High River- Police seizure of firearms

[Marc Montgomery]

While I do not condone such things as drinking and driving the idea of roadside car seizure for even tiny amounts of alcohol or this ridiculous "stunting" laws...also strikes me as being against civil rights...police as instant judge and jury... and again seizure of private property..

what's very much even more scary- are the number of people who clamour for crushing of vehicles in such cases..destruction of property..
I am amazed at people who would so willingly walk blindly into a 1984- big brother state.
(btw- did you know your car has a black box that police can use to convict you, and insurance companies can use to deny your claims?)

[Andrew]

Im not sure at what year this started as standard practice but the computers now have that data of speed,braking etc stored in them. And yes the police do use it if it is avail as legal evidence. I was just talking to my wife about this today. That car, and that computer is the owners legal property. Like anything, you would assume police or insurance company's would need a warrant to seize it, and if not, anything on it would be inadmissible in a court of law, but i have yet to hear of anything like that in canada

Originally Posted by Marc Montgomery

(btw- did you know your car has a black box that police can use to convict you, and insurance companies can use to deny your claims?)

[Marc Montgomery]

From a 2013 news story
"While there are at least 12 US states that have laws regarding the ownership and use of EDR information, Canada does not have EDR specific legislation and this data is regularly used in the courts."

I cannot immediately recall insurance companies using the data to deny claims, but if its used in court then its available, and Im quite sure they will, and have, deniec claims

Car insurance companies are now using something very similar..in Canada Desjardins is calling it "Ajusto" claiming it will reduce your bills if the info shows you are a "safe" driver".. ( a somewhat relative judgement determined by the insurance company)

now optional, what happens when all insurance companies have this?
I dont see this as lowering your costs, but rather as an excuse to charge much more if you do not agree to having this installed to monitor and report on your driving.
(acceleration, speed, braking force etc) if you accelerate hard, they may feel you are a risk... if you brake hard..same deal.. speeding? well of course..risky all= more $ regardless of whether you've ever been in an accident.

BTW in Quebec if you have several accidents that were not your fault (3 i think) you re considered to have bad luck and so are a risk..= higher rates.

[Dianaa]

Originally Posted by Marc Montgomery

While I do not condone such things as drinking and driving
.... I am amazed at people who would so willingly walk blindly into a 1984- big brother state.
(btw- did you know your car has a black box that police can use to convict you, and insurance companies can use to deny your claims?)

Not in a Blitz though!

[Marc Montgomery]

No, not a CMP though. you're correct there....in fact not much electronic at all on a CMP. Imagine a vehicle you can tune without a computer...those were the days.

BTW massive floods in England, massive fires in OZ...no police smashing in doors and taking property in either place?

[Dianaa]

Originally Posted by Marc Montgomery

No, not a CMP though. you're correct there....in fact not much electronic at all on a CMP. Imagine a vehicle you can tune without a computer...those were the days.

BTW massive floods in England, massive fires in OZ...no police smashing in doors and taking property in either place?

But they are smashing into the bikie fortresses! (and taking their guns), but that's probably not a bad thing even if the suspension of civil liberties and denial of freedom of association is an issue.

[maple_leaf_eh]

One of the most unappreciated differences between Canada and the US is the so-called Miranda Rights given to persons detained by American cops. They have to be read their rights. In Canada the cops read the person a caution which allows just one phone call and offers very little individual protection.

There is case law that allows the cops to interrogate continuously without a lawyer present. Statements and confessions are accepted by the courts which have an odourous taint of intimidation and coertion. People go to jail for years for their flippant remarks, and are freed only after strenuous work by outsiders to have their cases reviewed. Some wrongful conviction settlements have been tens of millions of dollars.

The average biker is different than Joe-Blow Sixpack. They have lawyers on retainer, so when the cops break down the doors of a clubhouse or catch some Harley Davidson motorcycle with loud pipes, the guys get first class legal advice. Their probably even have "conduct after capture" training designed to counter police investigation techniques.

During the Alberta floods the Canadian Forces was 'called out' to assist the civil authoritites. The cops used some of their rubber assault boats to get to some isolated houses, and borrowed heavy picket fence post thumpers to break the doors. Apparently, when the army found out what their guys and kit were being used for, cooperation was abruptly withdrawn.

WRT Rob's RCMP acquaintance running to tell his story, that sounds like an internal story line that satisfies someone's need for rationalizing their actions. The thin blue line can close ranks tightly when it is challenged.

[Marc Montgomery]

Thanks for the link Rob.. It is truly frightening that people like Ms Cukier ( a paid lobbyist) will put their own personal agenda ahead of the foundations of our society in terms of our basic civil rights.

As to the RCMP...even if (and that is an enormous if) one accepts their thin excuse of breaking in to secure loose firearms, how can they explain the uneccessary damage iof destroying doors and frames worth anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars each, instead of simply breaking a small window beside when that option was avialable?

People there have said that in addition to tracking mud all over houses, and rooting through drawers, closets, etc they say mounties smashed doors on houses not part of the flood area, smashed a door on a house (not in a flood area) and which was getting extensive interior reno even though told by a friend as they arrived at the house , there was no one, and nothing inside..
Aslo they apparently did not break into houses owned by mounties. (at least two)

meanwhile, the latest this week.
http://o.canada.com/news/national/re...erta-flooding/

[Marc Montgomery]

Rob, can you possibly believe that claim? Victims of the flood? The town had been fully evacuated. If anyone had been left behind (virtually impossible) wouldnt they be at the door or window yelling for help? Maybe use a cell phone to call for help? Sorry, that claim is patently unbelievable. totally, i dont believe that for a nanosecond

Meanwhile, the swiss thing came about becuase of a dispute between two former partners..now both operating competing stores and as a very stupid tactic by one to get the other in trouble by claiming he was selling illegal firearms.. and look at the result...

I am not aware of the prescribed antiques issue.. could you clarify?