Police Endangerment?

http://cjme.com/story/controversy-over-high-river-gun-seizures-continues/117917

This is interesting. We all know that in every community there are baddies. The cops know who the people are that are generally responsible for a high percentage of the crime in their towns. And we know the police would love an excuse to enter their homes and see what they might be up to. And to be fair it would be a great pre-emptive strike that would benefit the communities. But we have this pesky charter of rights that includes protection against unlawful and UNREASONABLE search and seizure. There are an estimated 300 citizens of High River who did not evac. when they were told to. There are 160 cops keeping the town surrounded and locked down as of now. Does it seem reasonable for police to break into houses without the owners' permission and confiscate guns? Bear in mind that the story of body searches came out long after the searches and seizures were performed. I think it is just an attempt to placate the residents who were understandably upset knowing that police were rooting through their homes when they are perceived as the force that is supposed to protect the homes from being rooted through.

The town of High River is in a state in which there is more than one cop for every two citizens right now. That should make it SAFER than usual and therefore LESS necessary to implement extreme safety measures such as gun seizures. I would think removing people from houses would come before removing private property. And while they have locksmiths opening locks and law officials performing what amounts to police cat burglary, why not take knives and baseball bats and any other possibly dangerous weapons? Why stop there? If you see a grow op, a bag of coke, some pirated movies or albums, get rid of them too! What is the owner to do? "Hi, I'd like to report some illegal stuff that has been stolen from me." Perry Mason couldn't defend that charge in court.

Perhaps Larry Flynt said it best when he said that no matter how sleazy, perverted and indecent he was, rights and freedoms still applied to him. It doesn't matter how big a scumbag a person may be, or how frequent an offender, he or she has rights. And this is not to mention the majority of High Riverites who are law-abiding, good folks. I worked there for a couple years so I can say that. Imagine how they will feel going back to their damaged homes, (if they are still there), only to find that their belongings have been rummaged through. Talk about adding insult to injury!

Like I say, the town of High River is probably a bit safer after gun seizures that have taken place. And all the fortuitous information about illegal activity in the town that was stumbled upon during the seizures will probably help to clean up the area. But this was just not reasonable. And you can bet there will be more than 300 people who don't evacuate next time the river overflows for fear of criminals AND police. And there is no question the effect will be the same in every other town in Alberta, maybe even Canada, if we don't tidy up our laws and procedures a bit. How many people will this indirectly endanger or even potentially lead to their deaths?

These search and seizure actions may well have been performed with only good intentions but you can not overlook the fact that in the end the authorities may have shot themselves in the foot here. They could actually have endangered more people than they protected. And that's not in their job descriptions. Leastaways not how I reckon.