Broken Trust: Gun Grab at High River

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/2923814901001

Sun News Network's premier feature documentary detailing the abuse of government power in the wake of the Alberta floods.

Thank you for posting Steve, To paraphrase "Dixie", "Old times here are not forgotten."

I just finished watching the entire video which is a bit over an hour long. Sun news very clearly illustrated how the mounties broke the law in doing what they did. It is unclear how many claims for damages done by the RCMP are still outstanding.

After having been reminded of how much the mounties abused the law I'll never trust one of them again. It is quite clear they will be like the Nazis during the second war, if questioned about their activities, they will just say "well I was just following orders."

The only time to my knowledge I might have ever been in the cross hairs of a police firearm was during the marches on Ottawa during the efforts to have the gun registry eliminated when the RCMP had their snipers on the roofs of buildings along the parade route. That was disquieting enough but with what happened in Alberta last summer it is proof positive they can never be trusted.

In my mind once you can not trust one police force you can't trust any of them. I hope no police officer ever comes to me looking for help of any kind.

Jim

Are you going to return the favour and never call police?

Earth to Jim: you're and idiot.

Its all good though man. I don't trust Ontarians. They haven't produced a politician worth a pinch in....ever, and Torontonians voted in a fat, impaired crack head. And he may actually be the best mayor the've had on the books in decades. Speaks volumes.

Anyway, I just wanted to see what it feels like to generalize without forethought. I'm done now.

Remember the saying "When you need help in seconds the police will be there in minutes".

Jim

"Anyway, I just wanted to see what it feels like to generalize without forethought. I'm done now. [/quote]

Don't worry there was lots of forethought. I'll admit there are some good LE types but in my line of work before I retired I had lots of contact with the police. As a group they are some of the worst speeders I've ever encountered, they dislike wearing seatbelts and have a sense of entitlement like few other groups I have run into.

If you have any awareness of what went on in High River and still trust the Mounties then I think your judgment is a little suspect.

Jim

Not trying to justify the actions of the Mounted Police in High River, as that would be unconscionable, but according to Statistics Canada, in 2012 there were 69,539 police officers in Canada LINK so let's say you had personal contact with 1,000 on more than just a one shot deal, over the course of what 30 or 35 years?? And most of them in the greater Toronto area??

A pretty broad brush you are using in a fairly small paint can.

Keith,

I understand what you are saying. But, I think we can agree that our perceptions are formed by the things we are exposed to. Back in the 50's when I was a young man my recollections of police actions was quite a bit different than what I came to see as I got older and met and dealt with more police. I still know and consider friends a number of existing and former police officers. Even a few of them (primarily those who are retired and feel free to speak without repercussions)quite agree with my assessment of how their place in society has changed over the years.

In my opinion (and I only speak for myself) the mounties did themselves irreparable harm through their actions in High River. As a former police officer I can understand why you tend to have more faith in their actions than I do.

I guess it is just a case of our personal world experiences having led us to different conclusions.

All the best, Jim

Here you go Jim, maybe this will cheer you up regarding Law Enforcement Officers during this Christmas season..

http://www.youtube.com/embed/WxjZB5S_g7s?rel=0

Jim,

The High River thing is non-defenseable - no question about it. At least the gun part of it and the entry into folk's homes to search for them. On that we agree.

Society has changed since the 1960s, my friend. The demographics of society have changed -- the societal norms have changed. When I first joined the Police Force, if the boss found out you were living with a woman and weren't married, they would give you an ultimatum to either make an honest woman out of her or resign. Now, same sex couples cannot be discouraged. And a large segment of society is all over that.

Sure the police of the 60s, 70s, 80s etc were a different breed, largely anyway. I policed in the 70s, 80s, 90, and the early 2000s. I would be lying if I said I never saw any changes. I could say that personally, I fought against the changes in ME. But I've always been a little crusty. (Okay, maybe a lot crusty.)

I'm just saying that, it's a stretch to paint all the police officers in Canada with the brush of one incident in Alberta, or because that some cops like to speed or not wear their seatblets -- two of the more minor offences in the Traffic Act, BTW.

Back in the day, police officers were exempt from wearing their seatbelts if they had a suspect in custody, and section 128(13) of the Traffic Act has always exempted a police officer from the speed laws while he was engaged in the lawful performance of his duties. NOW, all of that is not to try to whitewash the fact that some coppers like to speed, or don't like to wear their seatbelts. But in one of the small courts I prosecute in, on a docket with 37 charges, 30 were for speeding, a careless driver, some log book offences and two seat belt charges. Seems like people other than coppers like to speed as well, and some of these were high rollers.

I am not ranting. I have probably met and worked with more officers that you have. Some of them had bad attitudes, for sure, but on the average, over prolonged periods of exposure, most of them get a pass from me. Not all. And I have charged off duty police officers for speeding, and one for impaired driving. The laws apply to all -- even me!

Keith, it just doesn't matter how society has changed. The laws concerning unlawful entry, theft of private property and willful damage have not.

Here's what's wrong with what happened, and I realize that this has not been investigated yet. I am hopeful, but not convinced, that an inquiry will get to the bottom of this.

To begin, who issued the order for the officers to kick down the doors, enter 1900 homes and seize all the firearms? And of course, for what reason were they ordered in? I see no evidence that RCMP upper echelons even questioned what amounts to thousands of illegal acts.

When the order was given, why didn't anyone question it? Why didn't anyone say, "Hey, your telling us to kick in doors and steal private property!" Did anyone - from a supervisor to a constable - say, "I don't think we can do this. It's illegal."

In the military, being ordered to commit an illegal act is not a lawful command. It can be refused, without any sanction or disciplinary action taken against the member who refuses. The RCMP and the OPP are governed by similar rules.

Let's leave the RCMP out of things for a moment. Did any municipal, provincial or federal person(s) in a position of authority order a halt to the abuses? I do remember the PM commenting on the situation, but he was told publicly that he was sticking his nose into the RCMP's business, and to butt out. This begs the question, were persons in command positions aware of what was going on? And if so, why the lies?

Because of the confusion for the first couple of days, anyone who might have been able to stop this probably did not know what was going on. After that, sitreps would have started, so that supervisors, politicians and others would be apprized of what was going on. The RCMP would have been bound to report up the chain. An operation of this magnitude would have been watched very closely.

It's also reasonable to assume that the federal solicitor general would have been told, even though it was primarily a provincial affair. Had that happened, I'm confident that phone calls would have been made to have these activities stopped.

So you see, it's not just beat cops who are responsible. There was complicity up and down the chain of command. To the best of my knowledge, not one person, even anonymously, complained about what was happening. Why was that? I find it hard to believe that everyone involved in this operation thought the Mounties were doing the right thing, and not overstepping their authority.

And while the first day or two might have been confused, when the news coverage started, and people were on television complaining about being kept out of their homes, someone should have questioned what was happening.

Someone up high had to have ordered this, and it was supported all the way down to the guys who were hammering in the doors. I do not believe that an operation commanded by competent, experienced people would continue to break the law for weeks without a recorded order in their possession. A document has to exist somewhere. If they investigate it, they will eventually turn something over.

There are many unanswered questions. If justice is to be served, dozens of heads should roll - from the constables up to the commissioner.

Steve,

You got me dead wrong. I am not, NOT, NOT justifying the actions of the RCMP in High River. Period. End of message. If it happened like it was reported -- dead wrong. I get that. I am on side. Read my entire post.

I did get it. I'm saying that societal values changing don't enter into what happened.

Steve said it better than I ever could.
Not a matter of individual officers.

The "Police Riot", at the Chicago Democratic convention in 1968 seems roughly similar.

The only good thing now is, a "stink" has, and is being raised.

Then you didn't get it. The changes I spoke of had NOTHING to do with the "Gun Grab" in High River. That was as wrong as it could have been. But the other comments by Jim is what I was addressing.

So to say it all over again for the 50th time . . . .

The High River "GUN GRAB" WAS WRONG ON EVERY LEVEL and I was not trying to minimize that at all EVER!

I'm off to greener pastures, well, whiter pastures right now. Y'all have fun.

With regard to the events in High River it appears there is now an investigation underway. If this is the case hopefully the truth will come out and not become a whitewash job.

With respect to my personal feelings about a portion of the police population they were not intended to sidetrack the original discussion. Let's leave that out of any further discussions and stick to the original topic.

Jim

I immigrated to Canada in 1972--small town pop.2500--it was a training detachment at that time and we had a lot of (young)OPP for a small town. I worked in a grocery store so I got to know many of them in short order. Curled and played fast-pitch with 'em and we partied hard--a few of them were pretty fair fishermen and hunters. There were a few that were fire breathing dragons but the old-timers got them sorted out fairly quickly from what I could see.

I'm no angel but I ain't a criminal either. Got a couple of speeding tickets which I deserved and got several warnings when I probably should have gotten a ticket. One of my buddies on the force had to charge me with Impaired Driving in 1977. He felt bad about it but I was driving drunk and I sure don't hold it against him. Turned out for the best anyway cause I haven't had a drink since.

I thank the good Lord every day that I didn't hurt anyone while impaired and I'm grateful to the young OPP that help turn my life around by doing the right thing. We are still buddies all these years later.

In 1991 I moved outta town 30 miles and have only occasionally talked to a police officer since. Occasionly got stopped at 'Ride' programs and seatbelt checks. I have noticed a big change in attitude among the few officers I have met. It seems to be an 'us and them' thing.

I remember watching a TV cop show in the late 70's called NYPD Blue. They had some Vietnam Vet that was settin up a SWAT team in some major city. I distinctly remember telling my wife that the militarization of the police would come to a bad end.

What happened to Jesse Sansone and Jonathon Logan and Ian Thompson and now the events in High River have really swung me over to Jim's way of thinking.

I also have been around here long enough to know that Brother Kieth is Old School and one of the good guys. Thank you Kieth for your service.

We all came into this as good friends.
I think we still are.
A lively discussion is not a bad thing.

I agree on the whole.



Sorry for my part in the sidetrack. I'm done.

Oh, I got it. My observations were based on why it happened to begin with and who initiated it. An order had to come down from on high. An order that no one, regardless of rank or position, questioned. It's less about your average constable and more about the decision makers and the system in general. What broke that something like this would happen?

The fact that times change is true, but that's not part of the problem in High River. Jim losing faith with police generally has happened across the board almost everywhere on the planet, but that is a different discussion.

Well I knew something had happened but I must admit I am almost furious now!
Head of RCMP in Alberta says he got no orders from above, well then fine, I say the heads should roll starting with him & continue right down to the lowly officers swinging the battering rams. Sure they were "only following orders" but if they don't know what they did was not only wrong but illegal then they shouldn't be doing the job!!
Loss of jobs & pensions is the only way this kind of behavior will stop!

I hope that the RCMP involved lose their jobs over this, nothing less.

Alberta headquarters is the place the bad orders came from?

Steve;
Hopefully this finds you and yours well this December morning sir. Thanks for the video link and reminder to those who haven't been watching this case unfold.

I've got to believe - based upon many conversations with both current and retired members of the RCMP plus as many conversations with friends in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton and Abbottsford PDs - that the RCMP constables were acting on orders from further up the chain of command.

It's how the RCMP function day in and day out - more like the para-military police that they are - than say the individual constables in Vancouver PD or any other that I've mentioned.

Anyway, for me it puts a sharp emphasis on the problem we've got both within our national policing agency and our perception of them as Canadians.

They need to get onto some house cleaning, changes in how they interact with the communities they are policing and how we view them.

The RCMP need to do it now too, as I fear that many folks' minds are being changed as to how they will choose to cooperate with the individual officers in the future.

In my view and experience, any policing body can not effectively perform their duties without positive interaction within the community they are working in.

The RCMP need only to look back into how things were in the '70's policing Native communities to see how well that didn't always work.

Anyway Steve, I'm not remotely suggesting we should give up on them - particularly as individual constables - but yes, they need some housecleaning and a tuneup for sure.

Merry Christmas to you and yours Steve.

Regards,
Dwayne

Anybody heard any updates on above matter?

there is a Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP that was in High River in early Jan., been there twice, our NFA national Firearms ASS. have accquired Emails from RCMP through FReedom of info. Info seams to say that some minister of the Alberta Gov was aware 2 days befor it was common knowledge.[ person unidentified],

For more info google the Edmonton Sun jan 8 2014. page 5 , article by Lorne Gunter.
NEW LIGHT SHED ON GUN GRAB .

norm

That is logical, given that what happened was not carried out by a rogue officer. In order for it to go on as long as it did, with the methods that were employed, and no one answering questions, direction from up high was given. In other words, the officers did what they were told.

In my opinion, this was not some grandiose conspiracy, but rather, a small number of senior people that set things in motion. They did not expect that their actions/intentions would be discovered. Command and control went south early on, and for whatever reason - arrogance, indecision, fear of discovery - the higher ups did not get a handle on things. Once the media started poking around and the stories were told, it was impossible to contain.

From here, we can only watch to see if the backroom scrambling will be revealed, and who's head(s) will be chopped off. You can be assured that the horse police and certain politicians will be forced to offer up a public sacrifice. This is done routinely to help stop any further inquiries.

The question is, will the whole truth be revealed? Tune in next week. Same bat time. Same bat channel.