The Great Gun Control Debate

[chrisf]

We also know the media never sensationalizes articles related to firearms....

A couple of years ago, there were a load of guns confiscated from a local home... the local constabulary had them all laid out, the media took photos, and reported it as if they had taken dozens of "assault rifles" off the streets and out of the hands of gang bangers... but it was a load of sporting shot guns, a couple of SKSs, and some bolt actions... with one or two pistols...

A few days later, another news article came out, reporting that the registered owner of the gun was the victim of police harassment, his guns were all registered, and he was the victim of a "paper crime".

Ultimately, I asked around. Turned out the idiot had built several silencers and posted about it with pics on gun nutz. He was only being charged over the scilencers, that was it. The rest of the guns were confiscated as a matter of SOP, as the charges were firearm related.

I realise gun owners are a touchy bunch, I know, I'm a gun owner, and I'm very touchy about it, particularly with the reclassification controversy in the past few months... it's an uneasy feeling knowing that you could be made into a criminal by the stroke of a bureaucrats pen, but come on now... don't we all know better when it comes to the accuracy of reporting in the media???

 

[Fishbone Jones]

“People have a significant amount of money invested in firearms ... so we put them in a place that we control and that they’re safe.”

So I wonder how much jewelry, art, etc they picked up and catalogued for safe keeping on the behalf of the owners?

After all “People have a significant amount of money invested in (choose your expensive collectible) ... so we put them in a place that we control and that they’re safe.”

I've reposted my comments from above.

They didn't report that they confiscated the firearms for public safety.

The RCMP spokesman said that they removed them because they were valuable and the RCMP wanted to keep those valuable items safe.

My question stands. Did they remove and catalogue other valuables found in the open, like grandma's Royal Daulton china or Aunt Bee's jewelry?

The RCMP contributed hugely to this controversy by not being truthful and up from from the very first paragraph of their public statement. They were obtuse on purpose.

Given the past antics of this particular RCMP spokesman (google it), it's understandable why people don't believe them.

Gun owners are used to being the shafted whipping boy, so when they're being told that this is, once again, for they're own good, they're entitled to speculate and look at this with a jaundiced eye to they're hearts content.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I'm not sure if it's funny or sad... but it's almost always the same with you guys...

Every time the media reports on anything military related, it's torn apart because the media never gets their facts straight on anything...

Every time the media reports on somthing controversial, but not military related, it gets taken as gospel, and sends people into a spin...

It's the same media reportnig on both though...

Thank you..............

 

[Container]

I've reposted my comments from above.

They didn't report that they confiscated the firearms for public safety.

The RCMP spokesman said that they removed them because they were valuable and the RCMP wanted to keep those valuable items safe.

My question stands. Did they remove and catalogue other valuables found in the open, like grandma's Royal Daulton china or Aunt Bee's jewelry?

The RCMP contributed hugely to this controversy by not being truthful and up from from the very first paragraph of their public statement. They were obtuse on purpose.

Given the past antics of this particular RCMP spokesman (google it), it's understandable why people don't believe them.

Gun owners are used to being the shafted whipping boy, so when they're being told that this is, once again, for they're own good, they're entitled to speculate and look at this with a jaundiced eye to they're hearts content.

We re in agreement. It was a terrible way to speak with the media- it leaves everything open for speculation. Which is contrary to the point. However I dont see it as being untruthful- I see it as someone who is talking too much and having their words dissected. This is another RCMP "seemed like a good idea at the time" combined with a poorly framed media statement.....which is amazing considering its a media guy.

 

[Canadian.Trucker]

My personal feelings on this until more facts come to light is that it shouldn't be a big deal.  Perhaps what recceguy has focused on about why the RCMP confiscated the firearms is a bit of a sticking point, but regardless if in the end the firearms are returned to the owners then is it a big issue?

I know for myself I ensure that my firearms are locked away properly and securely in the manner directed by law, so if my firearms were taken by cutting the safe open I would question why it was necessary as they were safe and secure.  However, we don't have all the facts about what went down.

The comments from the article with the words "nazi" and "this is why the US has the right to bear arms" is way over the top and is just inflaming the situation.

The issues with looters and scum of the earth doing things such as what happened to "Sophie" in Calgary is another matter that goes to show how people take advantage of others misfortune.  The two are intertwined though and if I were careless enough to evacuate from my home and leave a firearm unsecure, I would be very happy and grateful to the police that they found and secured it so that it couldn't be stolen or used to harm someone else.  I too am wary of police and the government in general when it comes to firearm confiscation etc but I think in this case we need to look at the situation with a more level head.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I remember being on course with a number of RCMP sergeants, their opinion of their own PR staff was not exactly positive. More like it's a dumping ground for those who fail in real police work. So it becomes a self perpetuating issue. The force allows themselves to be represented by the bits from the bottom of the barrel and then wonders why they are getting shredded in the media and peoples opinion of them has dropped considerably. This is magnified by a media that for the most part is written and edited by people with agenda's and with the attention span of a 2 year old. 

 

[Old Sweat]

The noon news on CFRA in Ottawa included a brief item from the PMO that the PM (a) expressed disbelief that the RCMP would be wasting their time collecting firearms, and (b) the firearms are to be returned post haste as soon as practical after the town is declared secure.

I am paraphrasing this, and may have got parts wrong, so take the text, but not the intent, with a grain of salt.

 

[ballz]

As per Old Sweat's comment...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/pmo-says-the-rcmp-should-have-better-things-to-do-than-seize-guns/article12882952/

The Prime Minister’s Office is stepping into the controversy surrounding the flood response in High River, Alta., saying the RCMP should have better things to do than seize residents’ guns.

The town remains under evacuation, and emergency crews have been going from home to home, searching for people and assessing damage.

Stephen Harper’s office sided with the residents.

“We expect that any firearms taken will be returned to their owners as soon as possible,” PMO spokesman Carl Vallée said. “We believe the RCMP should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property.”

On Thursday, RCMP Sergeant Patricia Neely said the guns will all be returned. “Firearms that were unsafely stored in plain sight were seized for safekeeping,” she said. By Friday, an RCMP spokesperson said the force was preparing a statement on the gun seizure.

Canadian law requires that guns be unloaded and locked away when stored.

High River, population 13,000, was worst-hit by last week’s flooding. Much of the town remains under water, and officials say it’s too dangerous for residents to be allowed back in. That has left municipal leaders under fire from residents anxious to assess the damage at their home.

Danielle Smith, leader of Alberta’s Official Opposition Wildrose Party and the MLA who represents High River, said on Twitter she doesn’t have a problem with RCMP seizing loose guns. “The problem is if residents have trouble getting them back,” she said. She added that it’s unclear how many guns Mounties seized.

This spokesperson is giving different info than the other one. I hope this one is correct. The RCMP would have no choice but to confiscate an improperly stored firearm if they entered a home and it was laying in plain site.

The other question remains, of course, is just how many firearms were seized. That number could tell the tale.

I also can't help but admit I think the PMO was a bit quick to throw the RCMP under the bus on this... I'm a firearm owner, and a private citizen (err.. for the most part... I think), it's my right to b*tch and scrutinize stuff like this and even jump to conclusions, not quite the same for the PMO. There appears to be no communication between the RCMP and the Federal government.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

What is this internal communication of which you speak? Seems like a remarkable idea with huge potential benefits. Is there a power point presentation for it?

 

[Old Sweat]

This was posted on another site as the storage requirements of the Firearms Act:

The Firearms Regulations DO NOT require storage of non-restricted firearms in gun safes. Sub-para b contains three separate options. Note the "or" at the end of (b)(ii) If the firearm rendered inoperable by a secure locking device and not readily accessible to ammunition, then there is no need to store in a gun safe. Sub para c shows that storing a firearm and ammuniction together requires a safe.

STORAGE OF NON-RESTRICTED FIREARMS
5. (1) An individual may store a non-restricted firearm only if

(a) it is unloaded;

(b) it is

(i) rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device,

(ii) rendered inoperable by the removal of the bolt or bolt-carrier, or

(iii) stored in a container, receptacle or room that is kept securely locked and that is constructed so that it cannot readily be broken open or into; and

(c) it is not readily accessible to ammunition, unless the ammunition is stored, together with or separately from the firearm, in a container or receptacle that is kept securely locked and that is constructed so that it cannot readily be broken open or into.

The above may or may not be correct, but if correct, there is no requirement to lock away an inoperable firearm that is stored separately from its ammunition. Whatever the truth of the matter, the issue is that the locals are under considerable stress, and there have been reports that the RCMP were breaking into locked homes to search them. Collecting firearms can easily be construed as confiscating them. Someone with much too much zeal and a shortage of common sense decided to obey the letter of the law in this case. The public reaction is compledtely understandable. Methinks the local detachment commander may well be in touch with Brookfield in short order.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I remember being on course with a number of RCMP sergeants, their opinion of their own PR staff was not exactly positive. More like it's a dumping ground for those who fail in real police work. So it becomes a self perpetuating issue. The force allows themselves to be represented by the bits from the bottom of the barrel and then wonders why they are getting shredded in the media and peoples opinion of them has dropped considerably. This is magnified by a media that for the most part is written and edited by people with agenda's and with the attention span of a 2 year old.

Now where else have I seen that approach? 

 

[The Bread Guy]

I remember being on course with a number of RCMP sergeants, their opinion of their own PR staff was not exactly positive. More like it's a dumping ground for those who fail in real police work. So it becomes a self perpetuating issue. The force allows themselves to be represented by the bits from the bottom of the barrel and then wonders why they are getting shredded in the media and peoples opinion of them has dropped considerably. This is magnified by a media that for the most part is written and edited by people with agenda's and with the attention span of a 2 year old.

To be fair to the face in front of the camera, I'm guessing any messaging shared, as with many federal organizations, get approved by lots of people way above the pay grade of the face in question - and we all know how "writing by committee" can go, right?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Modified and butchered by people that have no clue about the subject and run squealing from any form of risk.

 

[Container]

The above may or may not be correct, but if correct, there is no requirement to lock away an inoperable firearm that is stored separately from its ammunition. Whatever the truth of the matter, the issue is that the locals are under considerable stress, and there have been reports that the RCMP were breaking into locked homes to search them. Collecting firearms can easily be construed as confiscating them. Someone with much too much zeal and a shortage of common sense decided to obey the letter of the law in this case. The public reaction is compledtely understandable. Methinks the local detachment commander may well be in touch with Brookfield in short order.

They were searched for injured or survivors etc. However. I know more than a few mounties that would seize a rifle with a trigger lock out of 'ignance'. There was a communication issue for sure- you can tell there was an issue when you see sections where mounties are "ordered" back to discuss with the residents rather than "enforce" the barricade with spike strips.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Did Ian Thomson end up getting charged?
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/lorne-gunter-why-hang-ian-thomson-for-the-crime-of-protecting-himself/

 

[Container]

Did Ian Thomson end up getting charged?
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/lorne-gunter-why-hang-ian-thomson-for-the-crime-of-protecting-himself/

I believe he did. That entire case was bizarre. Im still not able to follow the whole thing- it was ridiculous.

"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," Corp. 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."

A more well composed statement from this article:

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

What a mess.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I believe he did.

If so then I'd be heading to my lawyers office if these Albertans don't get charged for unsafe firearm storage too.

 

[Sig_Des]

Did Ian Thomson end up getting charged?
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/lorne-gunter-why-hang-ian-thomson-for-the-crime-of-protecting-himself/

He did, but was aquitted as of Jan, however the Crown stated they would appeal.

http://www.theccfblog.ca/2013/01/ian-thomson-acquitted-but-may-face.html


As far as the High River firearms confiscation/storage for safety thing, I probably reacted too quickly as a gun owner to the poor statements by the initial RCMP spokesperson.

IMO, if the police are in your house and they see a loaded shotgun/pistol/ whatever, unsecured, just sitting on the table or counter, of course they can't leave it.

However, if it's properly stored, and meeting all the requirements, that's a whole different issue.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Did Ian Thomson end up getting charged?
http://www.firearmlegaldefence.com/lorne-gunter-why-hang-ian-thomson-for-the-crime-of-protecting-himself/

Yes he did. The Crown used a two prong approach in charging him. Almost 2 1\2 years after being attacked, in his home, by thugs intent on burning him alive, and thousands of dollars in legal fees, the judge acquitted him. The Crown has yet to appeal.


All because he protected himself and his property from people intent on killing him.

Instead of calling 911 and waiting for the police to "Serve and Protect Investigate"

 

[Container]

If so then I'd be heading to my lawyers office if these Albertans don't get charged for unsafe firearm storage too.

I dont follow?