If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Post)   RCMP: Sorry about the floods. No, you can't go back to your homes. Oh yeah, we raided your houses and took your guns. Have a nice day, eh   (news.nationalpost.com) divider line 282
    More: Scary, RCMP, Security checkpoint, firearms  
•       •       •

15075 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jun 2013 at 6:42 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



282 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-28 05:36:00 PM
Where are the horses?
 
2013-06-28 06:13:17 PM
And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.
 
2013-06-28 06:14:42 PM
The RCMP later stated that the weapons were needed for a firing squad (La GRC a déclaré plus tard que les armes étaient nécessaires pour un peloton d'exécution):
blogs.btedmonton.ca

/Obama Harper's gonna take away your guns!
//Obama Harper va enlever vos armes!
///might as well be bilingual for a Canada story...
 
2013-06-28 06:36:01 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.
 
2013-06-28 06:38:11 PM
This is why you don't register your underground bunker.
 
2013-06-28 06:38:26 PM
We need a photoshop of Lootie with a bucket full of rifles to put this story in perspective. I got stuck watching "Sons of Guns" last night and it showed how they had a staff member sleep in the building during a hurricane to protect them from looters.
 
2013-06-28 06:45:27 PM
In before misplaced 2nd amendment post/troll.
 
2013-06-28 06:45:56 PM
Residents not being allowed back in and weapons have been confiscated? Sounds like the beginning of a apocalypse-style movie.
 
2013-06-28 06:47:07 PM
So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?
 
2013-06-28 06:47:53 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


This
 
2013-06-28 06:49:18 PM
Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.
 
2013-06-28 06:49:43 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down, and the RCMP have been throwing little fits ever since.  This would qualify as a big fit.
 
2013-06-28 06:50:35 PM
I can't help but think that if the guns were properly stored and locked up, people couldn't just take them.

But maybe the towns people have a point. Maybe guns should just be left lying around after a major disaster. That's a great idea.
 
2013-06-28 06:50:40 PM
I'd be pissed as Hell if I came home after a flood and found out the government/police had gone into my house without my consent. I'd be even pissed-er if they took some of my stuff. I'd be a-suing if the stuff they took was firearms. But I'm an American, and I really have no idea how they do things in the Great White North. Sounds like a clusterfark, though.
 
2013-06-28 06:52:17 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: I'd be pissed as Hell if I came home after a flood and found out the government/police had gone into my house without my consent. I'd be even pissed-er if they took some of my stuff. I'd be a-suing if the stuff they took was firearms. But I'm an American, and I really have no idea how they do things in the Great White North. Sounds like a clusterfark, though.


They did it in NOLA before Canada. People there had to sue, and many of them never received their firearms back.

And people wonder why we should just trust the government.
 
2013-06-28 06:52:20 PM
Canadians have guns?
 
2013-06-28 06:53:08 PM

foo monkey: Canadians have guns?


Even handguns.
 
2013-06-28 06:53:08 PM
"We are from the government, we are here to help"
 
2013-06-28 06:53:18 PM

Rabid Badger Beaver Weasel: In before misplaced 2nd amendment post/troll.


Check the TFA. Much like the Yukon, the Canadians beat ya to it.
 
2013-06-28 06:54:19 PM
RCMP looting homes you say? Seem to remember something about the Okanagan fire west of Kelowna BC where people had electronics stolen during the RCMP lockdown of neighborhoods.
Of course they did blame it on kids with noisy dirtbikes driving through the fire to steal stuff. Good enuf excuse to the morons.

/The Canadian gun registry is/was/still a violation of the Charter[Constitution].
//Register your gun and automatically lose your Right to not be searched without evidence of criminal activity.
///Knock Knock. Who's there? Police. Police who? Police who are coming in to search without warrants, since you registered your gun and we will beat you if you try to deny us.
 
2013-06-28 06:54:28 PM

foo monkey: Canadians have guns?


From a Vancouver, BC gun store's website:

www.reliablegun.com

You'll notice they even have *Gasp* assault rifles in Canada!
 
2013-06-28 06:55:04 PM

foo monkey: Canadians have guns?


Those moose ain't gonna shoot themselves...
 
2013-06-28 06:55:13 PM

YoOjo: Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.


They're just using Candians for practice, before they come to the USA and TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY

Bwahahahahahaha.
 
2013-06-28 06:55:20 PM

ModernLuddite: I can't help but think that if the guns were properly stored and locked up, people couldn't just take them.

But maybe the towns people have a point. Maybe guns should just be left lying around after a major disaster. That's a great idea.


They were in houses.

Hey what if this, what if the stupid RCMP did their jobs and arrested LOOTERS instead of stealing LOOT themselves. "Do not worry citizen, we took your TV, guns and car, so that looters couldn't! Now for the good news citizen, if you can produce evidence of ownership of the mentioned items you can have them back!'

Police, a gang like any other.
 
2013-06-28 06:55:25 PM
Well it depends.  If I could walk into the RCMP station and get my property immediately I would thank them for holding on to it and keeping it safe. If I could not do so I would lawyer up.
 
2013-06-28 06:55:36 PM
How the fark are you supposed to provide proof of ownership of stuff like that?  I mean, maybe if you just bought the thing and can electronically get proof from your credit card, but other than that you are basically farked if they take a hard line on returning them.

How the hell could I prove I own by grandfathers shotgun... oh, I know IT WAS IN MY farkING HOUSE.
 
2013-06-28 06:56:03 PM
Did they tale their beers too? Eh?
 
2013-06-28 06:56:47 PM
The long gun registry was ordered destroyed over a year ago. The RCMP shouldn't even know where long guns are. The article doesn't say if it's long guns or handguns (where they must be registered with all the appropriate permits filed). I'm assuming it's long guns and they're using information that isn't even supposed to exist!
 
2013-06-28 06:57:05 PM
uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.
 
2013-06-28 06:57:57 PM

Fizpez: How the fark are you supposed to provide proof of ownership of stuff like that?  I mean, maybe if you just bought the thing and can electronically get proof from your credit card, but other than that you are basically farked if they take a hard line on returning them.

How the hell could I prove I own by grandfathers shotgun... oh, I know IT WAS IN MY farkING HOUSE.


You could register it.

...Oh. Little double edged sword, huh?
 
2013-06-28 06:58:41 PM

doglover: Rabid Badger Beaver Weasel: In before misplaced 2nd amendment post/troll.

Check the TFA. Much like the Yukon, the Canadians beat ya to it.


Who reads the article around here?
 
2013-06-28 06:58:43 PM
This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...
 
2013-06-28 06:58:56 PM

YoOjo: Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.


I'm not saying it is Water-aliens.....  but....
 
2013-06-28 06:59:51 PM

Pichu0102: Fizpez: How the fark are you supposed to provide proof of ownership of stuff like that?  I mean, maybe if you just bought the thing and can electronically get proof from your credit card, but other than that you are basically farked if they take a hard line on returning them.

How the hell could I prove I own by grandfathers shotgun... oh, I know IT WAS IN MY farkING HOUSE.

You could register it.

...Oh. Little double edged sword, huh?


There is no registry.
 
2013-06-28 06:59:56 PM
They apparently forced their way in (otherwise how did they get in at all?).  Want to bet they didn't have a 100% record on the "guess if this house has a gun we need to seize" game?  So, how pissed would you be if they broke into your home for no reason, looking for a gun that doesn't exist?  Or broke in and found a gun that was properly stored and safe from reasonably equipped looters?
 
2013-06-28 07:00:10 PM

atomicmask: ModernLuddite: I can't help but think that if the guns were properly stored and locked up, people couldn't just take them.

But maybe the towns people have a point. Maybe guns should just be left lying around after a major disaster. That's a great idea.

They were in houses.

Hey what if this, what if the stupid RCMP did their jobs and arrested LOOTERS instead of stealing LOOT themselves. "Do not worry citizen, we took your TV, guns and car, so that looters couldn't! Now for the good news citizen, if you can produce evidence of ownership of the mentioned items you can have them back!'

Police, a gang like any other.


I'm just glad that Canadians don't worship guns like Americans do. 

//Also, fark the RCMP. Immigrant-murdering, useless sacks of excrement.
 
2013-06-28 07:00:20 PM

foo monkey: Canadians have guns?


They used to.
 
2013-06-28 07:00:37 PM

Fizpez: How the fark are you supposed to provide proof of ownership of stuff like that?  I mean, maybe if you just bought the thing and can electronically get proof from your credit card, but other than that you are basically farked if they take a hard line on returning them.

How the hell could I prove I own by grandfathers shotgun... oh, I know IT WAS IN MY farkING HOUSE.


They have them cataloged by house. Proof of address would do the trick. I don't really agree with the methods, but lets not blow it out of proportion here.
 
2013-06-28 07:00:39 PM
Silly Canadians. When told to evacuate, your guns are at the top of the list of things you grab, right behind your family, pets, mementos, and medicines.  If I have 5 minutes to evacuate, most of the guns stay.  If I have 30 minutes or more, the guns are coming with me.
 
2013-06-28 07:00:46 PM
So, theft.
 
2013-06-28 07:01:06 PM

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


This.

If they didn't do this and those guns were stolen by looters and started turning up at crime scenes, the same people that are screaming about them doing this would be screaming about them letting looters take them.
 
2013-06-28 07:01:15 PM

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.
 
2013-06-28 07:01:44 PM
"So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?"

How certain are you that they're not?

/double entendre
 
2013-06-28 07:01:45 PM

mtbhucker: Except there is no gun registration in Canada.


The guns may not be registered, but there's still a list of every person who has a license to own them.
 
2013-06-28 07:01:54 PM

YoOjo: Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.


All that dampness makes it easy for mold and fungi to grow. If you've played The Last of Us, you know that this doesn't end well.
 
2013-06-28 07:02:00 PM

ModernLuddite: atomicmask: ModernLuddite: I can't help but think that if the guns were properly stored and locked up, people couldn't just take them.

But maybe the towns people have a point. Maybe guns should just be left lying around after a major disaster. That's a great idea.

They were in houses.

Hey what if this, what if the stupid RCMP did their jobs and arrested LOOTERS instead of stealing LOOT themselves. "Do not worry citizen, we took your TV, guns and car, so that looters couldn't! Now for the good news citizen, if you can produce evidence of ownership of the mentioned items you can have them back!'

Police, a gang like any other.

I'm just glad that Canadians don't worship guns like Americans do. 

//Also, fark the RCMP. Immigrant-murdering, useless sacks of excrement.


Oh, I've known quite a few very pro-gun Canadians. Also, known quite a few pro-gun Englishmen and Frenchmen.

Or did you conflate "enjoy the right to own and enjoy engaging in safe, sporting activities with their firearms" with "Worship"?
 
2013-06-28 07:02:36 PM

Rabid Badger Beaver Weasel: In before misplaced 2nd amendment post/troll.


I'm in favor of reasonable gun control, but anybody who is sincere about the issue has to see this scenario as a particularly good argument against it.
 
2013-06-28 07:03:18 PM
Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...
 
2013-06-28 07:03:39 PM
Have a nice day, eh?

It's "Have a good day", subby. "Have a good day".

/eh?
 
2013-06-28 07:03:48 PM

joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.


They are. How do you think they find out if any one is dead or needs help inside of a home during an emergency?
 
2013-06-28 07:05:50 PM
That's the dumbest bit of inflammatory journalism I've seen.

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


This, basically. The RCMP did what they're supposed to do - ensure the safety of citizens.

Also, the article doesn't say "...and the RCMP isn't going to give them back", now, does it? No. I'm sure that, once citizens come back, the RCMP will return those items once proof of residency is established (after all, the RCMP needs to give the guns back to the proper owners.)
 
2013-06-28 07:06:34 PM

Bravo Two: Sin_City_Superhero: I'd be pissed as Hell if I came home after a flood and found out the government/police had gone into my house without my consent. I'd be even pissed-er if they took some of my stuff. I'd be a-suing if the stuff they took was firearms. But I'm an American, and I really have no idea how they do things in the Great White North. Sounds like a clusterfark, though.

They did it in NOLA before Canada. People there had to sue, and many of them never received their firearms back.

And people wonder why we should just trust the government.


Shiat like this is exactly why some people defy evacuation orders.   Hell, defying evacuation orders now seems like an idea that is very much worth considering.
 
2013-06-28 07:07:41 PM
Meh, trust your government. So many of them have such good track records.
 
2013-06-28 07:08:11 PM
How dare they go around violating my 2nd amendment rights like that!

Wait, what's that? Oh. Nevermind.
 
2013-06-28 07:08:46 PM

Maul555: Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...


Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?
 
2013-06-28 07:09:24 PM

sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.


Mmmm-hmmm.  I trust you speak from experience?  A friend of mine was charged & then the charges were dropped once they found out the wife was lying about abuse.  My friend's gun collection was confiscated.  Though innocent & he owned the guns legally, the cops did not return them.  This happened in Edmonton, AB.
 
2013-06-28 07:10:51 PM

jehovahs witness protection: This is why you don't register your underground bunker.


Flooding and underground bunkers... sounds like a great combination.
 
2013-06-28 07:11:45 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?
 
2013-06-28 07:13:18 PM
If you want to steal my guns, you better bring a forklift.

www.movingsimplified.com
 
2013-06-28 07:14:37 PM

ongbok: joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.

They are. How do you think they find out if any one is dead or needs help inside of a home during an emergency?


That's called exigent circumstances and it requires more than a hunch.
 
2013-06-28 07:15:33 PM

Voiceofreason01: If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?


I imagine the safe companies have some sort of law enforcement hotline to give out combinations, or just an alternate code for the digital ones.
 
2013-06-28 07:15:37 PM
This is what organized crime looks like.
 
2013-06-28 07:16:50 PM
Oh, yes, we had to smash your locked gun cabinets to get them, as you'll find out when you return to your houses, all of which we had to break into whether you had guns or not, to find out.
 
2013-06-28 07:18:02 PM

Egoy3k: Well it depends.  If I could walk into the RCMP station and get my property immediately I would thank them for holding on to it and keeping it safe. If I could not do so I would lawyer up.


Would you thank them for breaking the locks on your doors and rummaging through your entire house? Or do Canadians leave their doors unlocked all the time and all their guns in a clear unlocked case right next to the front door?
 
2013-06-28 07:18:20 PM

joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.


Translation: "I have no clue what I'm talking about, but I'm going to make assumptions that cater to my own personal prejudices and allow me to get appropriately butthurt."
 
2013-06-28 07:18:33 PM

fnordfocus: Voiceofreason01: If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?

I imagine the safe companies have some sort of law enforcement hotline to give out combinations, or just an alternate code for the digital ones.


I imagine that you have an impressive collection of aluminum foil hats.
 
2013-06-28 07:20:33 PM

mike_the_engineer: If you want to steal my guns, you better bring a forklift.

[www.movingsimplified.com image 561x999]


Better have the thing hidden behind a bookcase.
 
2013-06-28 07:21:04 PM

Maul555: Bravo Two: Sin_City_Superhero: I'd be pissed as Hell if I came home after a flood and found out the government/police had gone into my house without my consent. I'd be even pissed-er if they took some of my stuff. I'd be a-suing if the stuff they took was firearms. But I'm an American, and I really have no idea how they do things in the Great White North. Sounds like a clusterfark, though.

They did it in NOLA before Canada. People there had to sue, and many of them never received their firearms back.

And people wonder why we should just trust the government.

Shiat like this is exactly why some people defy evacuation orders.   Hell, defying evacuation orders now seems like an idea that is very much worth considering.


Yes, it does. How else can Darwin come into play and thin the herd of guntards?
 
2013-06-28 07:21:19 PM
Everyone I know that has ever had firearms in police possession for any reason has got them back damaged and in many cases with a good portion of the ammunition used.

One friend of a friend died of a heart attack, cops took the guns from the family home before the body was even removed by the ambulance (died with his safe unlocked).  They mixed up all the reloading powders that were open (rather than carry a bunch of half full containers, they put them all into a bunch of big containers) so once his friends got everything back for the estate sale they had to destroy a couple hundred bucks in powders since they didn't know what was in the packages.  Damage to the guns from the cop lockup probably cost his family a few thousand dollars in resale value.

Wouldn't have such an issue if they responsible for damages, but they seem to immune.

/Ontario cops in these cases.
 
2013-06-28 07:21:32 PM

joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.


Each province has their own act, but http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/E06P8.pdf <-- that, applies to Alberta.  Section 19(1)(h) is the relevant part:

"authorize the entry into any building or on any land,
without warrant, by any person in the course ofimplementing an emergency plan or program;

So there, yup, we're definitely not the same as the US...
 
2013-06-28 07:22:06 PM
I'd bet there is about a 99.9% chance that one or more people claim they had guns that weren't returned and about a 0% chance to prove which side is lying.
 
2013-06-28 07:23:42 PM
I dislike Harper, but I appreciate that he stepped in and told them to give the guns back. This, in my minority opinion in my circle of friends, was uncool of the RCMP to do.

Also, there is a little much posting from people who don't understand our gun laws.
 
2013-06-28 07:23:52 PM
Does Canada have something similar to our National Guard? If so, then they should have been called up to block off and patrol the flooded areas so there wouldn't be any looters. That seems like it would be a lot easier to do than searching every house.
 
2013-06-28 07:24:27 PM

Next week's Tom Sawyer: ongbok: joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.

They are. How do you think they find out if any one is dead or needs help inside of a home during an emergency?

That's called exigent circumstances and it requires more than a hunch.


Do you know how I know you're an American?  Hint: we have different laws...
 
2013-06-28 07:25:03 PM

LisaNeedsBraces: sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.

Mmmm-hmmm.  I trust you speak from experience?  A friend of mine was charged & then the charges were dropped once they found out the wife was lying about abuse.  My friend's gun collection was confiscated.  Though innocent & he owned the guns legally, the cops did not return them.  This happened in Edmonton, AB.


I suspect your friend is leaving out a detail or two, but if not he should file a complaint and get a lawyer to write a letter.
 
2013-06-28 07:29:11 PM

FormlessOne: Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?



Read the article you farking moron.  You need to present them with proof of ownership which is most likely in the same condition as the other personal items in the home (e.g. destroyed).
 
2013-06-28 07:30:35 PM

Acharne: I dislike Harper, but I appreciate that he stepped in and told them to give the guns back. This, in my minority opinion in my circle of friends, was uncool of the RCMP to do.

Also, there is a little much posting from people who don't understand our gun laws.


Did Harper actually get involved? The article is scarce on this detail.
 
KIA
2013-06-28 07:31:03 PM
So, what will you have to sign to get them back?

Oh, and, uh... hope you have records somewhere safe of the serial numbers etc. as well as purchase information because they may not give them back without that either.

Will they be held long enough to start rusting?

I highly doubt the RCMP bothered to dry, clean and lube the guns for you...

Good luck!
 
2013-06-28 07:31:30 PM

joness0154: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but here in the US police are not allowed to enter private dwellings during a state of emergency.

I assume it works the same way in Canada. This is more than a non issue. It's a HUGE issue.


Haha you missed have missed that whole Katrina thing where police went into people's homes and took their guns while the people were there.
Also you must have missed that whole Boston bomber thing where police invaded homes without warrants and tossed the people into the streets and told them to run.
 
2013-06-28 07:32:50 PM

sno man: do keep chocking that chicken.


WAT?
www.racecaddy.com
images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-06-28 07:32:51 PM

FormlessOne: Maul555: Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...

Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


Funny how some people are okay with the idea that police can just go into their homes and take things that are considered "dangerous", oblivious to the high likelihood that other things may disappear and be blamed on looters (well, they would still be looters, they'd just also happen to carry badges).

I hope nothing like this ever happens in the US.  The police have no business in my home unless they have a warrant for a crime, and even then, they don't just get to take whatever they want.  If someone is going to loot anything from my house, I certainly don't want this problem to be doubled up by it being sanctioned by the government.
 
2013-06-28 07:33:29 PM

JK47: FormlessOne: Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


Read the article you farking moron.  You need to present them with proof of ownership which is most likely in the same condition as the other personal items in the home (e.g. destroyed).


It's almost like they took note of the house they found it in when they did their inventory. Might be a little easier to prove you own/were renting one of those.
 
2013-06-28 07:33:46 PM

thoughtless: Acharne: I dislike Harper, but I appreciate that he stepped in and told them to give the guns back. This, in my minority opinion in my circle of friends, was uncool of the RCMP to do.

Also, there is a little much posting from people who don't understand our gun laws.

Did Harper actually get involved? The article is scarce on this detail.


Yes he did. Here is a different article:



"Give them back their guns"
 
2013-06-28 07:35:22 PM
TIL Canada also has guntards.

Idiots are more concerned police being in temporary posession of their firearms they didn't bother to take with them upon evacuation than some random looter breaking in and taking them. Does exposure to gunpowder cause an automatic drop in IQ?
 
2013-06-28 07:38:30 PM

Voiceofreason01: fnordfocus: Voiceofreason01: If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?

I imagine the safe companies have some sort of law enforcement hotline to give out combinations, or just an alternate code for the digital ones.

I imagine that you have an impressive collection of aluminum foil hats.


Just as an example, Browning's safes accept a "master reset code" that they'll provide to an owner if Law Enforcement requests it.  You think they won't give it straight to a LEO who calls up?
 
2013-06-28 07:38:52 PM

JK47: FormlessOne: Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


Read the article you farking moron.  You need to present them with proof of ownership which is most likely in the same condition as the other personal items in the home (e.g. destroyed).


Yeah, but that's their fault.

You see, there could be the possibility of looting, so it's up to law enforcement to break down your door and go through your prized possessions to minimize any possible damage.

Now, you might ask: "that's fine and dandy, but can't they make a note of where the guns came from to document their actions like all good law enforcement do"? That's a good question, now shut up.
 
2013-06-28 07:40:46 PM
LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"
 
2013-06-28 07:41:11 PM
If those officers aren't trained by the TSA, you'll be lucky to get half your stuff back.
 
2013-06-28 07:42:33 PM

06Wahoo: FormlessOne: Maul555: Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...

Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?

Funny how some people are okay with the idea that police can just go into their homes and take things that are considered "dangerous", oblivious to the high likelihood that other things may disappear and be blamed on looters (well, they would still be looters, they'd just also happen to carry badges).

I hope nothing like this ever happens in the US.  The police have no business in my home unless they have a warrant for a crime, and even then, they don't just get to take whatever they want.  If someone is going to loot anything from my house, I certainly don't want this problem to be doubled up by it being sanctioned by the government.


Ya, cause it's the protection from a warrantless search solely for safety reasons during a once in a century flood, that makes the US a bastion of glorious freedom versus our Orwell-like concentration camp we call Canada.  Other than the whole NSA thing, and the enemy combatant stuff, and the influence of religion in so many of your laws, etc., but hey, no cop is going to check for YOUR bloated corpse during a flood, no way!
 
2013-06-28 07:43:04 PM
Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?
 
2013-06-28 07:43:21 PM
"The longer that the water stays in our houses the worse it's going to be. We'll either be bulldozing them or burning them down because we've got an incompetent government."

Last time I checked it was a CONSERVATIVE government in power in Canada.
And guess who helped put them in power in the first place?
Good old rural ALBERTA (Canada's Texas!)

Nice to be hoist by your own petard.
 
2013-06-28 07:43:58 PM

mike_the_engineer: If you want to steal my guns, you better bring a forklift.

[www.movingsimplified.com image 561x999]



I wonder how many people who have one of those picked 1-7-7-6 as the combination?
 
2013-06-28 07:44:34 PM

jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"


I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.
 
2013-06-28 07:46:14 PM
Shouldn't ever lib fark be happy about this?
 
2013-06-28 07:46:45 PM

Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.


haha i laughed.
 
2013-06-28 07:46:50 PM

Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.


Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.

intellectual checkmate, gun nutz
 
2013-06-28 07:49:14 PM

jso2897: Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?


You're an idiot if that is what you feel. Idiot only in the sense that you lotted people upset about this as 'inbreds' who hate the government. I love the police. I love the government and I love everything society has brought me. What I do not trust, is the RCMP taking personal items of ANY KIND from my house or my neighbours house. To claim it was to prevent looters is naive on their part. Sure there are more important issues at play, but this is an emergency, and in emergencies you often see strange justifications for strange behaviour. I bet these guns were on racks on the walls, but made the police nervious. It's a silly thing and it shouldn't have happened. To be against this action is not to be against 'The government'. You sound like a nutter.
 
2013-06-28 07:49:21 PM

FormlessOne: Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


That's just how they do fascism in Canada.  The jack-booted thugs knock down on your door, seize your property with a receipt and a "sorry we missed you" note to rescue it from flood damage and theft, disarm you with polite remarks, and shut down all dissent by engaging in a deliberative process where everyone is encouraged to voice his or her concerns.

It's like Orwell said:  if you want a vision of the Canadian future, imagine a boot stamping down a flight of basement stairs to rescue a kitten, forever.
 
2013-06-28 07:50:19 PM

super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.



It depends on how hard you throw them.
 
2013-06-28 07:51:28 PM

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


Yar.

It's really for the best that we don't have a bunch of empty houses full of guns just waiting for the looters to show up.

If someone steals your TV or XBOX... well, that sucks.  But they can't use it to commit MORE crimes.

If someone steals a whole bunch of weapons you were keeping under the bed for some damn reason, that's a public security threat, so putting the guns in storage until the evacuees can come claim them is reasonable.

And these guns wouldn't just stay in Calgary, they'd be in the rest of Canadian cities within weeks, to assist our idiot drug dealers in shooting each other over turf.
 
2013-06-28 07:51:32 PM

give me doughnuts: super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.


It depends on how hard you throw them.


I suppose that could be true if they contained lead, but you can say the exact same thing about guns.
 
2013-06-28 07:52:29 PM
fnordfocus:
Just as an example, Browning's safes accept a "master reset code" that they'll provide to an owner if Law Enforcement requests it.  You think they won't give it straight to a LEO who calls up?

It does not say that they'll turn the reset code over to law enforcement just that they'll let law enforcement vouch for your identity. You're being paranoid.
 
2013-06-28 07:53:51 PM

utah dude: uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.


The RCMP entered every home to ensure that the evacuation is done.  High River (the town in question) is basically the town where urban rednecks go to live.  There is a huge amount of 4x4ing, horse riding, Git 'er Dun, shoot 'em up yokels that live there.  Guns are everywhere, like hanging on living room walls, sitting in garages, etc.  I am surprised that some guns might have actually been stored properly.
 
2013-06-28 07:56:57 PM
Some clarification on what the police say they were doing:

From: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-alberta . html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."
 
2013-06-28 07:57:29 PM

Farktastic: utah dude: uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.

The RCMP entered every home to ensure that the evacuation is done.  High River (the town in question) is basically the town where urban rednecks go to live.  There is a huge amount of 4x4ing, horse riding, Git 'er Dun, shoot 'em up yokels that live there.  Guns are everywhere, like hanging on living room walls, sitting in garages, etc.  I am surprised that some guns might have actually been stored properly.


farktastic, fantastic explanation. thank you.

my have chamber locks and are too oiled up to even barely shoot, would probably not even rust underwater.
 
2013-06-28 07:59:04 PM

Pray 4 Mojo: Where are the horses?


Under the hood.
 
2013-06-28 07:59:38 PM

super_grass: give me doughnuts: super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.


It depends on how hard you throw them.

I suppose that could be true if they contained lead, but you can say the exact same thing about guns.


I dunno about the mythical chicken being farked by republicans, but those poor kids sure have been drug up, stacked up, and stood upon enough times that they have shoe prints in their corpses.

Any way we can convince you to let those kids rest in peace and make a clear, cogent argument that doesn't involve whoring out the emotional pain of their deaths? Or is using every one of them as emotional ammunition all you have left?
 
2013-06-28 08:00:59 PM
Meh, it is Canada, so it is not like it is an important country or anything like that.
 
2013-06-28 08:01:24 PM

LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?


The guns are in the hands of looters.
 
2013-06-28 08:03:29 PM

utah dude: Farktastic: utah dude: uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.

The RCMP entered every home to ensure that the evacuation is done.  High River (the town in question) is basically the town where urban rednecks go to live.  There is a huge amount of 4x4ing, horse riding, Git 'er Dun, shoot 'em up yokels that live there.  Guns are everywhere, like hanging on living room walls, sitting in garages, etc.  I am surprised that some guns might have actually been stored properly.

farktastic, fantastic explanation. thank you.

my have chamber locks and are too oiled up to even barely shoot, would probably not even rust underwater.


Excuse me, but you say redneck and git r done like its a bad thing to be. I'm a redneck, ride and keep horses, 4x4, and enjoy nature. I'm also college educated and don't fark my kinfolk. Kindly keep your bigotry to yourself, some of us find it farking offensive.
 
2013-06-28 08:04:52 PM

PopularFront: Some clarification on what the police say they were doing:

From: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-alberta . html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."


And this is the crux of the argument: the firearms were in my home until the cops came busting down the door for no good farking reason.
 
2013-06-28 08:05:26 PM

jso2897: Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?


If that actually happens (they give the guns back) then that is great and all that.  But it still does not excuse their blatant disregard of the law where they entered the homes without a warrant (and I am pretty sure that in Canada they do need a warrant to enter someone's home in a situation like this.

Also, ask those residents in New Orleans how great it was when a lot of the guns that were secured from looters were never returned.
 
2013-06-28 08:06:46 PM

Bravo Two: PopularFront: Some clarification on what the police say they were doing:

From: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-alberta . html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."

And this is the crux of the argument: the firearms were in my home until the cops came busting down the door for no good farking reason.


They had a good reason to come into your home if your were in the evacuation zone, and that was to see if there were any victims from the flood or people in need of help.
 
2013-06-28 08:07:01 PM

Bravo Two: super_grass: give me doughnuts: super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.


It depends on how hard you throw them.

I suppose that could be true if they contained lead, but you can say the exact same thing about guns.

I dunno about the mythical chicken being farked by republicans, but those poor kids sure have been drug up, stacked up, and stood upon enough times that they have shoe prints in their corpses.

Any way we can convince you to let those kids rest in peace and make a clear, cogent argument that doesn't involve whoring out the emotional pain of their deaths? Or is using every one of them as emotional ammunition all you have left?


Not demanding some unspecified  𝓘𝓜𝓜𝓔𝓓𝓘𝓐𝓣𝓔 𝓐𝓒𝓣𝓘𝓞𝓝 (tm) is implication that you hate these kids and are willing to throw their lives away for some radical stance that I'm fairly certain that you must hold. And last time I checked, not submitting to our gun restrictions, no matter how poorly planned or counter-effective you might think, is evidence enough that you don't care about the issue at all.

You should stop watching Faux Snooz and pay attention to the intellectual giants of Piers Morgan and MSNBC. You might just learn something.
 
2013-06-28 08:08:37 PM

Mock26: jso2897: Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?

If that actually happens (they give the guns back) then that is great and all that.  But it still does not excuse their blatant disregard of the law where they entered the homes without a warrant (and I am pretty sure that in Canada they do need a warrant to enter someone's home in a situation like this.

Also, ask those residents in New Orleans how great it was when a lot of the guns that were secured from looters were never returned.


Correction.  Turns out they had the authority, what with the declared state of emergency and all that.  But, do they have the authority to remove items such as the guns?
 
2013-06-28 08:09:03 PM
They should send them to the US and put them into the hands of NFL players.
 
2013-06-28 08:09:20 PM

super_grass: give me doughnuts: super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.


It depends on how hard you throw them.

I suppose that could be true if they contained lead, but you can say the exact same thing about guns.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tuZURhc1EM
 
2013-06-28 08:12:27 PM

Mock26: jso2897: Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?

If that actually happens (they give the guns back) then that is great and all that.  But it still does not excuse their blatant disregard of the law where they entered the homes without a warrant (and I am pretty sure that in Canada they do need a warrant to enter someone's home in a situation like this.

Also, ask those residents in New Orleans how great it was when a lot of the guns that were secured from looters were never returned.


Posted earlier


Each province has their own act, but http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/E06P8.pdf <-- that, applies to Alberta.  Section 19(1)(h) is the relevant part:

"authorize the entry into any building or on any land,
without warrant, by any person in the course of implementing an emergency plan or program;
 
2013-06-28 08:12:48 PM

Bravo Two: Any way we can convince you to let those kids rest in peace and make a clear, cogent argument that doesn't involve whoring out the emotional pain of their deaths?


How dare the gun-grabbers mention those dear, dear children. Clearly those dead kids belong to the gun community.

/ Cuz the gun community made them dead
 
2013-06-28 08:15:45 PM
I don't buy the argument that they were keeping them safe. There's nobody in the town - the police have it sealed off. Bad precedent, I says, eh.
 
2013-06-28 08:20:27 PM

Bravo Two: utah dude: Farktastic: utah dude: uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.

The RCMP entered every home to ensure that the evacuation is done.  High River (the town in question) is basically the town where urban rednecks go to live.  There is a huge amount of 4x4ing, horse riding, Git 'er Dun, shoot 'em up yokels that live there.  Guns are everywhere, like hanging on living room walls, sitting in garages, etc.  I am surprised that some guns might have actually been stored properly.

farktastic, fantastic explanation. thank you.

my have chamber locks and are too oiled up to even barely shoot, would probably not even rust underwater.

Excuse me, but you say redneck and git r done like its a bad thing to be. I'm a redneck, ride and keep horses, 4x4, and enjoy nature. I'm also college educated and don't fark my kinfolk. Kindly keep your bigotry to yourself, some of us find it farking offensive.


Good for you, I'm an outdoorsman too.  I described the "flavour" of the town and don't believe I judged anyone by reporting any other distasteful behaviors other than improperly storing weapons.  If you like leaving weapons lying around your house so much that the cops need to take them for safe keeping during an evacuation, I will be sure to lump you in with the rest of the idiots who would do this.

/respect your tools
 
2013-06-28 08:26:01 PM

give me doughnuts: mike_the_engineer: If you want to steal my guns, you better bring a forklift.

[www.movingsimplified.com image 561x999]


I wonder how many people who have one of those picked 1-7-7-6 as the combination?


The name is what struck me. "Warrior" indeed...
 
2013-06-28 08:29:18 PM

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


Exactly. But the derp from the "I need mah assaul rifles to protect me from modern day super predators" retards is pretty funny.
 
2013-06-28 08:30:47 PM

Voiceofreason01: If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?


Wont somebody think of the mounties?!
 
2013-06-28 08:31:14 PM

Bravo Two: utah dude: Farktastic: utah dude: uh... how would they find them? (if they're raiding houses and what-not? tear apart each and every person's closet? please explain this.

The RCMP entered every home to ensure that the evacuation is done.  High River (the town in question) is basically the town where urban rednecks go to live.  There is a huge amount of 4x4ing, horse riding, Git 'er Dun, shoot 'em up yokels that live there.  Guns are everywhere, like hanging on living room walls, sitting in garages, etc.  I am surprised that some guns might have actually been stored properly.

farktastic, fantastic explanation. thank you.

my have chamber locks and are too oiled up to even barely shoot, would probably not even rust underwater.

Excuse me, but you say redneck and git r done like its a bad thing to be. I'm a redneck, ride and keep horses, 4x4, and enjoy nature. I'm also college educated and don't fark my kinfolk. Kindly keep your bigotry to yourself, some of us find it farking offensive.


Settle down Cletus.
 
2013-06-28 08:32:49 PM

YoOjo: Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.


My guess would be that if those people become trapped or get into some other dangerous situation as a result of being in a flooded area, then emergency services would be obligated to rescue them, putting them at unnecessary risk and diverting those resources from other places where they're truly needed. It's the same reason that they sometimes forbid people from being out on the roads during particularly bad storms.
 
2013-06-28 08:35:57 PM

sno man: LisaNeedsBraces: sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.

Mmmm-hmmm.  I trust you speak from experience?  A friend of mine was charged & then the charges were dropped once they found out the wife was lying about abuse.  My friend's gun collection was confiscated.  Though innocent & he owned the guns legally, the cops did not return them.  This happened in Edmonton, AB.

I suspect your friend is leaving out a detail or two, but if not he should file a complaint and get a lawyer to write a letter.


Yeah I really find that hard to believe in Western Canada.  Even if it did happen the mere threat of a lawsuit would likely result in his guns being returned.

FormlessOne: Maul555: Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...

Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


Cut them some slack, if they didn't have something to be outraged about they might have to go out and actually learn about the real world..
 
2013-06-28 08:36:35 PM

ongbok: Mock26: jso2897: Another bullshiat, distorted victim myth from deluded gun-fappers.
They'll give your stupid guns back, after they have SECURED THEM FROM LOOTERS, you chuckleheaded morons.
Why are the people who biatch and cry about government the loudest always the inbreds who would survive about fifteen seconds without it?

If that actually happens (they give the guns back) then that is great and all that.  But it still does not excuse their blatant disregard of the law where they entered the homes without a warrant (and I am pretty sure that in Canada they do need a warrant to enter someone's home in a situation like this.

Also, ask those residents in New Orleans how great it was when a lot of the guns that were secured from looters were never returned.

Posted earlier


Each province has their own act, but http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/E06P8.pdf <-- that, applies to Alberta.  Section 19(1)(h) is the relevant part:

"authorize the entry into any building or on any land,
without warrant, by any person in the course of implementing an emergency plan or program;


But does that include seizure of property?
 
2013-06-28 08:38:25 PM
Noctusxx:
And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


If there's a registry, you dumb bag of feathers, then the government KNOWS it's your gun.  Sheesh.  Americans.
 
2013-06-28 08:38:49 PM
Who the heck evaluates and doesn't bring their guns? How little time did they have?
 
2013-06-28 08:39:03 PM
What the Americans in this thread do not understand (other than Canada has different laws) is that if the RCMP had not gone door to door searching for trapped victims and there was one (or some "I aint leaven my propertah" kinda guy).  It would be a major scandal there would be hearings and special investigations and public meetings, all trying to figure out why the RCMP let that person die when all they had to do was look.

It is the same thing with securing the guns, if they left them and even one was stolen and then used in a crime it would cause a huge uproar and the RCMP would be blamed for leaving those weapons unsecured.  Canada is a very different place and we look at things very differently.  The RCMP did probably the best thing in a very bad situation.

Of course those 4 lying murders from the YVR detachment should be tossed in jail, but unfortunately one thing we dont differ on is holding the criminal cops accountable.
 
2013-06-28 08:40:09 PM

mtbhucker: Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down


Um, only the long gun registry was repealed.  Also, "struck down" has different connotations than "repealed," which is more accurate in this case.
 
2013-06-28 08:43:50 PM

big pig peaches: Who the heck evaluates and doesn't bring their guns? How little time did they have?


You need a permit to carry a weapon from one place to another.

The use of a federal police force to enter people's homes and seize weapons that may not be there, may not be stored correctly and probably won't be used to commit a crime because the houses are within a secure area controlled by that same police force is farcical. Paulson's going to get his ass kicked.
 
2013-06-28 08:45:33 PM

super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.

intellectual checkmate, gun nutz


Give me a gallon of gasoline and a couple of bike locks, and I'll give you 20 and then some.
 
2013-06-28 08:45:45 PM
The Guess Who
"Guns, Guns, Guns"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHjyYmH6pvQ
 
2013-06-28 08:46:41 PM
sno man:
LisaNeedsBraces: sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.

Mmmm-hmmm.  I trust you speak from experience?  A friend of mine was charged & then the charges were dropped once they found out the wife was lying about abuse.  My friend's gun collection was confiscated.  Though innocent & he owned the guns legally, the cops did not return them.  This happened in Edmonton, AB.

I suspect your friend is leaving out a detail or two, but if not he should file a complaint and get a lawyer to write a letter.


I suspect he pulled the whole anecdote out of his ass piecemeal, but hey, you might be right.
 
2013-06-28 08:50:30 PM
Do you dumb chucklefarks not even realise they just moved the guns, which were left in empty properties, to a secure location to stop looters taking them, and are going to return them all to the owners?

Its common farking sense not confiscation.
 
2013-06-28 08:50:53 PM

CokeBear: How dare they go around violating my 2nd amendment rights like that!

Wait, what's that? Oh Eh. Nevermind.


Fixed that for you
 
2013-06-28 08:51:36 PM
"The guns will be returned to owners after residents are allowed back in town and they provide proof of ownership, Topham added."

And THERE is the problem," proof of ownership". They already know whose gins they are, since they knew which homes to enter. Proffered of your address should be enough, that's on your drivers license. Proof of ownership on guns can easy be ruined in a flooded home. I'd be posted too. Good thing ey registered them, because the government always swears that they won't use registration lists to seize your weapons.

And I just LOVE the "we only seized the guns cut we know they're expensive" line...
 
2013-06-28 08:52:04 PM

mtbhucker: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down, and the RCMP have been throwing little fits ever since.  This would qualify as a big fit.


Just another of the many reasons why the rcmp should be liquidated entirely. All fired with no benefits of any kind.
and started again from the ground up.

institutionaly corrupt. Fark the whole lot of them. Im sure they have better things to be doing like beating people in handcuffs. And murdering people in airports.
 
2013-06-28 08:52:18 PM

The Thoroughbred of Sin: What the Americans in this thread do not understand (other than Canada has different laws) is that if the RCMP had not gone door to door searching for trapped victims and there was one (or some "I aint leaven my propertah" kinda guy).  It would be a major scandal there would be hearings and special investigations and public meetings, all trying to figure out why the RCMP let that person die when all they had to do was look.

It is the same thing with securing the guns, if they left them and even one was stolen and then used in a crime it would cause a huge uproar and the RCMP would be blamed for leaving those weapons unsecured.  Canada is a very different place and we look at things very differently.  The RCMP did probably the best thing in a very bad situation.

Of course those 4 lying murders from the YVR detachment should be tossed in jail, but unfortunately one thing we dont differ on is holding the criminal cops accountable.


What you mentioned above would also happen in the U.S. And the same people screaming "Thar taking the guns!!!! Tyranny!!!!" Would be the ones screaming the loudest that the government didn't do their jobs if someone had died or was hurt as a result of the police not going door to door to make sure everyone was out of the evacuation zone or if it turned out that somebody looted an unsecured firearm and it turned up being used in a crime later.
 
2013-06-28 08:53:21 PM

No Such Agency: sno man:
LisaNeedsBraces: sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.

Mmmm-hmmm.  I trust you speak from experience?  A friend of mine was charged & then the charges were dropped once they found out the wife was lying about abuse.  My friend's gun collection was confiscated.  Though innocent & he owned the guns legally, the cops did not return them.  This happened in Edmonton, AB.

I suspect your friend is leaving out a detail or two, but if not he should file a complaint and get a lawyer to write a letter.

I suspect he pulled the whole anecdote out of his ass piecemeal, but hey, you might be right.


I don't know anyone that it has happened to, but I've heard of it.  If I remember correctly the scenario in that particular case was the cops wouldn't/couldn't release the firearms without a court order, and the lawyer wasn't gun savvy so he didn't think to get one after the charges were dismissed.   So the owner then has to start another court action to get them back and given the lawyer costs it wasn't worth it in that case.  Cheaper to buy new guns.
 
2013-06-28 08:53:38 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.


Murder weapons get removed from circulation?
 
2013-06-28 08:54:27 PM

gaspode: Do you dumb chucklefarks not even realise they just moved the guns, which were left in empty properties, to a secure location to stop looters taking them, and are going to return them all to the owners?

Its common farking sense not confiscation.


Who was going to take then, beavers? The town was evacuated and the police are guarding the perimeter.
 
2013-06-28 09:03:10 PM
fap, fap, fap
 
2013-06-28 09:03:35 PM

ongbok: If they didn't do this and those guns were stolen by looters and started turning up at crime scenes, the same people that are screaming about them doing this would be screaming about them letting looters take them.


That excuse is getting really tired. "If the police didn't act, people would blame them for not acting" is pathetic speculation at best.  What people?

If the RCMP stood by AS people looted, or openly ignored reports of rampant looting, that's a problem regardless of what's stolen.
 
2013-06-28 09:06:29 PM

YouSirAreAMaroon: gaspode: Do you dumb chucklefarks not even realise they just moved the guns, which were left in empty properties, to a secure location to stop looters taking them, and are going to return them all to the owners?

Its common farking sense not confiscation.

Who was going to take then, beavers? The town was evacuated and the police are guarding the perimeter.


It's not exactly difficult to get into High River for someone who is from the area and is a miscreant. Also, 300 or so people were known to have defied the evacuation order, 40 or so of whom needed to be rescued afterwards. And I'd be willing to put money on some of the idiots who live there and like to harass tourists (was there a few years ago for a family reunion, stayed in a campground and each night we were there someone was on the phone with the cops about idiot teenagers trying to steal things from the campground) at least trying to stay behind to loot from the houses they knew had the best stuff.

/Would also be willing to put money on the cops personally escorting some of those idiots out of town, as the cops knew who the kids were simply based on a description like "Short dark hair. Big leather jacket - not long, just looks like it's full of football padding." and "Girl wearing really tight clothing and cowboy boots."
//Well.. maybe not THAT much money, as said idiots were seen several nights in a row, so whatever the cops did was useless.
 
2013-06-28 09:07:19 PM
THEY DID NOT GO TO HOUSES LOOKING FOR GUNS.
THEY DID NOT USE THE GUN REGISTRY TO LOOK FOR HOUSES WITH GUNS TO GO TO.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-albert a. html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.
"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."

Chicken, keep farking etc.
 
2013-06-28 09:07:41 PM
I want to know how many cop haters also happen to be gun control fans.  There is an awful lot of both on fark.
 
2013-06-28 09:08:36 PM

pedrop357: ongbok: If they didn't do this and those guns were stolen by looters and started turning up at crime scenes, the same people that are screaming about them doing this would be screaming about them letting looters take them.

That excuse is getting really tired. "If the police didn't act, people would blame them for not acting" is pathetic speculation at best.  What people?

If the RCMP stood by AS people looted, or openly ignored reports of rampant looting, that's a problem regardless of what's stolen.


It's not an excuse because it is a reality. They would be blamed.

And realistically they aren't going to be able to stop all looting even if they seal of the town. People will find a way to breach the perimeter. So with that being said if there are deadly items left out unsecured they have to take steps to secure them.
 
2013-06-28 09:09:08 PM
They took the guns but left other valuables behind. jewelry, electronics, etc. So really who they helping?
 
2013-06-28 09:13:53 PM

Voiceofreason01: fnordfocus:
Just as an example, Browning's safes accept a "master reset code" that they'll provide to an owner if Law Enforcement requests it.  You think they won't give it straight to a LEO who calls up?

It does not say that they'll turn the reset code over to law enforcement just that they'll let law enforcement vouch for your identity. You're being paranoid.


First off, Officers lie.

Second, what the fark do you think would happen to a rep who didn't hand over the code when an Officer called?

If there's a backdoor, it's naive to think that the cops don't have and use it.  For example, Master Lock publishes a book for Law Enforcement and school administrators that has all of their combinations listed by serial numbers.
 
2013-06-28 09:16:11 PM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


A piece of trivia for you. Obama's only senate vote on gun control was in favor of the law that made it illegal for any government agency to do this.
 
2013-06-28 09:18:49 PM
Thanks a lot Snobama!
 
2013-06-28 09:21:54 PM

Bravo Two: Sin_City_Superhero: I'd be pissed as Hell if I came home after a flood and found out the government/police had gone into my house without my consent. I'd be even pissed-er if they took some of my stuff. I'd be a-suing if the stuff they took was firearms. But I'm an American, and I really have no idea how they do things in the Great White North. Sounds like a clusterfark, though.

They did it in NOLA before Canada. People there had to sue, and many of them never received their firearms back.

And people wonder why we should just trust the government.


The Vitter amendment to the Homeland Security funding act made this illegal. Granted, it was after the fact, but you now have some legal standing.
 
2013-06-28 09:21:58 PM

LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?


Looters?  Not unless they are close the the U.S. border.
 
2013-06-28 09:22:56 PM

pete1729: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

A piece of trivia for you. Obama's only senate vote on gun control was in favor of the law that made it illegal for any government agency to do this.


Bbbbut 0bummers tryin to grab yer guns!
 
2013-06-28 09:27:57 PM

LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?


Never dealt with the rcmp taking guns and searching homes for safety have you. Try getting them back. Aint happenin.
Looters are better as they are at least honest. Oh btw ever wonder how they leave your home after?
Think they remembered to close the doors to keep out wildlife?
 
2013-06-28 09:31:13 PM

runescorpio: Never dealt with the rcmp taking guns and searching homes for safety have you. Try getting them back. Aint happenin.


So this happens to you a lot. That sounds interesting. Please share the details.
 
2013-06-28 09:33:18 PM
That will teach you to leave your weapons behind.
 
2013-06-28 09:34:22 PM

Abner Doon: They apparently forced their way in (otherwise how did they get in at all?).  Want to bet they didn't have a 100% record on the "guess if this house has a gun we need to seize" game?  So, how pissed would you be if they broke into your home for no reason, looking for a gun that doesn't exist?  Or broke in and found a gun that was properly stored and safe from reasonably equipped looters?


Most likely a lot more than the guns will be found missing.
The government will blame the flood. The flood selectively removed jewelry and electronics from the second floor.. floods work funny that way.

Basically, it's government showing its true nature, taking advantage of any excuse to steal from the people. Just look at the premise they make for all the fark gun haters and government lovers. It's ridiculous. The guns aren't going to magically become animated and leave their safes, closets, and sock drawers. The police have everyone kicked out of the town and won't let them back in.... they just wanted to steal. Probably for themselves. Most everything will turn up missing.... Officer Dan: sorry Mr. Smith we didn't find the guns in your house, someone else must have taken them. Shame about your wife's jewelry. Meanwhile Mrs. officer Dan wonders in to meet her husband for lunch wearing some familiar looking jewelry... No Mr. Smith, we bought that 15 years ago....
 
2013-06-28 09:34:40 PM
LEO have had one consistent aspect for the last 60 years.  "We get to f*ck over who we please and you can't do sh*t about it."  Why do you think cops take such a sh*tty, repetitive job for 60k a year?  The fringe benefits is a license to trip over your dick and do as you please.  It's like the mafia with radios and badges.
 
2013-06-28 09:36:23 PM
The police are absolutely allowed to enter your house during an emergency. Any emergency worker can expecially if a forced evacuation is going on. They can arrest your ass just for staying. I'mean -- they dont want to but they do have the ability...

Guns -- even if legally owned -- must be stored properly. They should have the pin taken out or a trigger/bag lock on and be seperate from the ammo. Not a crazy or hard to comply with rule.

Now haveng grown up in the Peace River area i know how most people store their guns... And while most are pretty good about it there are always a few families that leave the rifle on the top shelf of the entryway closet with a box of ammo. Or in the garage with no locks on anything. Its not necessarily dangerous but it gives the cops an excuse to take your shiat.

There is i believe an exception for .22s -- that you can have one unloaded by the door and ammo close by as long as you live on a farm... (goddamn coyotes will come right up and eat your cats)

If you dont want the RCMP takeing your gun then dont ever admit to owning a gun and keep them out of sight unless you are using them. The PAL gives them a good list of houses to check on extra hard during an emergency so keep that shiat well documented in your personal files. Dont ever register a gun.

Registering that you have a gun is pretty much giving the cops free reign to walk into your house without permission or notice.

I have had a few run ins with the Yar see em pee and most of them were pretty friggin nice guys. A few were kind of prickish and one was downright nasty and suffering from small man syndrome but lots of good fellows on the force too. Most of them want to be heros not douche bags. The rule for dealing with cops is be polite and dont give them cause to bust your ass. They dont want to spend all night writing reports and paperwork and you dont want to go to jail. Make it easy for them to tell you to move along or go home. If they open your door to check if any one is home during an evacuation and you have an improperly stored gun just sitting in plain sight then yeah your gonna have a bad time. You are making it easy for them to screw you. Keep your shiat out of sight.
 
2013-06-28 09:36:38 PM

mtbhucker: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down, and the RCMP have been throwing little fits ever since.  This would qualify as a big fit.


Lets rephrase then, this is what happens when you vote liberals in to office
 
2013-06-28 09:41:53 PM

Voiceofreason01: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

If they had their guns locked in a safe then the mounties wouldn't have been able to take them would they?


You don't see a problem with me having to lock my shiat in a safe in my own ducking house in order to stop the police from stealing it? You dumb twat
 
2013-06-28 09:43:34 PM
Why exactly am I responsible for "safely and securely" storing my guns (whatever that means) if I don't have children around?
 
2013-06-28 09:45:17 PM

Ivo Shandor: mtbhucker: Except there is no gun registration in Canada.

The guns may not be registered, but there's still a list of every person who has a license to own them.




Depends how old you are. Tons of people own guns who passed the test in the 60s and all you needed was a piece of paper. Most of those records are gone. Also in our family there are many guns handed down for generations - no one had a permit, it was just great grandmother's gun she brought over from wherever. Lots of guns from the war as well.
 
2013-06-28 09:49:38 PM

Gdalescrboz: mtbhucker: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down, and the RCMP have been throwing little fits ever since.  This would qualify as a big fit.

Lets rephrase then, this is what happens when you vote liberals in to office


Liberals like Harper?  Or Redford?
 
2013-06-28 09:50:18 PM

Acharne: thoughtless: Acharne: I dislike Harper, but I appreciate that he stepped in and told them to give the guns back. This, in my minority opinion in my circle of friends, was uncool of the RCMP to do.

Also, there is a little much posting from people who don't understand our gun laws.

Did Harper actually get involved? The article is scarce on this detail.

Yes he did. Here is a different article:

"Give them back their guns"


Hopefully they will be returned immediately with minimal paperwork required. However, the article contradicted itself:

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

vs

At a press conference Friday in High River held by provincial and municipal officials, RCMP Insp. Gerrett Woolsey told reporters several hundred guns had been seized as officers inspected every home they could enter over a period of several days.

Yea, I'm not holding my breath for the right thing to be done.
 
2013-06-28 09:50:41 PM

Flakeloaf: THEY DID NOT GO TO HOUSES LOOKING FOR GUNS.
THEY DID NOT USE THE GUN REGISTRY TO LOOK FOR HOUSES WITH GUNS TO GO TO.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-albert a. html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.
"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."

Chicken, keep farking etc.


So now my home is considered a non secure place? are my kids next since they apparently dont live in a secure place? I guess when police are free to busy in all willy nilly and claim shiat isn't secure and take it, and blow jobs like you think it's ok, then ya, I guess my home is no longer secure
 
2013-06-28 09:52:36 PM

sno man: Gdalescrboz: mtbhucker: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

Except there is no gun registration in Canada.  The bill got struck down, and the RCMP have been throwing little fits ever since.  This would qualify as a big fit.

Lets rephrase then, this is what happens when you vote liberals in to office

Liberals like Harper?  Or Redford?


They are Canadian aren't they?
 
2013-06-28 10:04:00 PM

Bravo Two: foo monkey: Canadians have guns?

From a Vancouver, BC gun store's website:

[www.reliablegun.com image 623x276]

You'll notice they even have *Gasp* assault rifles in Canada!


The assault weapons are for taking out the moose.
 
2013-06-28 10:11:26 PM

Flakeloaf: THEY DID NOT GO TO HOUSES LOOKING FOR GUNS.
THEY DID NOT USE THE GUN REGISTRY TO LOOK FOR HOUSES WITH GUNS TO GO TO.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-albert a. html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.
"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."

Chicken, keep farking etc.

Continuing on....

At a press conference Friday in High River held by provincial and municipal officials, RCMP Insp. Gerrett Woolsey told reporters several hundred guns had been seized as officers inspected every home they could enter over a period of several days.
 
2013-06-28 10:16:31 PM

thoughtless: JK47: FormlessOne: Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


Read the article you farking moron.  You need to present them with proof of ownership which is most likely in the same condition as the other personal items in the home (e.g. destroyed).

It's almost like they took note of the house they found it in when they did their inventory. Might be a little easier to prove you own/were renting one of those.


You know that won't be sufficient. Living in a home is not proof that you own something in that home.
 
2013-06-28 10:20:06 PM

ongbok: Bravo Two: PopularFront: Some clarification on what the police say they were doing:

From: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-alberta . html

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

"In those situations, when they were out in plain view and they were not properly secured and stored, those firearms were taken by the RCMP member and safely secured in the High River detachment."

And this is the crux of the argument: the firearms were in my home until the cops came busting down the door for no good farking reason.

They had a good reason to come into your home if your were in the evacuation zone, and that was to see if there were any victims from the flood or people in need of help.


Just like the TSA has a good reason to xray scan you and accidentally find drugs. it is about safety.
 
2013-06-28 10:28:06 PM
They'll be able to justify it when they say X number nondescript gun crimes solved.
 
2013-06-28 10:31:21 PM

Gdalescrboz: You don't see a problem with me having to lock my shiat in a safe in my own ducking house in order to stop the police from stealing it? You dumb twat


The law says the gun needs to be locked in a gun safe or have a trigger lock or be otherwise disabled. Lame yes but trigger locks are what -- 10 bucks at crapntire?

And you dont need a permit to move your guns if they aren't restricted. They just have to travel with a lock on and stay out of view. You do NOT need a permit to move your rifle. You could have a sawed off (barrel as long as the stock) under your truck seat as long as it was unloaded and locked out.
 
2013-06-28 10:33:38 PM

sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.


Actually, yes, yes this. Very much this.
Founding fathers would not even recognize the laws we have now. Canada? They even have founding fathers, or just a bunch of drunk trappers?
 
2013-06-28 10:44:02 PM
The guns will be returned to owners after residents are allowed back in town and they provide proof of ownership, Topham added.


see they're just making sure actual looters didn't get their hands on them. they're keeping them safe from thieves.
 
2013-06-28 10:46:21 PM

big pig peaches: Who the heck evaluates and doesn't bring their guns? How little time did they have?




Gun-free shelter?
 
2013-06-28 10:54:53 PM
Thunderpipes:Founding fathers would not even recognize the laws we have now. Canada? They even have founding fathers, or just a bunch of drunk trappers?

They might have a hard time with your flat screen and cell phone too.  Times change.
Raise one for the Drunk Trappers this Canada Day weekend!
 
2013-06-28 10:56:05 PM
None of my guns are registered. Problem solved.
 
2013-06-28 11:03:18 PM
Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.

leadmetal:
Most likely a lot more than the guns will be found missing.

Wow, it's easy to argue about imaginary scenarios you have made up in your own head.  "More than likely" your mother is currently under my desk gargling my schwanzstucker.  Yet I can't feel it, I wonder why?
 
2013-06-28 11:06:26 PM

swfan: Silly Canadians. When told to evacuate, your guns are at the top of the list of things you grab, right behind your family, pets, mementos, and medicines.  If I have 5 minutes to evacuate, most of the guns stay.  If I have 30 minutes or more, the guns are coming with me.


I'd take my guns, and go take the stuff that some dum dum spent 15 minutes grabbing all the food and water he could.   then I have my guns, AND food.
 
2013-06-28 11:06:58 PM

LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?


No mention of looters in the article. To whit, let me pull all your teeth to prevent you from getting cavities.
 
2013-06-28 11:12:29 PM

YoOjo: Why are they not allowing them to go to their houses? Are there water-zombies in the area? Water-aliens? Water-SARS? What's the conspiracy? There must be one.


I think they dont want 500 people going back into town and the hardware store is not open and thus, people might break in.
I would think they could just post one patrol, though, to prevent that.
 
2013-06-28 11:16:35 PM

SwiftFox: Oh, yes, we had to smash your locked gun cabinets to get them, as you'll find out when you return to your houses, all of which we had to break into whether you had guns or not, to find out.


I imagine they just knowcked loudly on normal doors.. but gun owner houses, they busted in, just to make sure you didnt leave a gun on the toilet or sink or something for some toddler to find... in your locked house.
 
2013-06-28 11:34:00 PM

No Such Agency: Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.


The law is irrelevent if people disagree with it.

No Such Agency: "More than likely" your mother is currently under my desk gargling my schwanzstucker.  Yet I can't feel it, I wonder why?


They don't call you "Tiny Tim" for nothing.
 
Ral
2013-06-28 11:45:14 PM

ModernLuddite: I can't help but think that if the guns were properly stored and locked up, people couldn't just take them.


Indeed.  If the police (or anyone) came into our house, they wouldn't be able to get our guns, because we properly store them in a safe that weighs close to a ton and is bolted to the foundation.
 
2013-06-28 11:45:20 PM
Bravo Two

foo monkey: Canadians have guns? From a Vancouver, BC gun store's website:

www.reliablegun.com

You'll notice they even have *Gasp* assault rifles in Canada!


Niiiiiice.

/Still looking for a phased plasma rifle in the forty watt range.
 
2013-06-28 11:47:38 PM
So it's been said a few times here, but for those who haven't actually read the article or paid any attention to the news of flooding in Alberta.

A) CANADA

B) There is a sate of emergency and people have been evacuated from the area for over 8 days due to flooding.

C) RCMP are going door to door in the evacuated areas looking for bodies. (And sadly they have found a few.) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.

D) In a few homes, unsecured firearms were found. The RCMP are required by law to take custody of the firearms until they can be secured by their owners. Just the same as if the gun was found in the street. People have been out of their homes for 8 days now and no one knows when people will be allowed back into the area. If the door is unlocked or the police had to break the lock to get in, guns on a rack or over the mantle are unsecured.

E) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.

F) The National Post's view is that all guns are bad, and any number greater than zero is a "substantial' number of firearms". So if you actually read what little they wrote, sort of think of them as the Canadian equivalent of USA Today.

G) Even in Canada there is crime including looting.

H) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.
 
2013-06-28 11:50:34 PM

Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...


Don't bring level headed thought and logic into this. We've gone to Derp Speed Plaid, and nothing can stop us now!
 
2013-06-28 11:54:34 PM
Man On Pink Corner:

Give me a gallon of gasoline and a couple of bike locks, and I'll give you 20 and then some.

I've got marshmellows and graham crackers
 
2013-06-29 12:01:03 AM

redkingca: D) In a few homes, unsecured firearms were found.


"But as they're talking about those plans, newshounds pose puzzlers about the RCMP seizing at least several hundred guns out of people's homes after they'd been evacuated. "
 
2013-06-29 12:03:02 AM

LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?


I would think that if law enforcement has enough resources to go house by house, break in forcibly, search the house, and remove the owners' guns that they have enough resources to prevent almost all looting.
 
2013-06-29 12:10:18 AM

al's hat: LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?

I would think that if law enforcement has enough resources to go house by house, break in forcibly, search the house, and remove the owners' guns that they have enough resources to prevent almost all looting.


You're absolutely joking, right?

House to house searches are conducted to ensure no threats to life remain. They're not done to protect property.
 
2013-06-29 12:11:13 AM
TheWizard:
You know that won't be sufficient. Living in a home is not proof that you own something in that home.

Maybe the mounties respond to growing political pressure and the unusual disaster situation and decide not to be dicks about it? I'm reaching I know.
 
2013-06-29 12:12:42 AM
I had never considered until now that a bike lock would work on a person.

That's a great hack.
 
2013-06-29 12:12:50 AM

omeganuepsilon: No Such Agency: Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.

The law is irrelevent if people disagree with it.


Canadian law isn't irrelevent(sic) because American plebs disagree with it. No matter how special your mommy told you you are.
 
2013-06-29 12:22:24 AM

hardinparamedic: Larmer: This is a non-story, at this point.  As soon as the RCMP refuse to return the firearms, then there's an issue.

They were legally authorized to enter private homes during the state of emergency, and from the sounds of it, only took firearms that were unsafely stored (ie in the open, no trigger lock).  That is the smart and responsible thing to do, and if anything we should be ticked off at the idiots who don't safely store their guns; they make the rest of us look bad.

/owns lots of guns
//guns, guns, guns
///love me some guns...

Don't bring level headed thought and logic into this. We've gone to Derp Speed Plaid, and nothing can stop us now!


I don't think a looter would pass on a gun just because it had a trigger lock on it.
 
2013-06-29 12:38:45 AM

neongoats: omeganuepsilon: No Such Agency: Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.

The law is irrelevent if people disagree with it.

Canadian law isn't irrelevent(sic) because American plebs disagree with it. No matter how special your mommy told you you are.


I misphrased, pardon my not breaking it down to a gradeschool level of reading so you would only be mildly challenged.

If the people are arguing for a specific right(ie in this case, privacy/search&seizure/bare arms[or more generally understandable rights, such as anti-discrimination laws), whether or not Canada allows for them is irrelevant, because people are saying they should allow for those rights.

I want equal rights for women, for example, no matter what country they are in or what the local laws are.  They way most get treated in some middle-eastern countries is reprehensible.

The local laws are irrelevant as to our desire for certain places to grow the fark up and attempt to be civilized and fair.
 
2013-06-29 12:44:31 AM

omeganuepsilon: neongoats: omeganuepsilon: No Such Agency: Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.

The law is irrelevent if people disagree with it.

Canadian law isn't irrelevent(sic) because American plebs disagree with it. No matter how special your mommy told you you are.

I misphrased, pardon my not breaking it down to a gradeschool level of reading so you would only be mildly challenged.

If the people are arguing for a specific right(ie in this case, privacy/search&seizure/bare arms[or more generally understandable rights, such as anti-discrimination laws), whether or not Canada allows for them is irrelevant, because people are saying they should allow for those rights.

I want equal rights for women, for example, no matter what country they are in or what the local laws are.  They way most get treated in some middle-eastern countries is reprehensible.

The local laws are irrelevant as to our desire for certain places to grow the fark up and attempt to be civilized and fair.


Well unfortunately this isn't some tea party fantasy scenario where the cops are smashing and grabbing all the guns to keep the populace in line, blatantly running over civil rights, etc. I realize that the farkderps are portraying it that way though.
 
2013-06-29 12:47:06 AM

omeganuepsilon: ie in this case, privacy/search&seizure/bare arms[or more generally understandable rights, such as anti-discrimination laws),


Neither of which happened here.
 
2013-06-29 12:51:06 AM

hardinparamedic: al's hat: LordJiro: So instead, these people would prefer their firearms be in the hands of looters?

I would think that if law enforcement has enough resources to go house by house, break in forcibly, search the house, and remove the owners' guns that they have enough resources to prevent almost all looting.

You're absolutely joking, right?

House to house searches are conducted to ensure no threats to life remain. They're not done to protect property.


That wasn't the case here.  They didn't break into houses looking for people who might be trapped or need assistance.  They broke into empty houses to remove the guns.
 
2013-06-29 12:56:07 AM

al's hat: That wasn't the case here.  They didn't break into houses looking for people who might be trapped or need assistance.  They broke into empty houses to remove the guns.


No. No, actually, that's NOT the reason they did it. They were doing house to house searches for bodies and fatalities/trapped individuals.
 
2013-06-29 12:58:29 AM

hardinparamedic: omeganuepsilon: ie in this case, privacy/search&seizure/bare arms[or more generally understandable rights, such as anti-discrimination laws),

Neither of which happened here.


Matter of opinion based on conflicting fact and bad internet articles.

There is search&seizure.

A couple guns?  No big deal.   Not represented as a search, found by happenstance, and a judgement call was made.

But didn't a different officer state significantly more than that?  That would hint at a specified search with a ready intent.
 
2013-06-29 01:34:58 AM

FormlessOne: Maul555: Wow... WTF Canada, WTF...

Huh? "Oh noes! The cops entered my flooded house, took my improperly secured weapon, noted the address from whence it came, and will hold it for me, high and dry, until I come back and ask for it! IT'S MADNESS! MADNESS!"

Sheesh. The article clearly states that the RCMP inventoried them, secured them, and will be happy to give them back once citizens can return to their homes. Bloody 'ell, what is wrong with you folks?


You might have read about cops in New Orleans who did the same thing during Katrina and how some of those people still don't have their guns back.

If the RCMP is really not up to no good, the will immediately hand over the guns to their owners when they show up to claim them.
 
2013-06-29 01:45:58 AM

omeganuepsilon: Matter of opinion based on conflicting fact and bad internet articles.

There is search&seizure.

A couple guns?  No big deal.   Not represented as a search, found by happenstance, and a judgement call was made.

But didn't a different officer state significantly more than that?  That would hint at a specified search with a ready intent.


Just admit that it's based on your opinion, and your opinion alone that you assert that. If you're willing to do that, then I'm completely good with you saying that. However, the actual reason they were going door to door, as I linked above, was to search for people trapped and bodies in the houses - when they found firearms unsecured in houses they had a duty, under the Canadian law, to secure those firearms until the owners came to claim them. Otherwise, the Canadian authorities would have been liable for anything that happened from that point, and the news would be asking instead 'HOW DID THEY LET THIS HAPPEN!"

PaLarkin: You might have read about cops in New Orleans who did the same thing during Katrina and how some of those people still don't have their guns back.


So how many of those firearms were found abandoned in areas where there was active looting going on, and how many of those firearms haven't been given back to people who have presented evidence that they are the rightful owners?
 
2013-06-29 01:49:02 AM
"The longer that the water stays in our houses the worse it's going to be. We'll either be bulldozing them or burning them down because we've got an incompetent government."

The incompetent ones here are those people that live on a FARKING FLOOD PLAIN.   Just because the river hasn't flooded in your short lifetime doesn't mean it never will.  Idiots.
 
2013-06-29 01:51:51 AM

hardinparamedic: omeganuepsilon: Matter of opinion based on conflicting fact and bad internet articles.

There is search&seizure.

A couple guns?  No big deal.   Not represented as a search, found by happenstance, and a judgement call was made.

But didn't a different officer state significantly more than that?  That would hint at a specified search with a ready intent.

Just admit that it's based on your opinion, and your opinion alone that you assert that. If you're willing to do that, then I'm completely good with you saying that.


Wut?

No, there are multiple possibilities here, since we are lacking facts and have conflicting information.  Depending on what the facts actually are, either could be argued legitimately.

hardinparamedic: However, the actual reason they were going door to door, as I linked above


Because government/law enforcement never lies.

Bonjour.

PaLarkin: You might have read about cops in New Orleans who did the same thing during Katrina and how some of those people still don't have their guns back.

If the RCMP is really not up to no good, the will immediately hand over the guns to their owners when they show up to claim them.


This.  This is why people need to speak up about things.  It is the citizens' duty to keep his government and other authorities in check.
 
2013-06-29 01:56:20 AM

omeganuepsilon: Because government/law enforcement never lies.

Bonjour.


Because the only other rational response is that everything is a conspiracy with nefarious intent. It's either ONE or the OTHER. No middle ground possible.

omeganuepsilon: No, there are multiple possibilities here, since we are lacking facts and have conflicting information.  Depending on what the facts actually are, either could be argued legitimately.


I'm not playing the "well, if this is true then that, but what if" game, OU. I'm doubting the validity or veracity of something that is being repeated verbatim of rags like Free Republic and Breitbart.
 
2013-06-29 02:01:35 AM

sno man: Thunderpipes:Founding fathers would not even recognize the laws we have now. Canada? They even have founding fathers, or just a bunch of drunk trappers?

They might have a hard time with your flat screen and cell phone too.  Times change.
Raise one for the Drunk Trappers this Canada Day weekend!


I thought you all already raised one last Monday.
 
2013-06-29 02:13:32 AM

hardinparamedic: omeganuepsilon: No, there are multiple possibilities here, since we are lacking facts and have conflicting information.  Depending on what the facts actually are, either could be argued legitimately.

I'm not playing the "well, if this is true then that, but what if" game, OU. I'm doubting the validity or veracity of something that is being repeated verbatim of rags like Free Republic and Breitbart.


How about CBC.CA?
They were both on the same page that was linked several times above, and not a login-only MSN website. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/28/pol-pmo-guns-albert a. html
At a press conference Friday in High River held by provincial and municipal officials, RCMP Insp. Gerrett Woolsey told reporters several hundred guns had been seized as officers inspected every home they could enter over a period of several days.

"When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.


As I implied above, someone is lying, or the internet, indeed, the CBC is misquoting/wrong.
 
2013-06-29 02:14:37 AM
hardinparamedic:

So how many of those firearms were found abandoned in areas where there was active looting going on, and how many of those firearms haven't been given back to people who have presented evidence that they are the rightful owners?

I don't know how many people in New Orleans went to the cops and claimed they owned guns they didn't.  Maybe the RCMP wanted to keep guns away from criminals.  Maybe they didn't.  If the RCMP's only goal is to secure the guns so criminals didn't get to steal them; the only way to prove this is by giving them back to their owners as soon as they show up to collect them.    If the RCMP doesn't hand the guns over to their owners immediately, they will show that they only wanted an excuse to steal peoples' guns.
 
2013-06-29 02:18:15 AM

Bravo Two: super_grass: give me doughnuts: super_grass: Ricardo Klement: jaytkay: LOL Gun "rights" advocates are calm, rational people LOL


"AH NEED MAH GUNZ TO FIGHT THE FLOODWATERSS!!!11!"

I'm sure you'd be calm and rational if the cops came and took your Beanie Baby collection.

Yes, but you can't kill 20 kids with beanie babies.


It depends on how hard you throw them.

I suppose that could be true if they contained lead, but you can say the exact same thing about guns.

I dunno about the mythical chicken being farked by republicans, but those poor kids sure have been drug up, stacked up, and stood upon enough times that they have shoe prints in their corpses.

Any way we can convince you to let those kids rest in peace and make a clear, cogent argument that doesn't involve whoring out the emotional pain of their deaths? Or is using every one of them as emotional ammunition all you have left?



The heart of the argument for gun control is that the pain and loss caused by gun violence warrant it.  But I can't point to examples because, in addition to being a powerful argument, I'd be a 'whore'. What are you, six?

You are desperate to get people to stop talking about the consequences of largely unregulated availability of guns, because any counter-argument is inadequate. And you know it.  You should be desperate.
 
2013-06-29 03:10:09 AM
Wow, the derp really came out in force...

So for the people who think this is some RCMP conspiracy, let me just get this straight: In the middle of a gigantic unprecedented flood, with tens if not hundreds of thousands of evacuees, and the chaotic logistics nightmare that goes with it, the RCMP thought it would be a great time to use the long gun registry, which no longer exists, to go out and haphazardly confiscate yer gunz, admit to it, and then tell people through CBC and other national new sources where they`re being stored and how they can pick them up.

Just wanted to get that cleared up, thanks.

BTW, it`s you idiots that are going to ruin it for the rest of us law abiding gun owners with an ounce of common sense.  Keep it up and your counterparts on the opposite end of the spectrum are going to convice enough people that we really do need to ban semi-autos, just look at all the crazy gun nuts out there!
 
2013-06-29 03:22:57 AM

omeganuepsilon: At a press conference Friday in High River held by provincial and municipal officials, RCMP Insp. Gerrett Woolsey told reporters several hundred guns had been seized as officers inspected every home they could enter over a period of several days.


Unless you have reports of people kicking in doors and windows to get those guns, your quote is not as much proof of your point as proof they were following their standard policy. The officers  WERE NOT INSPECTING FOR GUNS TO TAKE, they were inspecting for trapped people or dead bodies as a result of the flooding. The same thing FEMA USAR teams would do during a major disaster. It is not that hard to think to secure a firearm before leaving for an evacuation. You know the shelters are not going to let you in there with one anyway. (Red Cross and FEMA policy strictly prohibits firearms in shelters)

omeganuepsilon: When RCMP officers were going door-to-door searching each residence for potential victims, we did come across a couple of residences where there were some firearms that were left insecure," Cpl. Darrin Turnbull told CBC News in an interview.

As I implied above, someone is lying, or the internet, indeed, the CBC is misquoting/wrong.


So basically, they said the same thing, then? The population of High River's incorporated area, alone is 13,000 people. This isn't a little village they walked into and beat every door down to take your boomsticks.
 
2013-06-29 03:28:46 AM

Man On Pink Corner: Why exactly am I responsible for "safely and securely" storing my guns (whatever that means) if I don't have children around?


Because it's Canada and if you don't you can lose your gun license. Good enough reason asshat?
 
2013-06-29 03:32:04 AM

hardinparamedic: your quote is not as much proof of your point


omeganuepsilon: Matter of opinion based on conflicting fact and bad internet articles.


omeganuepsilon: No, there are multiple possibilities here, since we are lacking facts and have conflicting information.  Depending on what the facts actually are, either could be argued legitimately.


omeganuepsilon: As I implied above, someone is lying, or the internet, indeed, the CBC is misquoting/wrong.


Get stuffed.
 
2013-06-29 03:37:30 AM

Hiro-ACiD: Because it's Canada and if you don't you can lose your gun license. Good enough reason asshat?


No.
 
2013-06-29 03:50:38 AM

Man On Pink Corner: Hiro-ACiD: Because it's Canada and if you don't you can lose your gun license. Good enough reason asshat?

No.


I am as pro-gun as it gets, and even I believe that its irresponsible and should even be criminal to; 1) not leave firearms at least minimally secured when they are stored and you are not in control of them, and 2) to refuse to report firearms when they are stolen.

If you want to be a gun owner, fine. Just don't be an idiot one.  Doesn't clear you to be a jackass and supply criminals with a clean supply of guns.
That's just basic responsibilty - not some horrible oppressive burden, not any restriction on your right to bear arms.
 
2013-06-29 03:55:36 AM
Question: is there anyone in this thread who didn't grow up in the middle of New York City?
 
2013-06-29 04:05:33 AM
So when they are finally allowed back to their rotting and moldering homes, they're going to have to deal with their doors having been kicked-in by the mounties as well?  Did the jack-booted thugs bother to secure the homes behind them after they looted all the guns, or did they just leave the doors flapping in the breeze?
 
2013-06-29 04:15:47 AM

omeganuepsilon: Get stuffed.


Uh, really? No.  Really?

You quoted two people saying the exact same thing in different contexts, then accused them of lying and/or being misrepresented because right wing rags decided to make this an issue of gun registration and confiscation, and misrepresent what happened? Again. Your original assertion was that this was a search and seizure, not a rescue/recovery operation, and that those guns were taken - not from plain sight and in the open - but that the homes were searched specifically for this.


Max Awesome: So when they are finally allowed back to their rotting and moldering homes, they're going to have to deal with their doors having been kicked-in by the mounties as well?  Did the jack-booted thugs bother to secure the homes behind them after they looted all the guns, or did they just leave the doors flapping in the breeze?


I can't speak for the Cannokistanis, but I know USAR teams will tape the doors shut if they will not latch/lock, and put crime tape around the entrances after they complete the search. Looters are not very smart, most of the time. They'll take the most direct way in - the front door.

rooboyspatches.com
 
2013-06-29 04:16:37 AM

neongoats: Well unfortunately this isn't some tea party fantasy scenario where the cops are smashing and grabbing all the guns to keep the populace in line, blatantly running over civil rights, etc.


you mean like the fantasy of New Orleans?
 
2013-06-29 05:06:05 AM

Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.


It's why I joined the NRA, even though they are a bunch of raving nutbags and I don't own a gun. Sometimes the loonies are right.

It's important that law makers and law enforcers fear the people they represent enough to respect them.
 
2013-06-29 05:12:28 AM
Communism is on the rise in Canada.  Every time I open my door and allow customers in my noodle shop, a raging debate about wages erupts into everyone slinging my noodles and I cannot charge one person more than another for excess damages.  How ridiculous.
 
2013-06-29 06:02:03 AM
omeganuepsilon:
No Such Agency: Oh look, Americans are still here posting as if they have any understanding of Canadian law.

The law is irrelevent if people disagree with it.


That doesn't even make sense.  We don't have a right to bear arms up here, but people constantly go on as if we do and the authorities should act accordingly.  The Mounties acted in accordance with Canadian law and customs here, they did nothing wrong.

No Such Agency: "More than likely" your mother is currently under my desk gargling my schwanzstucker.  Yet I can't feel it, I wonder why?

They don't call you "Tiny Tim" for nothing.


Aww, and I thought it was because of my sick ukelele playing.  But I'm right, you were making up things that didn't happen and using that as an argument.
 
2013-06-29 08:56:33 AM

Gdalescrboz:
So now my home is considered a non secure place? are my kids next since they apparently dont live in a secure place? I guess when police are free to busy in all willy nilly and claim shiat isn't secure and take it, and blow jobs like you think it's ok, then ya, I guess my home is no longer secure

"Secure" means "locked", you paranoid whackjob.

mikefinch: The police are absolutely allowed to enter your house during an emergency. Any emergency worker can expecially if a forced evacuation is going on. They can arrest your ass just for staying. I'mean -- they dont want to but they do have the ability...

Guns -- even if legally owned -- must be stored properly. They should have the pin taken out or a trigger/bag lock on and be seperate from the ammo. Not a crazy or hard to comply with rule.

Now haveng grown up in the Peace River area i know how most people store their guns... And while most are pretty good about it there are always a few families that leave the rifle on the top shelf of the entryway closet with a box of ammo. Or in the garage with no locks on anything. Its not necessarily dangerous but it gives the cops an excuse to take your shiat.


THIS.
 
2013-06-29 09:12:46 AM
This is how you cook a live frog. You turn the heat up slowly. News like this only encourages revenge.
 
2013-06-29 09:18:55 AM
WHAT , government using any  disaster to be a bunch of gun grabbers , I am calling fake on this one!!!
 
2013-06-29 09:23:23 AM
Also, people here are forgetting that Canada has a surprising amount of gun collectors; if the RCMP inspected a house of a gun collector in High River, it's not out of the realm of possibility that they could come out with 20-30 guns that were out on display. You get 5 houses like that (and this being Canada's Texas, 5 houses with 20+ guns is not out of the question) and suddenly you're up into the Hundreds from just a "few houses".

mikefinch: Now haveng grown up in the Peace River area i know how most people store their guns... And while most are pretty good about it there are always a few families that leave the rifle on the top shelf of the entryway closet with a box of ammo. Or in the garage with no locks on anything. Its not necessarily dangerous but it gives the cops an excuse to take your shiat.


I've got family out in the High River area (and other parts of Alberta); every time I hear of a kid shooting another kid in a gun related accident, I have a quick burst of fear that I'm going to have to figure out how to pay for going to the funeral of a second or third cousin.
 
2013-06-29 09:41:59 AM

Kirk's_Toupee: This is how you cook a live frog. You turn the heat up slowly. News like this only encourages revenge.


Yeah, if the government keeps oppressing us like this there might be a day when every ordinary citizen isn't allowed to have four loaded guns on the floor of his doublewide.
 
2013-06-29 09:46:54 AM
In today's edition of "who said this, a criminal or a cop?" We have:
"People have a significant amount of money invested in firearms ... so we put them in a place that we control".

/most folks would call that theft.
/did they go around jacking cars and emptying silverware drawers too?
 
2013-06-29 10:22:06 AM

al's hat: That wasn't the case here. They didn't break into houses looking for people who might be trapped or need assistance. They broke into empty houses to remove the guns.


I don't think you understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped:  they can't tell if the house is empty until they go in to check.

It's not like a dead body is going to answer the door, or be searchable on Google Maps.
 
2013-06-29 10:43:05 AM

hardinparamedic: You quoted two people saying the exact same thing


You're not very bright are you?  No wonder you had to go into health care.
/only being as relevant and honest as you

No Such Agency: That doesn't even make sense.  We don't have a right to bear arms up here, but people constantly go on as if we do and the authorities should act accordingly.


Try reading further down the line.  I clarified the sentiment.
 
2013-06-29 10:45:56 AM
Foolish canooks, they should have taken their guns with them.  I guarantee this will happen here in the good ole US of A next opportunity our government gets.
 
2013-06-29 11:26:13 AM

Xcott: al's hat: That wasn't the case here. They didn't break into houses looking for people who might be trapped or need assistance. They broke into empty houses to remove the guns.

I don't think you understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped:  they can't tell if the house is empty until they go in to check.

It's not like a dead body is going to answer the door, or be searchable on Google Maps.


I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped.  I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.
 
2013-06-29 11:54:27 AM

omeganuepsilon: You're not very bright are you?  No wonder you had to go into health care.
/only being as relevant and honest as you


Well, if you have nothing factual to argue, you can always be the first to make personal insults.

Bravo.
 
2013-06-29 12:06:05 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Question: is there anyone in this thread who didn't grow up in the middle of New York City?


Yeah,  I live less than an hour away from the town in question.  If you own a gun, you have a responsibility to store it properly.  I own guns, and I store them in a safe.  If that is too complicated for you, you shouldn't have guns.  Idiots should not have guns.
 
2013-06-29 12:13:58 PM

hardinparamedic: omeganuepsilon: You're not very bright are you?  No wonder you had to go into health care.
/only being as relevant and honest as you

Well, if you have nothing factual to argue, you can always be the first to make personal insults.

Bravo.


Calling that an insult implies intent to hurt.  Voicing a simple suspicion of a deficiency of intellect is an entirely different thing.

Pussy foot around it as you did, it's still no worse than the backhanded comments you've made to me and others in this, and a wide variety of other threads.

Glass houses and such.
 
2013-06-29 12:19:56 PM

omeganuepsilon: Pussy foot around it as you did, it's still no worse than the backhanded comments you've made to me and others in this, and a wide variety of other threads.

Glass houses and such.


Backhanded comments? I pointed out you were grasping at straws by trying to say two comments, which mean the relatively same thing, are completely different and mean that one person is lying OR the media is misrepresenting it (Implying only two options here). I'm also hesitant to believe ANY story that comes out about guns and government in this day and age, because writers pander to the whargarbling shiatheads who hide in their basement while stockpiling some obscure caliber they think Obummer's gonna come steal from them.

I also pointed out that, according to Canadian Law pointed out by actual Canadian FARKers, had they left firearms in unsecured houses, in plain sight, they would have been responsible for what happened with them afterwords. They were duty bound to secure the firearms until the rightful owners claimed them. Until they start destroying/auctioning them off, and refusing to hand back firearms who's owners have the rightful documentation, this is a non-story. The only reason it even made international news is because the Chicken Littles are looking for something to cry about so they can tell us the sky is falling, and we're ONE STEP AWAY from Nazi Germany.

omeganuepsilon: Voicing a simple suspicion of a deficiency of intellect is an entirely different thing.


Again. If you have nothing else to argue from.
 
2013-06-29 12:54:53 PM

hardinparamedic: Backhanded comments? I pointed out you were grasping at straws


That's no different than saying "lying" or "stupid", except it uses more words.  You're attempting to tapdance around proprieties so that you can say, "wow, you insulted me, good jorb", a failed attempt at plausible deniability.

Petty and boorish is petty and boorish.

hardinparamedic: (Implying only two options here)


No.  Implying there are more possibilities than your narrow and absolute perspective.
 
2013-06-29 12:58:14 PM
I'm pretty sure any emergency official (police, fire department, paramedic) has a duty to secure all unsecure weapons that they come across.   The police just happens to be the arm of the government which is responsible for taking custody of those unsecured weapons.

I also believe those chuckleheads who left unsecure firearms in their homes should be charged with keeping an unsecure firearm.
 
2013-06-29 01:28:05 PM

al's hat: I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped. I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.


Perhaps, then, you don't understand the law.  The law says that they have to secure a firearm if it's unsecured.

If they were looking for bodies in a field and found a gun there, they'd have to do the same thing.
 
2013-06-29 01:48:53 PM

Xcott: al's hat: I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped. I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.

Perhaps, then, you don't understand the law.  The law says that they have to secure a firearm if it's unsecured.

If they were looking for bodies in a field and found a gun there, they'd have to do the same thing.


I wonder how many of the unsecured guns were in closets and under beds in a locked (until the police broke down the door) house.  I wouldn't call those guns unsecured until the door was broken down.
 
2013-06-29 03:51:54 PM

al's hat: Xcott: al's hat: That wasn't the case here. They didn't break into houses looking for people who might be trapped or need assistance. They broke into empty houses to remove the guns.

I don't think you understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped:  they can't tell if the house is empty until they go in to check.

It's not like a dead body is going to answer the door, or be searchable on Google Maps.

I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped.  I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.


The idea of an empty, now-unlocked-because-someone-smashed-the-door-in house with insecure guns inside is hard to grasp?  If the RCMP leave insecure guns in a house with a door that won't lock, they are committing a crime. They have to secure the weapons. They do not have an option here.
 
2013-06-29 03:55:13 PM
al's hat:

I wonder how many of the unsecured guns were in closets and under beds in a locked (until the police broke down the door) house.  I wouldn't call those guns unsecured until the door was broken down.

You're new to the Firearms Act, aren't you?And before you come back ready to quote 5(b)(iii), the "room" in that section contemplates a weapons vault, not a bedroom with gyproc walls and a tin chain.
 
2013-06-29 04:38:08 PM

redkingca: So it's been said a few times here, but for those who haven't actually read the article or paid any attention to the news of flooding in Alberta.

A) CANADA

B) There is a sate of emergency and people have been evacuated from the area for over 8 days due to flooding.


Then there's no one left to loot.

C) RCMP are going door to door in the evacuated areas looking for bodies. (And sadly they have found a few.) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.

"ACCORDING TO THE RMCP..."

D) In a few homes, unsecured firearms were found. The RCMP are required by law to take custody of the firearms until they can be secured by their owners.

They WERE secure- they were in the owners house, which was (presumably) locked.

If the door is unlocked

Then the should have reached in, locked it, and closed it again. Voila- secured!

or the police had to break the lock to get in, guns on a rack or over the mantle are unsecured.

If the police burned open their gun safe- the guns in it were unsecured. See how dumb that sounds?

E) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.

"ACCORDING TO THE RMCP..."

G) Even in Canada there is crime including looting.

Then maybe the RMCP should be on the lookout for looters, instead of breaking into peoples houses and taking stuff. Hey, wait a minute- isn't that the very definition of... looting?

H) The RCMP did not enter homes looking for guns.

"ACCORDING TO THE RMCP..."

You seem to put a lot of trust in the words of the police.
 
2013-06-29 04:46:08 PM

sno man: Noctusxx: And this is what happens when people pass Gun Registration Laws.

Nothing to see here Citizen, If you happen to find your proof of ownership in the flooded wreck of your home you might get your property back.....If we feel the gun is ok for you to own.

No, no it's not, but do keep chocking that chicken.


So, I take it the tag on your shirt says Victim. amirite?

www.gunandgame.com
 
2013-06-29 05:05:12 PM

Flakeloaf: al's hat:

I wonder how many of the unsecured guns were in closets and under beds in a locked (until the police broke down the door) house.  I wouldn't call those guns unsecured until the door was broken down.

You're new to the Firearms Act, aren't you?And before you come back ready to quote 5(b)(iii), the "room" in that section contemplates a weapons vault, not a bedroom with gyproc walls and a tin chain.


Did they take the weapons that had a trigger lock on them?  Because if it is non-restricted, that's all it says you need.
 
Ral
2013-06-29 05:45:33 PM

Xcott: al's hat: I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped. I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.

Perhaps, then, you don't understand the law.  The law says that they have to secure a firearm if it's unsecured.

If they were looking for bodies in a field and found a gun there, they'd have to do the same thing.


The inside of a private home and an open field are very different kinds of spaces, legally speaking as well as literally.
 
2013-06-29 05:46:30 PM

Wise_Guy: Flakeloaf: al's hat:

I wonder how many of the unsecured guns were in closets and under beds in a locked (until the police broke down the door) house.  I wouldn't call those guns unsecured until the door was broken down.

You're new to the Firearms Act, aren't you?And before you come back ready to quote 5(b)(iii), the "room" in that section contemplates a weapons vault, not a bedroom with gyproc walls and a tin chain.

Did they take the weapons that had a trigger lock on them?  Because if it is non-restricted, that's all it says you need.


Dunno, wasn't there. But from the other posters ITT, I'm willing to bet the trigger lock to gun ratio out in that area is quite low. I'm sure we'll hear in the next few days how insecure these weapons really were.
 
2013-06-29 05:47:10 PM

Ral: Xcott: al's hat: I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped. I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.

Perhaps, then, you don't understand the law.  The law says that they have to secure a firearm if it's unsecured.

If they were looking for bodies in a field and found a gun there, they'd have to do the same thing.

The inside of a private home and an open field are very different kinds of spaces, legally speaking as well as literally.


Not when storing a firearm they aren't.
 
2013-06-29 06:59:51 PM

Farktastic: Man On Pink Corner: Question: is there anyone in this thread who didn't grow up in the middle of New York City?

Yeah,  I live less than an hour away from the town in question.  If you own a gun, you have a responsibility to store it properly.  I own guns, and I store them in a safe.  If that is too complicated for you, you shouldn't have guns.  Idiots should not have guns.


What, besides confiscation by police in an emergency, do you see as the chief downside to keeping my rifle on a shelf in the closet?
 
2013-06-29 07:01:46 PM

Flakeloaf: You're new to the Firearms Act, aren't you?And before you come back ready to quote 5(b)(iii), the "room" in that section contemplates a weapons vault, not a bedroom with gyproc walls and a tin chain.


And you don't see anything unreasonable about requiring adults in an adults-only residence to store their firearms in a "weapons vault?"

I'm not necessarily looking for an argument, I'm just trying to understand the attitudes and beliefs of people who think very differently from myself.  I've found that to be a good habit in life.
 
2013-06-29 07:05:33 PM

Clemkadidlefark: .

So, I take it the tag on your shirt says Victim. amirite?



Probably in your sad world.  In my world it says FREE.  Free from the constant state of fear in your world.  I win.
 
2013-06-29 07:49:39 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Farktastic: Man On Pink Corner: Question: is there anyone in this thread who didn't grow up in the middle of New York City?

Yeah,  I live less than an hour away from the town in question.  If you own a gun, you have a responsibility to store it properly.  I own guns, and I store them in a safe.  If that is too complicated for you, you shouldn't have guns.  Idiots should not have guns.

What, besides confiscation by police in an emergency, do you see as the chief downside to keeping my rifle on a shelf in the closet?


Apparently, the people in this thread think that having it available in an emergency is a downside.  Keeping it under lock and key is a "duty" because within the home is not safe "enough".

They have given up on any semblance of the right to bare arms, and think anyone who hasn't is criminal, or soon bound to be.  They've given up on any semblance of privacy or protection from search & seizure, because anyone who would have a problem with that is potentially criminal and ignorant.

They can't even comprehend why people would want those freedoms, they welcome the nanny state, they encourage it, they depend on it like a child depends on the ability to suckle upon the mother.  They call people that want their homes and guns to remain a right, "backwards and paranoid".  That is quite obviously projection, especially the paranoia portion of it.  They fear other humans so much they want the Nanny to be as controlling as possible, even if it means giving up on these values.

What they don't quite grasp, is that the Nanny is comprised of people just like the backwards people they fear.  The actual leaders and people who have that backward view, the people with courage and the will to fight and to defend themselves, the strength to do what these pacifists could/would not.

Placing faith in a power above them, a religion by any other name is still a religion.

Irrational and self-compromising or self-defeating, imo, they've welcomed the very overlords they seek to restrain.

Look at me, I probably even sound like an anti-government whackjob to these ignorant dependant babes.

Truth is, I'm a veteran who has served his country dutifully and supports the military and government, for now.  I, however, do not wear on my sleeve the delusion that our current approximation of fairness is in any way permanent.  I do not seek to control others due to a fear of them, but encourage their liberty because I do not fear them.  When history repeats itself, it is because of people with those fears and prejudice allowed it to happen.

They are the natives that stood by when those in power would do ill to those beneath them.  Yes, that is the inevitable Godwin reference.  Giving it a name does not make it any less applicable.

I can understand the evolutionary drive to shy from conflict.  I mean, I've always moved we're more animal than this idealized man anyhow, and they prove it.  They seek dominance, but not at the risk of any danger or even contempt from the Alpha Nanny.  They are the bootlicking parasites, the Wormtongues, they are the weak links, the scared to pissing himself soldier in the line, yet the loudest in voice when it comes to dictating.

And to think, people call me fascist.
/Disclaimer: The writing is to mock their prosthelytizing condemnations of others. Is not to be taken as a manifesto.
//Farking rights, how do they work?
///and because some asshole will inevitably not get it, I'll repeat what I had to spell out above about rights.
I want all people to have certain rights.  If you are in a place where they're not granted by those in charge, I pity you.  Just like women in the middle east who are stoned or imprisoned for showing skin, or someone who gets beheaded on camera with a dull knife as an example, because he spoke out or was from the wrong nation/religion.
 
2013-06-29 08:23:58 PM

omeganuepsilon: Apparently, the people in this thread think that having it available in an emergency is a downside. Keeping it under lock and key is a "duty" because within the home is not safe "enough".


Maybe where you live you need to keep a loaded weapon handy.  I'm sorry for you.  Maybe you should move.  Where this happened, you do not need to keep a weapon that handy or loaded.  But you are welcome to your freedom.  I'll keep mine.
 
2013-06-29 08:30:50 PM

sno man: omeganuepsilon: Apparently, the people in this thread think that having it available in an emergency is a downside. Keeping it under lock and key is a "duty" because within the home is not safe "enough".

Maybe where you live you need to keep a loaded weapon handy.  I'm sorry for you.  Maybe you should move.  Where this happened, you do not need to keep a weapon that handy or loaded.  But you are welcome to your freedom.  I'll keep mine.


I don't currently need to, but I have the right if I so choose.  Freedom is about retaining choice.  Maybe you should get educated.

If it's such a eutopia, you don't need cops seizing them just because you're away either.

You'll keep your freedom?  You pretend you have it..that's rich.  Your wool, it's getting in front of your eyes.
 
2013-06-29 08:46:16 PM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: omeganuepsilon: Apparently, the people in this thread think that having it available in an emergency is a downside. Keeping it under lock and key is a "duty" because within the home is not safe "enough".

Maybe where you live you need to keep a loaded weapon handy.  I'm sorry for you.  Maybe you should move.  Where this happened, you do not need to keep a weapon that handy or loaded.  But you are welcome to your freedom.  I'll keep mine.

I don't currently need to, but I have the right if I so choose.  Freedom is about retaining choice.  Maybe you should get educated.

If it's such a eutopia, you don't need cops seizing them just because you're away either.

You'll keep your freedom?  You pretend you have it..that's rich.  Your wool, it's getting in front of your eyes.


If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.
And you are right, freedom is about choice.  I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid. Nor pick on your spelling. Good day.
 
2013-06-29 08:58:05 PM

sno man: If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.


Behind cop-proof steel doors?
 
2013-06-29 09:00:55 PM

Alleyoop: sno man: If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.

Behind cop-proof steel doors?


as in a gun safe, yea, pretty much.
 
2013-06-29 09:02:17 PM

sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.


Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..
 
2013-06-29 09:07:42 PM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.

Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..


No it's nothing to do with fear.  It's called responsibility. All those freedoms you are on about actually come with responsibilities. I thought you were smarter than that.
 
2013-06-29 09:37:46 PM

sno man: omeganuepsilon: sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.

Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..

No it's nothing to do with fear.  It's called responsibility. All those freedoms you are on about actually come with responsibilities. I thought you were smarter than that.


The responsibilities that I'm "on about" are the citizen's responsibility to maintain.  The people in any country do have the ability, in theory, to influence and even control the government, many people perceive that as a responsibility.

Sad that you do not.  You embrace those who remove people from their homes, and then remove things from the home without consent.

Nothing to do with fear?

sno man: Alleyoop: sno man: If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.

Behind cop-proof steel doors?

as in a gun safe, yea, pretty much.


Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.
 
2013-06-29 10:01:25 PM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: omeganuepsilon: sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.

Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..

No it's nothing to do with fear.  It's called responsibility. All those freedoms you are on about actually come with responsibilities. I thought you were smarter than that.

The responsibilities that I'm "on about" are the citizen's responsibility to maintain.  The people in any country do have the ability, in theory, to influence and even control the government, many people perceive that as a responsibility.

Sad that you do not.  You embrace those who remove people from their homes, and then remove things from the home without consent.

Nothing to do with fear?

sno man: Alleyoop: sno man: If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.

Behind cop-proof steel doors?

as in a gun safe, yea, pretty much.

Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.


Because you need the last word, I'll leave you and your sad little world to it.  Good night.
 
2013-06-29 10:04:02 PM

sno man: Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.

Because you need the last word, I'll leave you and your sad little world to it.  Good night.

 
2013-06-29 10:07:16 PM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.

Because you need the last word, I'll leave you and your sad little world to it.  Good night.


nice misquote.  just night this time.
 
2013-06-29 10:19:39 PM

sno man: Alleyoop: sno man: If the bozo's had kept their guns responsibly, as any gun owner should, they would still be where they left them.

Behind cop-proof steel doors?

as in a gun safe, yea, pretty much.


Sorry, that doesn't work. By the logic the cops are using (we busted into your locked house, and thus any guns you had were no longer locked up), they could well bust into your safe, then take the 'unsecured' guns from it.
 
2013-06-29 10:35:18 PM

fredklein: Sorry, that doesn't work. By the logic the cops are using (we busted into your locked house, and thus any guns you had were no longer locked up), they could well bust into your safe, then take the 'unsecured' guns from it.


You seriously believe the RCMP is going to bust into a gun safe in search of bodies or people in need of help?

Maybe we should settle this with a bet.  Are you willing to bet money that the RCMP broke into locked gun safes?
 
2013-06-29 11:11:23 PM

Xcott: al's hat: I understand the concept of looking for people who might be trapped. I don't understand taking the time to haul guns away instead of moving quickly to the next house to continue looking for people who might be trapped.

Perhaps, then, you don't understand the law.  The law says that they have to secure a firearm if it's unsecured.

If they were looking for bodies in a field and found a gun there, they'd have to do the same thing.


That's because a wee babe could stroll along and happen to find the gun.
I dont think the wee babe is going to pick people's locks and force entry.
 
2013-06-29 11:18:03 PM

sno man: omeganuepsilon: sno man: Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.

Because you need the last word, I'll leave you and your sad little world to it.  Good night.

nice misquote.  just night this time.


No misquote, just hitting the fark button for quote.  But thanks for the other example of your behavior.  I bolded the word, but maybe you need to know what it means before it makes sense.

From the wiki for charlatan:
A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

Exampled by:
Making a claim that I need the last word, setting up a trap designed to get the last word, or if not, you get to say "told you so neener neener" as framed with the inane accusation of misquoting.

You cannot address points I made, only sidestep them with falsehoods and straw men and motorized goal posts.

Entertained me for a time, now I get to tag you for the charlatan that you are, so I know what I'm getting into if I decide to reply again in some other thread. Orange, for caution.
 
2013-06-29 11:25:45 PM

Nutsac_Jim: I dont think the wee babe is going to pick people's locks and force entry.


I don't think you understand:  if the RCMP has to bust the lock to get into the house, then it's unsecured.  At that point a kid (or looter) doesn't have to pick a lock or force entry to get in.  That's why firearms lying around the house must now be secured---just as if they were found lying on a porch or in an unlocked shed.
 
2013-06-29 11:28:39 PM

Man On Pink Corner: Flakeloaf: You're new to the Firearms Act, aren't you?And before you come back ready to quote 5(b)(iii), the "room" in that section contemplates a weapons vault, not a bedroom with gyproc walls and a tin chain.

And you don't see anything unreasonable about requiring adults in an adults-only residence to store their firearms in a "weapons vault?"

I'm not necessarily looking for an argument, I'm just trying to understand the attitudes and beliefs of people who think very differently from myself.  I've found that to be a good habit in life.


Happy to oblige! It's a shame I can't keep my lamentations for the necessity of what happens in other countries to myself because that keeps me from taking your stance. Something to work on.

In practical terms no, an ordinary household isn't reasonably expected to have a vault. Non-restricted weapons can be stored open-shelf with a trigger lock, or in a secure container that meets the criteria of a gun safe. Restricted and prohibited weapons have to be stored in a container, and any automatic weapons have to be disassembled with their bolts secured in a separate container as though they were ammunition (a locked container inside the same container as the weapon but with a different key will suffice).

Collectors, museums and NGOs that have firearms don't often think it practical to store weapons with individual trigger locks, and managing multiple cases for groups of weapons is unwieldy, so they opt for a big, walk-in container instead. (fun fact: My last job used to involve assessing the suitability of rooms held out to be vaults).  There's nothing stopping an individual from specially constructing a vault and using it as such but that would be seen as really weird unless they had a few dozen handguns on display inside.
 
2013-06-29 11:34:27 PM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: omeganuepsilon: sno man: Not only are you a poor citizen, you are a self-contradictory charlatan who who revels in denial/delusion.

Because you need the last word, I'll leave you and your sad little world to it.  Good night.

nice misquote.  just night this time.

No misquote, just hitting the fark button for quote.  But thanks for the other example of your behavior.  I bolded the word, but maybe you need to know what it means before it makes sense.

From the wiki for charlatan:
A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.

Exampled by:
Making a claim that I need the last word, setting up a trap designed to get the last word, or if not, you get to say "told you so neener neener" as framed with the inane accusation of misquoting.

You cannot address points I made, only sidestep them with falsehoods and straw men and motorized goal posts.

Entertained me for a time, now I get to tag you for the charlatan that you are, so I know what I'm getting into if I decide to reply again in some other thread. Orange, for caution.


You typed Charlatan. And claim I did. And now try to explain to me what I meant by calling you a Charlatan. Are you high? Do you need me to call someone to get you help? Call it a night big guy.  But do please get the last word first.
 
2013-06-29 11:43:58 PM
sno man: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
 
2013-06-30 12:13:32 AM

Xcott: fredklein: Sorry, that doesn't work. By the logic the cops are using (we busted into your locked house, and thus any guns you had were no longer locked up), they could well bust into your safe, then take the 'unsecured' guns from it.

You seriously believe the RCMP is going to bust into a gun safe in search of bodies or people in need of help?

Maybe we should settle this with a bet.  Are you willing to bet money that the RCMP broke into locked gun safes?


My point (which you apparently missed) was that the only reason the guns they took were 'unsecured' was because they busted into the houses to begin with. If they had not busted into the houses, the guns would have been secured... in a locked house. It is this tautological argument that stinks, and could be applies to their busting into gun safes.
 
2013-06-30 12:15:10 AM

Xcott: I don't think you understand: if the RCMP has to bust the lock to get into the house, then it's unsecured.


Solution 1) Don't bust into houses.

Solution 2) Re-lock the door when you leave.
 
2013-06-30 12:22:31 AM

omeganuepsilon: sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.  Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..


I suspect they're teaching kids that guns fire themselves these days.  Some kind of demonic possession, or something.
 
2013-06-30 01:06:07 AM

Man On Pink Corner: omeganuepsilon: sno man: I choose to not be a paranoid and afraid.  Yeah, that's why you think people "should" lock guns in a safe.  Because that's not fear talking at all..

I suspect they're teaching kids that guns fire themselves these days.  Some kind of demonic possession, or something.


Actually they teach that if someone finds your unsecured weapon and kills people with it, you're going to have a bad time. Especially if that someone is a child.
 
2013-06-30 07:24:23 AM

Xcott: You seriously believe the RCMP is going to bust into a gun safe in search of bodies or people in need of help?  Maybe we should settle this with a bet. Are you willing to bet money that the RCMP broke into locked gun safes?


Do you seriously believe the RCMP did a service to people waiting for help by taking the time to search for and seize weapons that they themselves made unsecured?  I find it interesting that the article said they seized a large quantity of firearms but there was no mention of a single body being recovered or a single person being helped.

I don't know if they bothered to break into gun safes.  But if they had enough people to break into houses and seize a "large quantity of firearms" then they had enough people to simply drag gun safes out onto the back of a truck.  With the power out (and back-up batteries probably underwater or dead by now), alarms would not deter looters.  The authorities chose to use their resources to keep out home-owners as they did the looting themselves.
 
Displayed 282 of 282 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report