Québec wins temporary injunction to keep gun registry

141 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Québec wins temporary injunction to keep gun registry
Unionist

I've put this in the Québec forum, as the registry is clearly dead in the rest of Canada. Québec has a consensus of all political parties to establish its own provincial registry, and its court challenges to keep the Québec data from being destroyed is one step in that struggle. The trial, to determine whether the injunction will be replaced by an interlocutory injunction, is scheduled to resume on June 13.

Fidel

How do they feel about the registry in Northern Quebec?

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I haven't heard anyone mention the gun registry here at all - nothing, nada.

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

How do they feel about the registry in Northern Quebec?

You think your wedge politics will work here? North vs. South, urban vs. rural?? You obviously have little knowledge of our nation. Check out the results of the May 2 election. The NDP elected members everywhere. Try to reproduce those results in your province, or any province, and get back to me.

Fidel

They voted NDP in record numbers in Quebec, and it was because of the NDP's obssession with Allan Rock's gun registry?

Is that right?

Did anyone ask Northerners, or do they even matter?

ETA: I am glad they won an injunction. It stops the Harpers from destroying something that belongs to Canadians. 

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

ETA: I am glad they won an injunction. It stops the Harpers from destroying something that belongs to Canadians. 

Thanks for your support.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Fidel wrote:

ETA: I am glad they won an injunction. It stops the Harpers from destroying something that belongs to Canadians. 

So - what's stopping Ontario - and the other provinces - from taking the same step as Quebec?

bouchecl

Boom Boom wrote:

Fidel wrote:

ETA: I am glad they won an injunction. It stops the Harpers from destroying something that belongs to Canadians. 

So - what's stopping Ontario - and the other provinces - from taking the same step as Quebec?

The answer can be found in the first sentence of comment #2 by Unionist. The issue is dead in the ROC.

EDIT: We won two months of life support. However I'm not convinced Quebec will win this one at the end of the day. 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

But Ontario has a Liberal government, and the Registry was a (federal) Liberal idea. Why can't the Liberals in Ontario fight for their share of the Registry just like Quebec?

Bacchus

The federal Liberals and the Ontario ones are not in lock step with one another.

 

Since Quebec just wants their data I'd give it to them, much good it will do since unless they are careful it will be outdated and useless fairly quickly as people move, sell things etc. In fact delaying this in court ultimately makes the data worhless as more time is lost.

Quebec should be putting its own laws and registry in place asap while this all plays out

 

And if they are not planning to do so, then this is purely a political move for votes and not a real play to use data

bouchecl

Bacchus wrote:

The federal Liberals and the Ontario ones are not in lock step with one another.

Since Quebec just wants their data I'd give it to them, much good it will do since unless they are careful it will be outdated and useless fairly quickly as people move, sell things etc. In fact delaying this in court ultimately makes the data worhless as more time is lost.

Quebec should be putting its own laws and registry in place asap while this all plays out

And if they are not planning to do so, then this is purely a political move for votes and not a real play to use data

The registry is still updated in Quebec according to this RCMP site: 

Until further notice, due to a Court Order issued by the Quebec Superior Court, residents of Quebec are still required to register non-restricted firearms with the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program.

Bacchus

Wow then I am impressed and glad to see it. I am cynical enough these days to suspect every move be just a political ploy. Im glad this is not

autoworker autoworker's picture

Boom Boom wrote:

Fidel wrote:

ETA: I am glad they won an injunction. It stops the Harpers from destroying something that belongs to Canadians. 

So - what's stopping Ontario - and the other provinces - from taking the same step as Quebec?

Firearms fall under Federal jurisdiction, as does the Criminal Code.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

Firearms fall under Federal jurisdiction, as does the Criminal Code.

Property is provincial. Crime is federal.

In 1996, Alberta challenged the new federal legislation, saying firearms were provincial. The Supreme Court said, yeah, but crime is federal.

Now that the oil and gas barons are in power in Ottawa, and the gun registry is (almost) gone, I fully expected the U.S. "right to bear arms" crowd to switch gears and say: "But firearms are federal!!!!" Watch for Harper's lawyers to use that argument against Québec.

Anyway, this is purely a Québec issue. I'm not sure why outsiders are so worried about our attempts to protect people. I'll never forget Darrell Dexter's [url=http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20110713/ns-premier-says-provincial-gun... sensitive comments[/url] on the issue:

Quote:

Federal officials say provinces mulling their own gun registries should not look to Ottawa for help, and Dexter says that would make it too expensive to launch in his province.

"When it comes to any kind of new initiatives, we simply don't have the money to embark on costly or comprehensive jurisdictional areas that belong to the federal government," Dexter said Tuesday.

"We're struggling to make sure that we keep teachers in the classroom, that we keep nurses that work in our hospitals. We have real priorities that we're trying to deal with and we're going to concentrate on that."

You can always tell a liar when he gives two phoney reasons where one real one would do.

autoworker autoworker's picture

@Unionist: My point was that, without Criminal Code enforcement, it's practically useless. As for Quebec: What prevents gun registry legislation under its Civil Code? If Quebec wants a registry with enforcement mechanisms, and has the will to implement it, then why should the ROC object? If Quebec does decide to go ahead with one, it would probably be better to start from scratch anyway, and not replicate the problems that plagued the Federal program.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

@Unionist: My point was that, without Criminal Code enforcement, it's practically useless.

What are you talking about? You don't register your car under current provincial laws, we take it away. You don't register your gun under new provincial laws, you lose it. Totally within provincial jurisdiction. There is absolutely no need for Criminal Code enforcement. The Criminal Code aspects of the registry just gave the NRA lovers talking points about "criminalizing hard-working god-fearing law-abiding citizens". It was a useless Liberal add-on, which the NDP was trying to eliminate.

Quote:
As for Quebec: What prevents gun registry legislation under its Civil Code?

Nothing (though that's not what Harper's paid liars will argue). Québec will create its own legislation. Because it's Charest in power, of course, there are more important priorities, like selling out the North and crushing the students. But all parties are agreed, at least in words, on creating a provincial registry.

Quote:
If Quebec wants a registry with enforcement mechanisms, and has the will to implement it, then why should the ROC object?

Ask Harper that. He will do everything possible to stop Québec - because he can't tolerate any spark of progressive models anywhere in Canadian society. Others might get ideas.

Quote:
If Quebec does decide to go ahead with one, it would probably be better to start from scratch anyway, and not replicate the problems that plagued the Federal program.

Excuse me, you'll have to explain why, when all guns are registered in Québec right now (except for whatever criminals haven't done so) and the court has ordered registration to continue, Québec should announce: "Ok, folks, thanks for obeying the law, but we're now tearing up all our registry data, and you'll have to file in and register the same weapons again - for a modest fee of course."

No, I don't think so. That, of course, is what Vic Toews would achieve by destroying the data. That, of course, is why Québec is in court trying to save the data. I would that thought that was clear.

Unionist

Actually, autoworker, you raised a great point. Why should the ROC object? Here's my question: Why aren't other provinces intervening to support Québec's challenge to keep its own data? Even if they don't want their data, isn't it a fundamental issue which could haunt them on other subjects in the future?

My answer is: They don't give a shit. I quoted Darrell Dexter as a particularly contemptible example of that thesis. I would love to be proven wrong.

autoworker autoworker's picture

Unionist wrote:

Actually, autoworker, you raised a great point. Why should the ROC object? Here's my question: Why aren't other provinces intervening to support Québec's challenge to keep its own data? Even if they don't want their data, isn't it a fundamental issue which could haunt them on other subjects in the future?

My answer is: They don't give a shit. I quoted Darrell Dexter as a particularly contemptible example of that thesis. I would love to be proven wrong.

The Problem is that the registry is a Federal database that collected information on Canadian residents. It's not the property of Quebec. While the decision rests with the courts, it has the makings of an interesting precedent, as you point out.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

The Problem is that the registry is a Federal database that collected information on Canadian residents. It's not the property of Quebec.

Well, if it was the property of Québec, there wouldn't be any fear of destruction nor any need to go to court. The issue is: Just because something is your property, does that mean you can destroy it? Obviously there are countless examples to the contrary. And that's what the courts will decide - although I have very little confidence that they will rule in Québec's favour.

 

autoworker autoworker's picture

I wonder if there may be an individual court challenge to have one's information removed from the registry, or perhaps a class action blocking further use of the database.

6079_Smith_W

I'd say there is enough overlap in jurisdiction, the issue and in the effect of the registry that it is anyone's guess how the court might rule. 

It is even possible  the political will within Quebec may even play into the decision. Sometimes, after all, courts do make rulings based on common sense.

 

6079_Smith_W

I am sure you know Unionist,  that one of Harper's strategies in many of his actions is  that if Quebec residents gets so frustrated that they opt for sovreignty there is a silver lining in that for him.

I may oppose the gun registry as written and promoted by the Liberals, but that does not make me an American stooge, and if there is a critical mass of support for the registry within Quebec, I support that move completely. I am glad the injunction came through, and not only because it pisses off Vic Toews.

Perhaps we shouldn't do Harper any favours by helping him drive that wedge in any more. Just look at him pretending to be sympathetic to Quebec in his recent comments about the Charter. Playing sides off against each other and creating division is what his rule is built on.

 

 

Unionist

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I am sure you know Unionist,  that one of Harper's strategies in many of his actions is  that if Quebec residents gets so frustrated that they opt for sovreignty there is a silver lining in that for him.

Us too, maybe.

Quote:
I may oppose the gun registry as written and promoted by the Liberals, but that does not make me an American stooge,

I oppose it as written as well. But anyone who supports Harper's abolition of it, without replacing it by far more effective and stringent gun control, had better wonder why they are supporting Harper and not the women's and trade union and other organizations across Canada who are on the other side.

But you aren't wondering out loud about individual and class action challenges to protect your arsenal from the State's eyes, are you? That's why you don't qualify as an American stooge. Nor did I ever hint you were one. But try to understand that the impetus for getting rid of the registry comes from the NRA and Harper and his robots. Wonder why Jack Layton and almost the entire NDP caucus voted to keep the registry. Try to see through the well-financed propaganda campaign which has been running for 17 years now, which says guns are good and people are bad. I'm sure you have done all these thought exercises and arrived at the right conclusion.

Quote:
and if there is a critical mass of support for the registry within Quebec, I support that move completely.

What do you mean, "if"? Are you serious? Do you know what it takes to get an all-party consensus here? And what if it's just 50% + 1? Is that a critical mass in your dictionary?

Quote:
Perhaps we shouldn't do Harper any favours by helping him drive that wedge in any more.

Let's not use the term "tar sands" because it pisses off Albertans and we don't want to drive the wedge. Let's not call for single-tier health care because Québec has gone down the road of privatization and we don't want to drive a wedge. Let's forget about Kyoto because the eastern provinces liked it and the west didn't.

The best question to ask in all those (and a myriad other) so-called "wedges" is this: Am I on Harper's side of that wedge?? If the answer is "yes", then time to go see a wedge doctor and get at least a diagnosis, if not some treatment.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

I wonder if there may be an individual court challenge to have one's information removed from the registry, or perhaps a class action blocking further use of the database.

Oh, absolutely - I'd suggest checking with the tens of millions of hard-working Canadians who filed complaints demanding that the long-form census be abolished in order to stop the government from snooping into their private lives. They might have some energy left over to demand that the record of their arsenals be deleted.

[Clearing throat... hummmmmmm...]

Quote:
O beautiful for spacious skies,

For amber waves of grain,

For purple mountain majesties,

Above the fruited plain!

6079_Smith_W

Please Unionist, don't read stuff into my comments that aren't there, like making accusations based  on the meaning of the word "if". Yes, I know there is a fucking consensus in your province. That's why I made the point of saying that I support you in that. 

So you can stop singing the anthem of a country that does not have any meaning to me, thank you very much. I don't appreciate the implication, The bottom line is that on this issue, I am on your side in wanting to preserve that registry in Quebec.

 

 

Unionist

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Please Unionist, don't read stuff into my comments that aren't there, like making accusations based  on the meaning of the word "if". Yes, I know there is a fucking consensus in your province. That's why I made the point of saying that I support you in that. 

So you can stop singing the anthem of a country that does not have any meaning to me, thank you very much. I don't appreciate the implication, The bottom line is that on this issue, I am on your side in wanting to preserve that registry in Quebec.

You can be offended all you want - or, you can look back at my post and see that I wasn't singing the anthem at you - and my next post where I specifically excluded you from my implication. Just read carefully, please. You appear to see wedges and divisions where there are none.

I guess I have to apologize to you for something that I never said nor intended in the first place. Does that make it clearer? I have no accusation against you whatsoever.

Our only point of difference that I can see is this: You appear to be concerned about "wedge politics". The way to avoid a "wedge" is not to avoid taking stands on important issues. It is by building broad unity against the evil that is Harper, without stopping to freak out about secondary differences that we have.

Let me make it even clearer. Anyone whose vote in a federal election is primarily driven by whether or not the Liberal gun registry continues to exist, is very hard for me to see as an ally.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I was waiting for someone to mention the USA.  One nation, under the gun

6079_Smith_W

Actually no, the way to avoid the wedge is not to not take stands, but rather to not make distinctions between Quebec and the rest of Canada (and I know you were not the only person doing this), but rather to focus on the issues. There are supporters and opponents of the registry throughout Canada.

I don't share the opinion of those who voted based on the registry (and other things) but I can certainly see why some of them saw the Liberal government's actions as an attack. Of course if the entire focus is on the registry those people are not allies. But the reality is that people and everything else in this world are far more multi-faceted than that.

 

 

 

 

 

autoworker autoworker's picture

Why should Canadian, gun owning Quebec residents remain on a Federal registry, when their compatriots elsewhere in Canada do not. If Quebec wanted the names of Canadians, residing in Quebec, who completed census data, along with their information, should Ottawa comply? What of other information that's collected on Quebec residents. Let Quebec create it's own registry, if that's the consensus, as it sets it's fiscal priorities.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

Why should Canadian, gun owning Quebec residents remain on a Federal registry, when their compatriots elsewhere in Canada do not.

That's the price they pay for living in Québec. If they don't like it, they can take it up with the Superior Court judge who granted the interlocutory injunction. Or are they not subject to the rule of law either?

Quote:
If Quebec wanted the names of Canadians, residing in Quebec, who completed census data, along with their information, should Ottawa comply?

You mean, if Ottawa announced they were going to destroy all existing census information? Nah, let it burn.

What you seem to miss is that police in Québec have access to registry data now. They're not asking for any info held by Ottawa. They're just asking for the info they access now not to be destroyed. See, I'm pretending you are raising serious points rather than just baiting as you have always done with respect to Québec.

Quote:
What of other information that's collected on Quebec residents.

What are you talking about? What information? Collected by whom?

Quote:
Let Quebec create it's own registry, if that's the consensus, as it sets it's fiscal priorities.

Yes, that's what it intends to do. Would you like Canadians resident in Québec (as you put it) to be obliged to register their already-registered firearms again, from scratch? That's what you and Vic Toews would apparently be advocating.

autoworker autoworker's picture

I assume that, while the injection is in effect, Quebec residents shall continue to register their guns in the Official Language of their choice.

Unionist

autoworker wrote:

I assume that, while the injection is in effect, Quebec residents shall continue to register their guns in the Official Language of their choice.

No, actually, by all-party consensus, everyone must register their gun in English only. Violators will be shot.

ETA: Sorry for being flippant. Perhaps you are unaware that an individual can live quite comfortably and get everything done in English only, if they want. They can register their [url=http://www.saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/vehicle_registration/index.php]vehicle[/url] and their [url=http://www.ramq.gouv.qc.ca/en/citizens/health-insurance/Pages/health-ins... and [url=http://www.revenuquebec.ca/en/sepf/formulaires/default.aspx?T=200]provin... tax returns[/url] and everything else in English - and all those are provincial. So I wouldn't worry too much about gun-owners that can only shoot in English. They'll be fine.

MegB

autoworker wrote:

I assume that, while the injection is in effect, Quebec residents shall continue to register their guns in the Official Language of their choice.

Enough already.  If you can't refrain from dumping on Québec, just stay out of the forum altogether, k?

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

autoworker wrote:

I assume that, while the injection is in effect, Quebec residents shall continue to register their guns in the Official Language of their choice.

No, actually, by all-party consensus, everyone must register their gun in English only. Violators will be shot.

ETA: Sorry for being flippant. Perhaps you are unaware that an individual can live quite comfortably and get everything done in English only, if they want. They can register their [url=http://www.saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/vehicle_registration/index.php]vehicle[/url] and their [url=http://www.ramq.gouv.qc.ca/en/citizens/health-insurance/Pages/health-ins... and [url=http://www.revenuquebec.ca/en/sepf/formulaires/default.aspx?T=200]provin... tax returns[/url] and everything else in English - and all those are provincial. So I wouldn't worry too much about gun-owners that can only shoot in English. They'll be fine.

 

lol! And we know what Freud said about English-speaking males and their need of long guns...

MegB

Hey, sometimes a long gun is just a long gun.

6079_Smith_W

... and a scattergun is a scattergun, all the time.

(as in, by design it catches a lot of things other than the intended target, for those not familiar with how sawed-off shotguns work).

6079_Smith_W

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/04/23/pol-ndp-bruce-hyer.html

Bruce Hyer quits NDP caucus to sit as independent. He cited, among other things, NDP leader Thomas Mulcair's pledge to restore the long gun registry.

 

Fidel

The NDP has to get the hell away from old line party issues. Lib-Tories same old stories only know how to divide Canadians against each other. The NDP has to find a way to cut through that crap and unite Canadians against the old line party plutocracy. 

Canadians want hope for the future not more oppressive rules and regulations and user fees. Hunters and anglers were already KGB'd to death when out in the bush. They have to produce more paperwork and documents on the spot for gun-toting park ranger-paramilitaries than Europeans did when crossing borders during the cold war era. The Liberals really fucked it up good.

Unionist

Bad news. The Court of Appeal has unanimously ruled that Québec can't stop Harper from destroying the registry.

BUT - the Court maintained the injunction for two more weeks in case Québec wants to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court and apply for a fresh injunction...

If I got that wrong, I'm sure someone here will correct me. I'll see if I can find a reliable link in English.

ETA: Québec immediately announced its intent to appeal:

Quote:

Le ministre québécois de la Justice, Bertrand St-Arnaud, s’est dit déçu du jugement rendu par le plus haut tribunal de la province. Il a immédiatement annoncé son intention de porter la cause devant la Cour suprême.

«Il y a un consensus au Québec en ce qui concerne l'enregistrement des armes à feu, a souligné le ministre. Toutes les formations politiques représentées à l'Assemblée nationale défendent cette position unanime et s'opposent vivement à la décision du gouvernement fédéral d'abolir le registre des armes à feu.»

Source.

Bärlüer

Not surprised in the least. The Superior Court decision was, shall we say, creative, legally speaking. (I'm not saying it was bad, but it was clearly unorthodox.)

Chances of reversal at the Supreme Court: very slim.

Francesca Allan

Sorry, off topic, but I would never support a gun registry that stated the following:

Quote:

Reasons for licence refusals or revocations include: a history of violence, mental illness, potential risk to oneself or others, unsafe firearm use and storage, drug offences, and providing false information.

[emphasis added]

Society again equates mental illness with violence. 

Unionist

Francesca Allan wrote:

Sorry, off topic, but I would never support a gun registry that stated the following:

You're not off topic, Francesca, just mistaken.

What you quoted relates to the Firearms Act - which is still in full force and effect throughout Canada - and has absolutely nothing to do with the registry, which is gone.

You see, the registry classified guns, not people. So hopefully, you would support the registry and Québec's fight to create its own. Who knows, maybe even your own province might be prevailed upon to do so too.

 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Francesca Allan wrote:

Sorry, off topic, but I would never support a gun registry that stated the following:

Quote:

Reasons for licence refusals or revocations include: a history of violence, mental illness, potential risk to oneself or others, unsafe firearm use and storage, drug offences, and providing false information.

[emphasis added]

Society again equates mental illness with violence. 

 

.....and drug possession.

Todrick of Chat...

Unionist wrote:

Francesca Allan wrote:

Sorry, off topic, but I would never support a gun registry that stated the following:

You're not off topic, Francesca, just mistaken.

What you quoted relates to the Firearms Act - which is still in full force and effect throughout Canada - and has absolutely nothing to do with the registry, which is gone.

You see, the registry classified guns, not people. So hopefully, you would support the registry and Québec's fight to create its own. Who knows, maybe even your own province might be prevailed upon to do so too.

 

Unionist

I believe you are mistaken, if I recall correctly under the previous gun registry there were several questions that dealt with mental health issues on the permit forms.

Of course it was several years ago when I did that paperwork.

Edit: remarks

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/form-formulaire/pdfs/5592-eng.pdf

Under the current form there are several questions dealing mental health. So in my view the government is tracking mental health issues of people.

Now I am not sure how much the forms have changed over the last 15 years but I guess that they have a large database of those that could have mental health problems.

 

Unionist

Yes, Todrick. Your link proves that they are tracking mental health issues. But the registry has been GONE since last year. And the form is a possession and acquisitions licence under the Firearms Act, which is still in effect and has nothing to do with the registry.

ETA: Look, there's no point arguing about this. All I wanted to do was correct Francesca, who quoted a line from the RCMP website relating to the Firearms Act, and didn't seem to realize that it's still in full force and effect even though there is no more registry in existence since 2012. There's lots of confusion generated by the gun lobby about this, and at least we should be clear on basic facts.

 

Todrick of Chat...

The registry collected the mental health issues of anyone that has applied for a firearm since the 1990s. Unionist, they are both connected, monitor and managed by the same people. I am willing to bet the the mental health records are still active in some government database.

 

Unionist

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

The registry collected the mental health issues of anyone that has applied for a firearm since the 1990s. Unionist, they are both connected, monitor and managed by the same people. I am willing to bet the the mental health records are still active in some government database.

 

Ok, you're right. But Francesca and you and anyone else who is worried about that database should forget about the registry (it's gone) and start lobbying to destroy those records. This thread is about the registry, and here in Québec, we're going to create one. That's the consensus of all of Québec. Too bad Canada can't do squat about gun control.

 

Paladin1

I seen this story and wondered how pro-registry Quebec residents would feel about it.

RCMP kicked in the doors and raided homes that were flooded in Alberta and confiscated firearms.

 

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Hell+Residents+angry+RCMP+siez...

Quote:

HIGH RIVER — RCMP revealed Thursday that officers have seized a “substantial amount” of firearms from homes in the evacuated town of High River.

“We just want to make sure that all of those things are in a spot that we control, simply because of what they are,” said Sgt. Brian Topham.

“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.”

That news didn’t sit well with a crowd of frustrated residents who had planned to breach a police checkpoint northwest of the town as an evacuation order stretched into its eighth day.

“I find that absolutely incredible that they have the right to go into a person’s belongings out of their home,” said resident Brenda Lackey, after learning Mounties have been taking residents’ guns. “When people find out about this there’s going to be untold hell to pay.”

See photos from the scene.

About 30 RCMP officers set up a blockade at the checkpoint, preventing 50 residents from walking into the town. Dozens more police cars, lights on, could be seen lining streets in the town on standby.

Officers laid down a spike belt to stop anyone from attempting to drive past the blockade. That action sent the crowd of residents into a rage.

“What’s next? Tear gas?” shouted one resident.

“It’s just like Nazi Germany, just taking orders,” shouted another.

“This is the reason the U.S. has the right to bear arms,” said Charles Timpano, pointing to the group of Mounties.

Officers were ordered to fall back about an hour into the standoff in order to diffuse the situation and listen to residents’ concerns.

“We don’t want our town to turn into another New Orleans,” said resident Jeff Langford. “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.”

Langford blasted High River Mayor Emile Blokland over comments made Wednesday in which Blokland said residents will be allowed to return after businesses, such as hardware and drug stores, are opened.

“It was ridiculous,” said Langford. “I think he’s a puppet on a string.”

Langford said Premier Redford should come to High River to address residents’ concerns and provide information.

“This is at the highest tension,” he said. “What’s going to happen next is that people are just going to be walking across these fields, and I don’t care if they put hundreds of thousand of police officers there, they’re not going to stop from getting in.”

Sgt. Topham said he didn’t know when residents would be allowed to return to their homes. “People much higher up are going to make those decisions,” he said.

He did confirm that officer relied on forced entry to get into numerous houses during the early stages of the flood because of an “urgent need”, said Topham.

Police are no longer forcing themselves into homes and the residences that were forced open will be secured, he said.

Topham said the confiscated firearms have been inventoried and are secured at an RCMP detachment. He was not at liberty to say how many firearms had been confiscated.

“We have seized a large quantity of firearms simply because they were left by residents in their places,” said Topham.

The guns will be returned to owners after residents are allowed back in town and they provide proof of ownership, Topham added.

Residents promised to returned to the checkpoint at noon every day until they are allowed to return to their homes.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald   

Todrick of Chat...

Will the new Qecbec registry have metal health questions? Likely.

 

Francesca Allan

Thanks for the information, Unionist; I was clueless. FWIW, I totally support gun control for EVERYBODY as I hate guns (and the mentality that goes with them). I just strongly object to singling out a group of people based on nothing more than subjective criteria of what a psychiatrist deems "normal." Clearly, this is a subject for another thread, though.

Pages