smerchly Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 http://www.torontosun.com/2013/06/28/tensions-high-in-high-river-as-mounties-seize-guns-from-evacuees-homes-2 To the hunters .....can this happen here ? The people of High River ,Alberta were ordered out of their homes because of flooding . Many of these homes on higher ground did not sustain a lot of damage but owners removed guns from the basement to keep them from getting wet & brought them up to the main floor or second floor. The RCMP decided to ransack these homes & take all of the guns for "safe keeping" and the owners must be able to prove they own each gun , which may be not be possible in many cases . Maybe we can learn something from this and do what is needed in case we have something similar happen in Ontario . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 If they left the firearms accessible and unattended in an abandoned house, the risk of thes guns ending up in the wrong hands due to looting is real, and the police have a responsibility to safeguard the public. Apparently, the info from the long gun registry was not completely destroyed by the police. How else would they know which homes to search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 I dont see this as a problem. (for someone like me) My guns are registered and i could prove they are mine.. I would say thanks for keeping my firearms from getting looted.. I'm sure if they were properly stored and out of danger from the flood, they wouldn't be removed in the first place.. they were probably removed because the were not properly stored and easily accessible.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickyy33 Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 Sounds like a good idea from the polic perspective, but are they in their legal rights to remove or enter private property? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-alberta.html I guess they didnt go out just looking for guns... apperently they were looking for people who needed help and if they came across unsecure guns, they were held until the owners came to claim them.. the police can't just go around and enter homes just to look for guns and take them.... they need a legal right to enter your home and if they are looking for people in distress, they can enter your home, and if they do find unsecure guns, they can take them.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickyy33 Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 So now my next question is, does Alberta have the same laws as ontario, as far as storage as a firearm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 I think they do.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvizsla Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 Gun laws are federal jurisdiction, and therefore the same across Canada, with the exception of Quebec who has temporarily at least held on to the long gun registry. As far as your guns being registered, the only guns registered now are restricted and prohibited firearms which tends to exclude the great majority of hunting firearms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChefMick Posted June 28, 2013 Report Share Posted June 28, 2013 So If I buy a brand new rifle for the purposes of hunting only I don't have to register it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted June 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2013 So If I buy a brand new rifle for the purposes of hunting only I don't have to register it?? I don't think so Mick , the registry has been quashed . I have a few questions after reading these posts . When the people left their house did they lock the doors ? I would have . If my guns were in a steel locker , could the locker be moved to an upstairs location or at least have them inside a hard case with locks on and hidden out of sight .? Shouldn't gun owners have the serial no. written down or take photos of their guns in case of theft ? I can see both sides of this story , but I am not in favour of cops entering your locked house . If they were checking for people who needed help they could knock loudly on the door ....no answer ....move on . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvizsla Posted June 29, 2013 Report Share Posted June 29, 2013 Yup there is no registry Mick, when there was the gun would have been registered at the time of purchase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted June 29, 2013 Report Share Posted June 29, 2013 Although I do not like the way the police have acted, a declared state of emergency/disaster does give far reaching powers to authorities and government agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerchly Posted June 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2013 In this case I think the rcmp overstepped their boundaries . It is well known they are ticked off about the canned registry .This story is gaining momentum and Harper is now looking in to it. Many will lose their guns because they will not have proper i.d. for them , & the cops will be laughing . I hope the government steps in and allows the owners to get their guns back from a good description of their guns . We must be very careful allowing cops to enter our houses without proper warrants as we give up our freedoms to power trippers like the RCMP . This guy posted one of the better answers in todays Sun newspaper . " Unauthorized confiscation of public property is the issue here - not to mention invasion of privacy. Some would have you believe that it is in the public interest - that is total BS - the assumption that criminal gangs would roam the flooded streets looking to steal guns for a crime spree is beyond the pale. This absolute farce of a force - the arsey-MP, are a national disgrace and are rotten from the head on down. When not sexually abusing one another, tazing people to death, getting themselves shot ( !! ) or abusing their powers in ways to numerous to list - they are out confiscating legally owned guns. One can only assume they were moved out of their normal storage cabinets to prevent water damage ( as a gun owner - the thought of some very valuable collectibles getting damaged is a serious concern ) but can we also assume that this gong show of a police force practised the same concern for damage when "scooping" them all up ? I think not." Agreed ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrod Posted June 30, 2013 Report Share Posted June 30, 2013 Safe storage of a non-restricted firearm from the RCMP's website: "Attach a secure locking device, such as a trigger lock or cable lock (or remove the bolt) so the firearms cannot be fired; or Lock the firearms in a cabinet, container or room that is difficult to break into." If a non-restricted firearm had a trigger lock or is rendered inoperable, it is safe storage. It doesn't have to be in a cabinet or safe. If you have it in a cabinet, it doesn't need the trigger lock unless someone in the house can get into the cabinet. I feel the RCMP overstepped their authority and someone should be held accountable. "Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slevin Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 The feds are saying give the guns back, HARPER stomping grounds??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corey Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 If you have seen any of the pictures of videos you may notice that the RCMP brought in a locksmith to enter into homes with locked doors. Considering the tight security of the area, the threat of looting is actual minimal. Although it hasn't been confirmed I would imagine that the RCMP also selectively chose homes based on whether there was a PAL holder at the residence. Unfortunately the RCMP are beaurocrats who feel they do not have to be accountable to the public nor to parliament. Harper is accountable in that he has to do the right thing or lose the next election. The RCMP have violated the Canadian Charter of Rights for every home they went into as we are protected from arbitrary search or seizure although I would classify this as break and enter with burglary/theft as opposed to search and seizure. Heads from the RCMP should roll for this as they have gotten away with far too much for far too long. Time for a changing of the guard, literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffman Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 If they left the firearms accessible and unattended in an abandoned house, the risk of thes guns ending up in the wrong hands due to looting is real, and the police have a responsibility to safeguard the public. Apparently, the info from the long gun registry was not completely destroyed by the police. How else would they know which homes to search. If you own a gun you must have a POL or a PAL so the police still know who owns legal guns. It appears to me that destroying the registry just removes the type of gun(s) that a person owns or am I way off base ? In other words the police still know that I own a gun, but they no longer know how many or the types of guns that I own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvizsla Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 No the police know you are licensed to own a gun, not that you own any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffman Posted July 13, 2013 Report Share Posted July 13, 2013 So a POL or a PAL doesn't mean that I own any guns ,but if I do than I'm legal and can buy ammunition for any shotgun or hunting rifle. Is my statement now correct? I thought that when the long gun registry was struck down that we would revert to the previous system , where you needed an FAC to purchase a firearm, but that wouldn't give the government the revenue from the issuing the POL. Guess I should have known better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrod Posted July 14, 2013 Report Share Posted July 14, 2013 A Possession and Acquisition license shows that you are legally allowed to possess and acquire a firearm - not that you own one. There is a PAL for restricted and non-restricted firearms. If you have a non-restricted only PAL, you cannot purchase or own restricted firearms. The federal computer registry for non-restricted firearms has been disbanded. From what I've seen though, firearms dealers are still tracking these guns in their own ledgers at the instruction of the CFO. Try buying a long gun and they'll ask for your driver's license so they can get your address and postal code. This is from personal experience at SAIL less than a year ago and well after the registry was disbanded. I questioned the sales clerk about this and he said it was their policy - for returns and exchanges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scapulataf Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 They've never asked for my driver's license, but they have asked for my number, address etc. when I buy stuff there....... For returns and exchanges. This for clothing and fishing gear. Maybe the man is going to start restricting the purchase of clothing, fishing and camping gear and he's already starting to build up the file. "This guy has bought a lot of camping stuff lately, I'll bet he's going to commit some crimes and then hide out in the woods. Better send CSIS to his house to 'straighten thing things out' ". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.