Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Canada RCMP seize firearms in flooded High River

Or else as some have said, we get the government we deserve.

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

Plato

Short of donating several thousand dollars a year, what is your best idea of participating in politics?

Join the provincial and federal constituency associations of your choice, let your views be known, attend meetings of the mayor and council of your municipality, note their voting, support those that vote the way you think they should or run yourself.

Good advice, n007.

Just wondering how things are playing out in High River now that the flooding is over and people are returning to their homes have the RCMP been by to deliver the guns back to the home owners that the Mounties were keeping safe for them!!! Just asking.
Cheers NC

A flurry of recent stories about police knocking on � and sometimes knocking in � people�s front doors have raised alarms in both the U.S. and Canada about whether the home is still constitutionally protected from increasing police power.

As WND reported, High River, Alberta, has become a recent focal point of the controversy, when it was revealed Royal Canadian Mounted Police entered the flooded town after a mandatory evacuation, broke down doors and began confiscating �several hundred� firearms.

The details are eerily reminiscent of New Orleans during hurricane Katrina, when officers similarly invaded homes and confiscated thousands of weapons they uncovered.

In High River, RCMP and province officials assured citizens the only guns taken were those �improperly secured� and �in plain view� � to be stored for safekeeping and returned to residents after the evacuation ended.

But Michael Coren of Canada�s Sun News says the authorities are �lying, because we know the police actually broke locks to get into cupboards to find out if there were guns there.�

High River resident Cam Fleury believes his house, which sits at a high point free of floodwater, was targeted by the RCMP.

�This whole area is the highest point in town, so there was no flood damage,� Fleury told Sun News, �so there was no reason for them to enter any of these houses.�

northcountry;
Hopefully this finds you well on this warm summer evening sir.

It looks as if they have indeed begun to return them - which is good.

It also looks like Commissioner Bob Paulson, who in my opinion got the job because the government wants the RCMP image to be improved and their interactions with Canadians as well, is fully supportive of having Ian McPhail look into the matter.

Here's a link on a bit of the news on it.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sto...guns-complaint-commissioner-paulson.html

I'm not exactly holding my breath to see sweeping changes in our national police force, but at least it's an improvement over what we were seeing when the Liberals were in power.

I hope they can salvage what's left of the RCMP's reputation in Canada, but honestly this whole deal in High River couldn't have come at a better/worse time - depending on which side of the gun control issue one is on.

Most of us who were anti-registration are pointing to High River and saying "This is EXACTLY what we were talking about folks."

Anyway, we'll see what happens and it won't happen quickly I'm betting. All the best to you this summer sir.

Dwayne

It Just A test!!> it went down in Boston Very Well > So they are trying in Alberta and it went down not so Well> very interesting. Canadians luv their Guns More then Americians It seems!

For 39 years I was a municipal employee so I tended to avoid political involvement. In the Fall of 1993 I retired. In 1994 there was a Provincial election in which the son of a friend of mine was running as the PC candidate. As I was no longer employed I decided to offer to assist to try and learn more about the political process. Certain circumstances eventually led me to be responsible for the running of the door to door portion of the campaign for the last couple of weeks of the campaign.

At the time the NDP had been in power and were universally hated due to their performance. If memory serves me correctly the candidate I was working for won with a plurality of over 20,000 votes.

Following the election, at the request of the candidates father, I submitted a somewhat lengthy review of the ways in which I thought the campaign could have been better run. My main criticism involved a family member of the candidate who, to my knowledge, had no prior political experience. This person at times was over riding recommendations of others in respect to how the campaign should be run. As it turned out the opposing sitting party was so reviled that it didn't matter anyway.

I was requested to join the riding association executive and did so for either a year or year and a half. (Can't remember exactly.)

At this point it seemed the focal point of the riding association was fund raising, something I have never been very comfortable with. In addition it seemed as though the riding association members were expected to be at the forefront of making contributions. In any case the time came when I decided to step down.

When the next election rolled around I was approached by the candidate and asked to participate in the running of the campaign. I declined for a number of personal reasons. The candidate was re-elected although with a sharply reduced plurality. In time a third election occurred and again the candidate was re-elected but down to a plurality of two or three thousand votes and the party was no longer in power.

I thought this was unfortunate as the person whom I had been working for was, at that time, the Minister of Natural Resources. He was, and is, very much an outdoor person and I feel would have done a good job for sportsmen.

During the course of these events the PC premier had decided for strictly political reasons to eliminate the spring bear hunt. After my friend had become the Minister of Natural Resources I had asked if he had plans to reinstate the spring hunt. In a very round about way the answer seemed to be no. I had the impression he was doing as he was told by the Premier's office. Needless to say my reply to this was not too well received. This pretty much capped any thoughts I might have had about ever becoming more involved in the political process. This feeling was reinforced by my many years of exposure to municipal politicians, far too many of whom I felt were egotists more interested in promoting themselves than in necessarily doing what was best for the community.

Maybe I'm jaded but being in my late 70's I no longer have any desire to again become involved other than as a voter and even that is becoming harder.

Just as an aside during my initial work on a campaign there was another guy working there who is now the head of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association. Strange bedfellows and all that?

Sorry for the long rant but just thought my experience might be of interest to a few of the campfire members.

Jim

Jim, I was gung ho in my forty's, but find myself grown cynical the last few years.
There may be more to it than cash, but they sure like it.

Good day Jim,I hope you missed Toronto's shower!I've found that a lot of politicians enter the fray with genuine wishes to improve the system,no matter which party they are in.Some on both sides are driven by ideologies but many truly believe they can make a difference.Once elected they run into 2 things,"The Party Line",that they are expected to adhere to,and the bureaucrcy which actually runs the various ministries no matter who is in power.I support Governments whose ideas seem to coincide with mine,but I am also cynical and prefer to support the Canadian Shooting sports lobby groups.Continued pressure on Government is the only way to go,between High Riverand obnoxius rulings by CFOs our sport is still at great risk.Best wishes,Monashee

Wabigoon and Monashee,

Thanks for your comments. I provided my information to give some insight into one persons view of the political process both as a government employee and as a political supporter. I'd like to hear from anyone else who may have been involved at any level as to what their impressions were (are).

Jim

People have all sorts of excuses as to why they don't want to get involved in the political process, the world is run by those that show up.

I joined a political party, and have worked at updating call out lists for the local riding association, and have filled out ever questionaire electronically that has come to my email. I have made a few contributions, but as a retiree from a provincial government job, funds are not in large supply. I like at least having the illusion that some of what I say might get tabled and discussed if there are others with similar views.

Run for political office? Are you kidding? Why make a liar out of an otherwise honest man?

Dwayne
Thank you for your kind remarks. I have to ask though.do you suppose the RCMP will give their guns back and not record all details of same and who owns same. Is this not the RCMP building their own registry with out authority. Just saying.Hoping this finds you and yous well this fine day. Cheers NC

northcountry;
Thanks for the reply sir.

I believe that there may well be some members in management in the RCMP who harbor the vain hope that recording some of the data on individual firearms might be a bit of a De facto registration. They couldn't be more wrong.

About the only thing they may end up with is data on firearms owners who don't have a current PAL and that would be it.

The reason I say that anyone thinking that making a list today of who's got what would do any good is that there are a lot of us who are making good and sure many, many, many firearms are LEGALLY changing hands.....at a refreshingly dizzying rate.

At the stroke of midnight when the wonderfully useful registry died, I can only guess how many firearms LEGALLY changed hands in Canada - this was by the way not by chance or accident.

It would strike me that the observant folks in High River were no doubt part of this movement and learned a thing or three from it.

Hey, the returned firearms could conceivably be provinces away by now - different ones having taken their spot in gun safes all across High River.

Bad data and all that you see northcountry.

For those who are wondering, the same rules applied to Quebec's efforts to retain a registry as well - or at least legally it surely could have.

This lesson may or may not be lost on the rank and file Constables, we'll see I suppose.

Anyway that's just my take on it northcountry and as always I might be entirely incorrect on all counts.

All the best to you this weekend sir.

Dwayne

Don't be surprised if all the comments made on this post are being scrutinized by RCMP computer spies. They don't only look for porno. So they know everyone here or soon will. Threats to their survival in Canada are seriously looked at. Funny thing is that we bankroll their illegal activities.

378Canuck;
Top of the morning to you sir, I hope this finds you well.

Because of some of my contacts in various LE agencies here in Canada, I take it as a given that comments made here or anywhere on the 'net are being scrutinized.

As I've been both a CORE instructor for over 21 years and now although currently inactive was a PAL instructor for years too. That and a couple other activities in my life meant that I'd be open for constant scrutiny.

The last time I was renewing my Restricted/Prohib PAL I mentioned to the good folks at head office that the interview part of my application was redundant as they'd know if I'd sneezed and what caused it.

They said something about following procedures but did not say I was wrong.

Again though I'm happy to point out to them or anyone else for that matter that if Canadian gun owners involved in perfectly legal activities - that is the buying, selling and trading non-registered long guns between PAL possessing individuals - causes the always useless registry data to become even more obsolete, then that's just the way it is.

The honest people I know in LE agreed with me that it always was useless and incomplete data - which was used daily only because the system was automatically cued when information was sought from other sources.

For sure though 378, it's good to remind Canadians that even obtaining a PAL will put us on a "watch list" and although that's unmitigated horse manure in my view - a reminder now and then is a good thing.

The more of us that are aware of that reality then the better the chances are of some more folks doing something about it at some level whether municipal, provincial or federal.

Lastly although the RCMP would be disinclined to admit it - there can be no arguing that even on the municipal level there is an ability to guide the local detachments activities.

If the town council and mayor say that the local detachment gets a budget for 10 Constables when they've asked for 15 - they'll get what the council gives them for operating costs and wages.

Anyway I could go on, but hopefully most will get my point.

To be clear, I'm in no way anti LE in Canada at any level. All I want is for all agencies to enforce the law as it is written equally to all citizens and to be accountable when they do not.

Not much to ask really is it?

After all, as you say sir we are indeed bankrolling them 100%.

Have a good weekend 378Canuck and all the best this summer.

Regards,
Dwayne

Thanks Dwayne, Just passing the background checks for the PAL, might suggest the holders of said PAL are not in the habit of breaking many laws.
Course, that is not to say Big Brother is not watching.