Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Until you get flooded like High River, and the RCMP go boot kicking door to door looking for your guns.
Be fair mikey; some senior officer decided those firearms needed to be secured from possible looters and when it all came out they were seized by breaking into private property and taken without warrants they were ordered to return them AND pay for the broken doors.
A pity the RCMP are not more concerned about the handguns finding their way into Canada than those hunting rifles secured behind locked doors in an evacuated flood zone.
It's my understanding they only started doing that after looters had started invading houses and stealing guns that weren't in safes and that the RCMP only took any unsecured firearms that were visible and left out in the open. Owners had those guns returned to them afterwards. What conflicting stories did you hear?
.
a. You don't have looters if you have police presence
b. You mean, no warrant, illegal search, breaking and entering, and even if you didn't have firearms?
Yeah, they only took the ones out in the open, like in the back of closets, or locked away, or hidden throughout the home. You know, wide open... If you're going to force people from their homes you have a duty to protect the homes, not to break in and loot them yourselves.
a. You don't have looters if you have police presence
b. You mean, no warrant, illegal search, breaking and entering, and even if you didn't have firearms?
Yeah, they only took the ones out in the open, like in the back of closets, or locked away, or hidden throughout the home. You know, wide open... If you're going to force people from their homes you have a duty to protect the homes, not to break in and loot them yourselves.
Well, you do have looters with police presence. The police can't be everywhere at once.
Also, legally the RCMP were allowed to enter the homes.
"The RCMP had legal authority to forcibly enter evacuated homes during the natural disaster and even to seize loose firearms in plain view, the commission report says."....
"...Under the Criminal Code, such seizures did not require a court-approved warrant, but officers failed to take the necessary next step of reporting their actions to a judge."
That doesn't mean that they did everything correctly.
"In addition, RCMP members exceeded their authority by seizing some guns that were properly secured or that were not "in plain view," the commission found."
Is it simply lack of easy access to firearms, or are there other reasons?
what a weird question, among developed countries, Canada doesn’t seem to have “so few gun shooting”. When was the last time you hear it happen in Japan, Australia or Germany.
The reason: you live in a world composed of two countries.
what a weird question, among developed countries, Canada doesn’t seem to have “so few gun shooting”. When was the last time you hear it happen in Japan, Australia or Germany.
The reason: you live in a world composed of two countries.
Considering the OP's location and the Forum they posted in, Canada, one would think that " compared to the United States" is implied.
Well, you do have looters with police presence. The police can't be everywhere at once.
Also, legally the RCMP were allowed to enter the homes.
"The RCMP had legal authority to forcibly enter evacuated homes during the natural disaster and even to seize loose firearms in plain view, the commission report says."....
"...Under the Criminal Code, such seizures did not require a court-approved warrant, but officers failed to take the necessary next step of reporting their actions to a judge."
That doesn't mean that they did everything correctly.
"In addition, RCMP members exceeded their authority by seizing some guns that were properly secured or that were not "in plain view," the commission found."
Let's just agree that it's not a shining light in the history of the RCMP, and just because it was legal, doesn't make it right. 2100+ homes broken into, 600 guns seized, and the majority of those illegally.
Let's just agree that it's not a shining light in the history of the RCMP, and just because it was legal, doesn't make it right. 2100+ homes broken into, 600 guns seized, and the majority of those illegally.
I'm not disagreeing. I'm just pointing out for the sake of accuracy that not everything you said they did was illegal. Like breaking and entering, That's a fairly serious charge.
Let's just agree that it's not a shining light in the history of the RCMP, and just because it was legal, doesn't make it right. 2100+ homes broken into, 600 guns seized, and the majority of those illegally.
There have been more than one recent tarnishing of the RCMP shield. They've lost significant respect among Canadians over the last couple of years. Rampant sexual harassment going all the way to the top tier officers gone unaddressed for decades is just one of their most recent negatives.
I'm not disagreeing. I'm just pointing out for the sake of accuracy that not everything you said they did was illegal. Like breaking and entering, That's a fairly serious charge.
Not everything, just the vast majority of it. That, and the stuff that was legal, they didn't finish it properly.
Apologies for not letting it go. My wife and her family are all from High River, and to see what was done to their homes on top of the flooding in the name of "safety" was ludicrous. Plus none of them own firearms.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.