High River- Police seizure of firearms

[chris vickery]

Maybe someone who knows better may set me straight on this but here goes;
I thought that in order for Police to enter/search a premises and lay charges, that they had to have just cause. Be it a court issued warrant or have witnessed or seen in open sight a violation of law. eg. coming to the door of a home and being able to clearly see inside the illegal item in plain view.
As far as laying charges for unlawful storage in the High River case, I would argue that yes, perhaps these situation were encountered, but only after Police conducted a break and enter of the premises. Kind of crosses each other out as far as I'm concerned but I am not a lawyer. I believe that this is why no charges were laid in these cases as it would be paramount to embarrassment on the behalf of the RCMP.
If the areas were cordoned off and locked down as suggested, there really was not any reason in the interest of Public Safety to illegally enter and seize personal property. Things were safe right where they were.
As far as lawsuits involving the Firearms act and reclassification, that is coming henceforth by the NFA.
I understand that the RCMP has been tasked with the administration of the Act but I fail to understand how perfectly legal firearms yesterday become illegal today by the stroke of a pen and how law abiding Citizens become criminals overnight?
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Tony Wheeler]

Upon reflection I feel I've intruded on this thread so I've removed my posts accordingly. While many of the issues raised are relevant to Australians, particularly evacuation policy during natural disasters, I suspect they're best discussed in general terms rather than in the context of one particular event, particularly the High River case where the focus is largely on gun control rather than disaster management.