RCMP seize all unsecured guns in Alberta town

Started by Barrister, June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Barrister

Quote from: crazy canuck on June 28, 2013, 03:46:35 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 28, 2013, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM
RCMP have said it was only for security, and that guns will be returned to their proper owners

So what is the objection?

The extent of the devastation is extreme.  This isnt merely a flood.  There are a lot of things the RCMP could be doing right now that doesnt entail all the work necessary to collect, store and return these guns.   I think it boils down to an efficient use of resources during this time of emergency.

They weren't entering the homes for the purpose of finding guns.  They were going into homes to search for people in need of help - and if they found unsecured guns they took them.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

Jacob

Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:52:22 PMThey weren't entering the homes for the purpose of finding guns.  They were going into homes to search for people in need of help - and if they found unsecured guns they took them.

If that is how it happened, that seems innocuous enough to me assuming the guns are returned in a reasonable timeframe.

crazy canuck

Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:52:22 PM
They weren't entering the homes for the purpose of finding guns.  They were going into homes to search for people in need of help - and if they found unsecured guns they took them.

I wasnt suggesting they were.  But it takes time to gather, catalogue, store and then return those guns.

I think it really somes down to whether there is a risk that looters will take those guns.  If there is no such risk then what is the "security" issue?

The Brain

Owners of unsecured guns have broken the law and must be sent to gaol. Read your Machiavelli.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Viking

Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:44:39 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 28, 2013, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM
RCMP have said it was only for security, and that guns will be returned to their proper owners

So what is the objection?

That police went into private homes and seized private property.

And if they had found improperly stored explosives, radioactive materials, medicines, volatile organic compounds, strong acids or highly reactive chemicals?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

dps

Quote from: Viking on June 29, 2013, 01:34:26 AM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:44:39 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 28, 2013, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM
RCMP have said it was only for security, and that guns will be returned to their proper owners

So what is the objection?

That police went into private homes and seized private property.

And if they had found improperly stored explosives, radioactive materials, medicines, volatile organic compounds, strong acids or highly reactive chemicals?

I'll bet that some people, in hurriedly evacuating their homes, left at least plenty of medicines behind.  Volatile organic compounds, strong acids, and highly reactive chemicals are a reasonable possibility.  Improperly stored explosives seem less likely, and radioactive materials highly unlikely.

Cecil


CountDeMoney

lol, Momo looks like she had had enough of that shit.

Cecil

I like that last image when shes trying to turn the rescue worker into swiss cheese.

The Brain

Quote from: dps on June 29, 2013, 02:05:19 AM
Quote from: Viking on June 29, 2013, 01:34:26 AM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:44:39 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 28, 2013, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM
RCMP have said it was only for security, and that guns will be returned to their proper owners

So what is the objection?

That police went into private homes and seized private property.

And if they had found improperly stored explosives, radioactive materials, medicines, volatile organic compounds, strong acids or highly reactive chemicals?

I'll bet that some people, in hurriedly evacuating their homes, left at least plenty of medicines behind.  Volatile organic compounds, strong acids, and highly reactive chemicals are a reasonable possibility.  Improperly stored explosives seem less likely, and radioactive materials highly unlikely.

Indeed. Any radioactive material was likely carried within the body of the person.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Eddie Teach

Quote"She will crawl in the tub with [Kevan] or crawl in the shower with him, so that was probably a good thing that she's been around water a little bit," she said.

Dude, boundaries.
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

Viking

Quote from: dps on June 29, 2013, 02:05:19 AM
Quote from: Viking on June 29, 2013, 01:34:26 AM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:44:39 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 28, 2013, 03:35:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 28, 2013, 03:02:46 PM
RCMP have said it was only for security, and that guns will be returned to their proper owners

So what is the objection?

That police went into private homes and seized private property.

And if they had found improperly stored explosives, radioactive materials, medicines, volatile organic compounds, strong acids or highly reactive chemicals?

I'll bet that some people, in hurriedly evacuating their homes, left at least plenty of medicines behind.  Volatile organic compounds, strong acids, and highly reactive chemicals are a reasonable possibility.  Improperly stored explosives seem less likely, and radioactive materials highly unlikely.

I was just listing materials which require specific kinds of storage, like apparently guns in alberta do. The radioactives and explosives are much more likely at a workplace, obviously. Still the point remains. Are guns a specific case or is it general or all materials requiring specific storage procedures.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Admiral Yi

It seems pretty innocuous to me.

Course if they run any checks and prosecute/confiscate, it becomes more nocuous.