were doing their job in checking to
see that all residents were out and their homes were
as safe as the disaster conditions would allow.
Human decisions based on the best information at
the time. Arm chair quarterbacks can weigh in over
the next year.

[parsley]

...just as you are quarterbacking for the provincial
govt who gave the orders to have privatehomes
raided, charliep.

But your defense does not strengthen the
illegitimate, unecessary action that the
government chose to impose on private
Albertans .. Breaking into their homes, snooping,
and confiscating private property, from a secured
area.

And it was a fully secured area.Scummy actions
are scummy no matter who calls the play.

A man's home does not belong to the
government. Period. Pars

[cottonpicken]

Even when you put the gun thing aside,isnt it a little
creepy that they where rummaging through
houses,its not like people store their guns on kitchen
tables,you kind of have to take a good look.

And as far as looters,this isnt exactly new orleans.

[rockpile]

**** off Cotterpin! Leach!!

[charliep]

At the end of the day, it will be the people of High
River who have endured a tragedy beyond almost
anyones belief who have lost everything who will
judge this event and the actions taken. Similar
comments for Calgarians and those in other areas. I
cannot comment on their feelings in time of extreme
pain because I have not had to endure what they are.
Perhaps the one saving grace is the limited loss of life
in a disaster and their neighbours desire to support
them. Other stuff is just discussion.