RCMP Gun Seizure Meeting With Danielle Smith

[Kanonfodder]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

Perhaps a bit more door kicking may have saved that lady. why dont you post up your "facts" LD .that way we can compare" facts".

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/719...calgary-flood/

Seems like door kicking wouldn't have helped

[LongDraw]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

Perhaps a bit more door kicking may have saved that lady. why dont you post up your "facts" LD .that way we can compare" facts".

Do you consider the Calgary Police responsible for her death?

[Vigilante]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

Perhaps a bit more door kicking may have saved that lady. why dont you post up your "facts" LD .that way we can compare" facts".

well, since they admit to going into most residential places 3+ times, I am guessing if they were in a place 3 times and didn't find her, a 4th or 5th may not have helped much either.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by LongDraw

Considering all the cut-and-pasting you do of news articles it's conveniently ironic on your part that you don't mention the fact the little old lady told the police that she planned to leave, refusing to at the time the police went door to door informing residents of the evacuation order. Your statement that nobody searched homes, and a little old lady died is grossly misleading and a borderline libelous statement

Your constant trolling, accusing others of conjecture, and conspiracy theories is tiresome.

You don't even understand the big words you are using. The fact is they did not search homes. Someone made a big assumptions she left. A check of her home would of shown the facts.

She did not "refuse" to leave as you erroneously state above. It is unknown why she did not leave right away. An elderly woman can have some difficulty moving and making strong rational decisions. Hard to say why the poor lady drowned other than her apartment was not searched after saying she was leaving.

Homes were not searched in Calgary. As for your libelous statement... show proof that my statement was incorrect. That the woman is proved to have refused to move and that the Calgary police knocked down doors to evacuate. Otherwise just look up the fact the old lady DIED IN HER APARTMENT.

In case you missed a link...
http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/06/26...-from-drowning

It is ironic that you missed the facts and the point altogether and chose instead to attack the poster.

Oh well... cheers anyway.

Sun

P.S. People that have a differing opinion to yours on a forum are not trolling. They are expressing their opinion. If you can't stand someone disagreeing with you... don't open the post.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Kanonfodder

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/719...calgary-flood/

Seems like door kicking wouldn't have helped

The premise of door kicking is to remove the occupants in imminent threat of injury. Had they walked her out she would not on wandered back in. Anyone with an elderly relative knows that sometimes judgement is impaired.

No one can assume she choose to drown. Had someone come back and followed up with a door kick...she would be alive today.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by LongDraw

Do you consider the Calgary Police responsible for her death?

How about answering the question after stating unsubstantiated facts.

[Kanonfodder]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

The premise of door kicking is to remove the occupants in imminent threat of injury. Had they walked her out she would not on wandered back in. Anyone with an elderly relative knows that sometimes judgement is impaired.

No one can assume she choose to drown. Had someone come back and followed up with a door kick...she would be alive today.

The point is one person died in Calgary and she was told to leave and didn't for whatever reason, contact HAD been made, the lame excuse in HR is the RCMP were looking for people, how many people or pets did they find dead in these houses? How many were in fact rescued in the nick of time? What was the purpose of kicking in doors of non flooded houses?

The emergency power act doesn't trump a persons rights, those rights were clearly violated. Also considering the fact the houses were left unsecured makes the seizure excuse flimsy, you can't have it both ways, either the town was secure against looters because the cops had it blocked off making the lack of locks moot or it wasn't. If it was safe enough to leave houses with easy access doesn't it follow it should have been safe enough to have the guns remain where they were? You know in a locked house?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Kanonfodder

The point is one person died in Calgary and she was told to leave and didn't for whatever reason, contact HAD been made, the lame excuse in HR is the RCMP were looking for people, how many people or pets did they find dead in these houses? How many were in fact rescued in the nick of time? What was the purpose of kicking in doors of non flooded houses?

The emergency power act doesn't trump a persons rights, those rights were clearly violated. Also considering the fact the houses were left unsecured makes the seizure excuse flimsy, you can't have it both ways, either the town was secure against looters because the cops had it blocked off making the lack of locks moot or it wasn't. If it was safe enough to leave houses with easy access doesn't it follow it should have been safe enough to have the guns remain where they were? You know in a locked house?

There are lots of points that can be made both ways. It will be good to see a report on the facts versus guesses.

Searching for people, pets, guns, utility shut offs what have you...hard to know exactly. How many occurences. 500 guns sounds like a lot of homes but most gun owners don't just have 1. So it is 500 homes or 50 homes. Of the 500 instances...how many complained. Did one or two complain... not significant enough to get worked up on. Me getting worked up for someone else is a waste of energy if they don't see it as a problem.

It just keeps coming down to there is a hysteria built up on AOF on this topic that does not translate down to those affected. So why keep making this a controversy if those impacted don't see it that way? I almost feel like some are budding into others business where they are not wanted.

[Kanonfodder]

Just because people don't complain publicly doesn't mean there aren't complaints. The fact is that the whole seizure was unnecessary period. If it was insignificant why the public meeting tonite? Why is there a RCMP inquiry? Aren't you a bit alarmed that the video purports to prove that the RCMP were targeting houses with firearms? These questions are important, to say its butting into other people's business well news flash that's every thread on AO

[Hagalaz]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

quit arguing in circles... The RCMP didn't remove the guns on the 1st round.. hell it wasn't til days later they secured the guns. That's probably when they realized that High River wasn't completely evacuated, and they should do something about it.

"private property" that is at high risk to be stolen and used in other crimes.

You have drank deeply of the RCMP Kool-Aid, haven't you? Bought their story (you know, the one they could keep straight) hook, line and sinker. The RCMP need people like you around, people that support whatever they do regardless of how/why they do it.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Kanonfodder

Just because people don't complain publicly doesn't mean there aren't complaints. The fact is that the whole seizure was unnecessary period. If it was insignificant why the public meeting tonite? Why is there a RCMP inquiry? Aren't you a bit alarmed that the video purports to prove that the RCMP were targeting houses with firearms? These questions are important, to say its butting into other people's business well news flash that's every thread on AO

The fact that those affected don't feel harmed enough to care enough to complain is a very significant point in this whole hysteria.

If the RCMP were targetting homes via a list of gun ownership. That is definitely wrong. That video does not confirm it.

We don't have the same facts as those that had their guns moved for protection... Keep calling it seized is just a play on words and the hysteria.

So all these folks that had their guns moved during the floods...not all guns... so far just ones that were not secured although there are rumors eitherwise but unsubstantiated... other than one...maybe two who have a story...all others seem fine with it. Law abiding gun owners that had something wrong done to them and no Sun story. That is very telling at this point.

Let the hysteria continue and the conspiracies continue to evolve.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

The fact that those affected don't feel harmed enough to care enough to complain is a very significant point in this whole hysteria.

If the RCMP were targetting homes via a list of gun ownership. That is definitely wrong. That video does not confirm it.

We don't have the same facts as those that had their guns moved for protection... Keep calling it seized is just a play on words and the hysteria.

So all these folks that had their guns moved during the floods...not all guns... so far just ones that were not secured although there are rumors eitherwise but unsubstantiated... other than one...maybe two who have a story...all others seem fine with it. Law abiding gun owners that had something wrong done to them and no Sun story. That is very telling at

Let the hysteria continue and the conspiracies continue to evolve.

Just how do you know thar none of the firearms owners complained? How would you know if they have complained to the RCMP, their MP, or their MLA ?Since the firearms were private property taken against the will of some owners, seized, or even stolen could apply.

[Sneeze]

Sundance and JimPS.

I do not think you speak for the people of High River.

There is a town hall meeting tonight at 6:00 in High River to discuss these very issues.

Why don't you guys go on down there and meet the people first hand. Don't talk just listen.

Maybe it would open your eyes. You can meet the people who had locks cut by the RCMP to take their guns.

You can also meet people who had homes that were not affected at all by the flood but still had muddy boot prints all over the carpet, missing guns and were greeted by an RCMP spike belt when they tried to go home.

Or... you can continue to talk out your rectums about people and events you know nothing about.

Knowing both of your post history on AO - actually getting educated about a subject you are running your mouth about is the last thing you guys will decide to do... So I think you will probably pick the later option.

On edit: They do care enough to complain. You are just not listening.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Just how do you know thar none of the firearms owners complained? How would you know if they have complained to the RCMP, their MP, or their MLA ?Since the firearms were private property taken against the will of some owners, seized, or even stolen could apply.

How do you know they did? Still comes down to hysteria and conjecture. In the absense of any evidence people impacted are complaining the world of AOF conspiracies just assumes there is.

If this was a big deal to those actually impacted...not reading on a blog...guessing what went down...extrapolating random info to put together something to scream about... don't you think the Sun would of had an actual fact based story with witnesses, photos etc?

Sometimes the answer is the simplest. Nothing significant happened no matter how much some wish to make it more.

Still...bring on the evidence...I am not arguing against evidence...just arguing against jumping to conclusions WITHOUT evidence. So far what we know points to this being a nothing subject.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Sneeze

Sundance and JimPS.

I do not think you speak for the people of High River.

There is a town hall meeting tonight at 6:00 in High River to discuss these very issues.

Why don't you guys go on down there and meet the people first hand. Don't talk just listen.

Maybe it would open your eyes. You can meet the people who had locks cut by the RCMP to take their guns.

You can also meet people who had homes that were not affected at all by the flood but still had muddy boot prints all over the carpet, missing guns and were greeted by an RCMP spike belt when they tried to go home.

Or... you can continue to talk out your rectums about people and events you know nothing about.

Knowing both of your post history on AO - actually getting educated about a subject you are running your mouth about is the last thing you guys will decide to do... So I think you will probably pick the later option.

On edit: They do care enough to complain. You are just not listening.

LOL

Hopefully evidence will be clearly reported and then we can have facts to discuss.

Otherwise everyone are just rectum yackers.

Maybe your post will come back to haunt you.

[Sneeze]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

LOL

Hopefully evidence will be clearly reported and then we can have facts to discuss.

Otherwise everyone are just rectum yackers.

Maybe your post will come back to haunt you.

What are you laughing about? Do you think what happened there is a joke - or your posts funny in some way?

My post is going to come back to haunt me? How so? Do you mean you might actually go to the town hall and listen to first hand experiences of the Residents of High River? I would welcome that.

Would hearing first hand accounts not be good enough for you? What would?

You keep asking for "evidence" - and its right under your nose to discover but you are too busy typing garbage to actually look for it yourself.

There is no shame in admitting you were wrong or changing your opinion when new facts come to light. The fact you are totally incapable of any type of self reflection and hold steadfast to ridiculous positions says a great deal about your character (or lack thereof).

Once again - The town hall is at 6pm tonight. Drive down, sit down & shut your mouth. Learn something.

[Deo101]

Regardless of how big of an issue it was to people it was still essentially illegal. We've gone through this numerous times. Sure a lot of people were happy to have their guns secured. The EVIDENCE was that SECURED guns were seized. Period, end of story. Also I remember reading that doors were kicked in prior to the state of emergency being declared, also illegal (maybe necessary to preserve life) but illegal. What evidence are you after exactly? Just because people aren't rioting and starting High River on fire doesn't mean there isn't evidence of improper entries and seizures. Do you think you'd get away with breaking the law just because you had good intentions.

IMO the gun thing is minor compared to how the whole operation was handled.

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

LOL

Hopefully evidence will be clearly reported and then we can have facts to discuss.

Otherwise everyone are just rectum yackers.

Maybe your post will come back to haunt you.

[gitrdun]

Is the meeting at 6:00pm or 7:00pm? It's at the High School...correct?

[kevpack]

Originally Posted by Kanonfodder

Just because people don't complain publicly doesn't mean there aren't complaints. The fact is that the whole seizure was unnecessary period. If it was insignificant why the public meeting tonite? Why is there a RCMP inquiry? Aren't you a bit alarmed that the video purports to prove that the RCMP were targeting houses with firearms? These questions are important, to say its butting into other people's business well news flash that's every thread on AO

Here here! People on this thread are complaining about the firearms not passing safe storage rules being against the law. There's another big law lurking in the background, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...I thought that protected our rights against unlawful search and seizure...? No?
I guess the state of emergency circumvented that right

[nekred]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

LOL

Hopefully evidence will be clearly reported and then we can have facts to discuss.

Otherwise everyone are just rectum yackers.

Maybe your post will come back to haunt you.

If Nothing in fact happened why is there a meeting to discuss what happened? Why did the police come onto National TV to defend their action of "securing firearms" if nothing happened...

Sorry if I don't trust Canada's largest organized gang. If we always listened the RCMP version than a crazy maniac was subdued and rendered harmless in the Vancouver airport... That was the nail in the coffin for my trust and respect for the RCMP... not because they subdued a problem but because they lied so badly and evidence of collusion and not one of them recieved a jail sentence for 2nd Degree MURDER.

IMO RCMP define the boundaries by stepping over them and if no one squawks then this becomes the new norm. then they take another step... until finally public has pushed back and said... NO MORE!...

I have watched the firearm legislation very closely all my life. The legislation gets tougher thus making forearms appear dangerous...thus requiring more restrictions, then an incident happens thus more restrictions... and instead of dealing with the problem responsible people end up being restricted unnecessarily for the perception of public good.

Case in pont is another thread on here of how someones wife is terrified of firearms... Why? because they are percieved as dangerous. People killed each other, and themsleves accidentally, or on purpose long before firearms were invented.

I heard three people were injured in a mountain climbing accident maybe that should be banned and RCMP should enter all homes and "secure" any climbing gear.

We now have a society filled with useless people scared of everything under the sun who could not survive off of the land depndant on the government for their very existence....

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Sneeze

What are you laughing about? Do you think what happened there is a joke - or your posts funny in some way?

My post is going to come back to haunt me? How so? Do you mean you might actually go to the town hall and listen to first hand experiences of the Residents of High River? I would welcome that.

Would hearing first hand accounts not be good enough for you? What would?

You keep asking for "evidence" - and its right under your nose to discover but you are too busy typing garbage to actually look for it yourself.

There is no shame in admitting you were wrong or changing your opinion when new facts come to light. The fact you are totally incapable of any type of self reflection and hold steadfast to ridiculous positions says a great deal about your character (or lack thereof).

Once again - The town hall is at 6pm tonight. Drive down, sit down & shut your mouth. Learn something.

If the evidence is so easy to find, right under my nose...so horrible in the treatment of people and property... then why is there no Sun story with credible evidencing backing up the claim. So horrible...chock...gasp... sigh... that it is as unspeakable as the name of the guy with no nose in Harry Potter.

You are passionate about something and that seems to be the hysteria.

Yes I hope the facts due come out. Given the lack of facts to date I would surmise not much will come out of todays meeting. Even if it is a witch hunt it needs to have evidence to back it up. If it is a conspiracy it needs to affect more than a couple people with facts and evidence. I am sure that if there is anything of value maybe then the Sun will report on it. If not the meeting will be as boring as it sounds and I would rather be fishing.

Please attend the meeting, take copious notes, photos etc. and present your findings on AOF. I look forward to your insights.

As always... I continue to get great entertainment from your debating style.

Cheers

Sun

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Deo101

Regardless of how big of an issue it was to people it was still essentially illegal. We've gone through this numerous times. Sure a lot of people were happy to have their guns secured. The EVIDENCE was that SECURED guns were seized. Period, end of story. Also I remember reading that doors were kicked in prior to the state of emergency being declared, also illegal (maybe necessary to preserve life) but illegal. What evidence are you after exactly? Just because people aren't rioting and starting High River on fire doesn't mean there isn't evidence of improper entries and seizures. Do you think you'd get away with breaking the law just because you had good intentions.

IMO the gun thing is minor compared to how the whole operation was handled.

What you have mostly heard is people's guesses, extrapolations, heresay about what happened. I want to hear the facts. Evidence is not derived from hearing misinformation or unsubstantiated rumors on AOF one million times. Evidence of 1 or 2 instances of a misplaced but well meaning search gone minor wrong for the right reasons.

A real problem is using an old registry list to target homes for searches. WE need evidence of that.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by nekred

If Nothing in fact happened why is there a meeting to discuss what happened? Why did the police come onto National TV to defend their action of "securing firearms" if nothing happened....

When paranoia and hysteria grips any issue there will always be a need to address it before people assume the worst without facts. Because people are human they often jump to conclusions. Rarely do people jump to positive conclusions cause human nature assumes the worst and hey... it is way more fun for brains to thing of scary "what if" scenarios.

The rest of you post is another topic all together.

[ctd]

No matter what the outcome some people will want a few RCMP Officers to loose their jobs even if no harmfull intent was excercised.
Or laws broken.

This what one calls a witch hunt.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Another problem here is people who don't even own firearms are telling the firearm owners to just suck it up and deal with it.

LC

[Kanonfodder]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

When paranoia and hysteria grips any issue there will always be a need to address it before people assume the worst without facts. Because people are human they often jump to conclusions. Rarely do people jump to positive conclusions cause human nature assumes the worst and hey... it is way more fun for brains to thing of scary "what if" scenarios.

The rest of you post is another topic all together.

Video analysis reveals RCMP targeting of houses with firearms
Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Video analysis reveals RCMP targeting of houses with firearms

Canada's National Firearms Association has received the results of an expert analysis of the audio portion of video released to the media of the search of house number 619. As a result of the analysis the NFA has learned that the transmission clearly says he's "located all the firearms." This would indicate that police were indeed searching for firearms rather than merely collecting firearms that they found in an incidental search for survivors and pets. It would also indicate that the RCMP knew in advance which homes had firearms by using the firearm licensing system. The NFA will be presenting the content of its analysis at a meeting to be held in High River, Alberta on September 5. The analysis was done by Tiburon Films Inc. and all questions or statement requests about the analysis should go to info@tiburonfilms.ca.


Alberta Director for Canada's NFA, Dennis Young indicated this is a troubling development that confirms people's deep concerns about the High River firearms seizures. "The NFA has been investigating developments in High River right from the beginning and now it is evident that concern over police targeting the homes of firearm owners were entirely justified," Mr. Young said, speaking from Airdrie, Alberta. NFA President Sheldon Clare concurred, "Law enforcement officers have difficult and often dangerous jobs, but there needs to be some questions answered as to why this effort was deemed necessary, and who ordered it. Canada's National Firearms Association is very concerned about the bad image that this casts upon our police and the dangerous precedent that it sets. Using licensing lists to target the home of firearms owners is an action that demonstrates the danger of such programs to individual rights and freedoms."


NFA actions to date have included contacting the offices of Alberta's Premier Justice Minister, and the Federal Minister of Justice; filing Access to Information Act requests, writing letters to the RCMP Public Complaints Commissioner, and working with lawyer Richard Fritze to allow High River residents to present their accounts privately to a lawyer. Canada's NFA encourages everyone affected to submit their personal complaints to the RCMP Public Complaints Commissioner.


Canada's National Firearms Association is this country's largest advocacy organization promoting the rights and freedoms of all responsible firearm owners and users.



For more information contact:

Blair Hagen, Executive VP Communications, 604-753-8682 Blair@nfa.ca
Sheldon Clare, President, 250-981-1841 Sheldon@nfa.ca
Shawn Bevins, Executive VP, 819-313-2887 shawn@nfa.ca
Dennis Young, Alberta Director, 587-360-1111 Dennis@nfa.ca
Canada's NFA toll-free number - 1-877-818-0393
NFA Website: www.nfa.ca

-30-

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by Vigilante

As a resident in High River, I am EXTREMELY OFFENDED by this remark in particular, as well as pretty much everything else you have said in this thread.

I'm sorry for what you have gone through, but you're offended because I said you should be ready for a flood..

Obviously you're emotionally attached to this topic.. So you just lost all credibility...

Oh wait.. That was me..

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Another problem here is people who don't even own firearms are telling the firearm owners to just suck it up and deal with it.

LC

Those same individuals may be singing a different tune when the RCMP shows up at their house and takes whatever they feel like taking. Seizing assets the government calls it I believe.

[JB_AOL]

Originally Posted by Hagalaz

You have drank deeply of the RCMP Kool-Aid, haven't you? Bought their story (you know, the one they could keep straight) hook, line and sinker. The RCMP need people like you around, people that support whatever they do regardless of how/why they do it.

No.. I believe in the system.. If they did something illegal, they will be punished for it.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by JB_AOL

No.. I believe in the system.. If they did something illegal, they will be punished for it.

That's just funny... Sort of like Monty "full of booze" Robinson eh?