Gun Seizure Raises Questions

Thursday, October 05, 2006 04:00 AM

When three couples in their 50’s and 60’s returned from a pleasure-hunting trip along the Stikine River last Friday, they weren’t prepared for what would take place.

Ron Colebank, his wife Crystal, George Neudorf, his wife Judy, along with Williams Lake residents Thelma and Fred Hoeffels returned to the boat launch at Telegraph Creek last Friday morning.

As they began to unload their boats, they were approached by a man dressed in sweat pants and a t-shirt, who asked to see their rifles. They asked if he was a game warden; he replied "No I’m an RCMP member." After looking at their rifles he gave them back after making the comment that “People around here think I’m an a**-***e, but I’m just doing my job."

The group asked for some identification but the officer said, "I don’t have to give you any identification" and left, although one in the group says he did say his name.

Between 30 and 45 minutes later he returned, this time wearing a vest and his gun belt. He again approached the group asking for their rifles. This time he said they were being seized because (1) some of the rifles were not registered, (2) The PAL of one of the people in the group had expired.

In all, he took 7 rifles from the group.

During this time Ron Colebank says, "We had a trailer hitch break and I was running around trying to get it repaired because the water is very swift on the Stikine at the launch and we were afraid to lose a boat. The officer, who still hadn’t positively identified himself, kept following me asking me for the guns and I was using some colorful language towards him" says Colebank. "I said to the officer, I can understand why people think you’re an a**-**le." said Coleman. "At that point he told me he was charging me with Obstruction of Justice, and he got on a phone he was holding. An hour or so later two more police officers appeared who said they were from the Dease Lake Detachment."

Colebank and group were taken to the Dease Lake RCMP office where one of the officers said "We have 70 to 80 guns here that have been seized from people who don’t have them registered." Colebank says his group was there for a long time "We were at the Dease Lake station for about 4 to 5 hours". In the end, Colebank says the officer from Telegraph Creek came back into the office and said the obstruction charges were being dropped. Colebank says "I don’t know how he could drop charges when there were none officially laid."

The group of six then headed home without their rifles after being told they would have to return to Dease Lake to appear in Court to get their rifles back.

Opinion250 News contacted the Officer in Charge of the Dease Lake detachment, Sergeant Hunter. He says he will be talking to the officer in question later this week. When asked how many firearms were in storage at the RCMP facility in Dease Lake, he said, ‘No comment”. But he did acknowledge that all firearms seized from the region are stored in that office.

All six of those involved in the matter say none of them received a receipt for their rifles. When pressed for ID one of the officers said, "Can’t you see from the uniform who we are?" Colebank says "At the very end I got a card from a Const Brad. Robinson."

Sergeant Hunter says he would like to talk to the six people involved in the matter and he has asked them to try and reach him. “With their firearms, eventually they will be returned to their respective owners."

Meantime Jay Hill, House Whip and MP says yes there is an amnesty but the officer is right, there is an amnesty against criminal charges if your rifles are not registered but that doesn’t mean police officers cannot seize them. "That also applies to an expired PAL" says Hill. "It’s the best we have been able to do without a majority in the House." Hill adds "Police officers must however understand from what we have done, to show discretion." Hill says police in rural areas should show some common sense "A warning would have been more than sufficient in this case and it is plain to see that the officer in question showed very bad taste."

Hill says he will pass the matter over to Stockwell Day, Minister of Public Safety.

As for the 6 who were at the core of the seizure, all have returned home, with no idea of where their rifles are, no receipt for them being seized, no claim ticket, and as Colebank says “I never did get a card from the officer who started it all."

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, October 05, 2006 04:00 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: acrider54 on October 5 2006 5:36 AM

Power trips once again from the so called protector of the people, the RCMP they must be bored in Dease.

Posted by: Gofaster on October 5 2006 6:31 AM

Sounds like one officer with an attitude and an ego that needs to be taken in by his supervisor.

It is too bad that one officers questionable tactics throws a bad shadow on the good officers, of which there are many.

Posted by: Marty on October 5 2006 7:00 AM

He shows no I.D. when asked and was wearing sweats pants and a T-shirt.

Damn lucky he did not ask for my guns to look at.
No way in hell would I have believed he was a cop.
Next time try a uniform, and you better be willing to show your badge or go to hell jerk!

Cops like that give the good ones a bad name...then they wonder why people have no respect for them in general.
Maybe if your a cop, look at all the jerks you work with...really look at them, and the crap they pull.....then maybe you will understand why a lot of the public does not trust or respect you as a group.
And its a shame really...because some of you I bet are good people.
But are tainted by the losers amongst you.

Good story Ben, thanks for allowing me the chance to read it, as I had not heard a word of this yet....another fine example of power tripping and wasting time.
Go catch a drug dealer, murderer, thief or something useful idiot.

Posted by: wrinkledawg on October 5 2006 7:02 AM

There was enough of them there that they should of BOOTPHUCKED the arrogant prick and then deepsixed him.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on October 5 2006 7:38 AM

I think George N is lucky he didn't get shot. I know George and Judy they are definitely not trouble.

So the Rambo cop does a little attitude visit and then comes back with an amour vest on and carrying a freekin pistol!! How the hell did Rambo get into the RCMP? Rambo is dangerous, more dangerous than that pistol he was packing. People around the area better watch out for Rambo, someones going to get shot by this guy.

I bet Rambo would never have called in for extra cops if it had just been four people - Rambo would have given it a try on his own and started waving that pistol around.

Posted by: whynotyou on October 5 2006 8:15 AM

This is definitely a matter that requires investigating. Not because of the rifles being seized, but because the officer in question refused to identify himself. The fact that he returned carrying a "pistol" and was not perceived as a threat to the six involved (who were in possession of firearms) is pure luck on the so called "officer's" part. He is lucky the six people were of decent upbringing and had an abundance of common sense among them. To some people, shooting a nerd like that who was flaunting a pistol and refusing to identify himself would have been akin to "self defense".

Question: Where do they send low end cops? Answer: To Nowhere Man.

Posted by: Don Mackenzie on October 5 2006 8:34 AM

Did you all ever think, If the hunters had registered All their Firearms, Kept their PALs current,Nothing would have happened.You let your insurance and drivers licence expire get stopped would you BITCH ABOUT YOUR FINE??? Yes the officer should have been in uniform and shown his ID, But no Pal, a unregistered rifle, then Yes they should be charged.

Posted by: Don Mackenzie on October 5 2006 8:44 AM

I Forgot, Even if all your firearms are registered, you still need a Pal or Possession Certificate to be legal. The amount of money they must have spent on the trip, To be ruined by not renewing your Pal and registering 1 firearm before you go hunting.... Stupid....Officers conduct...Stupid...

Posted by: ammonra on October 5 2006 11:07 AM

I wouldn't express it quite the same way as Don, but I think he has hit the nail right on the head this time, for both issues. The hunters letting their paperwork lapse, and the overbearing "I'm in charge" type officer. I would only add that it never does any good to insult a police officer, no matter how busy you are. We do live in the real world, don't we?

Posted by: Palopu on October 5 2006 11:31 AM

Ammonra. I suspect a lot of people, police included, do not live in the real world, which explains why we have so many problems.

We cannot even face up to the fact that there are millions of guns in Canada that were never registered, and probably never will be. The whole question of gun registration was mishandled from the get go., and we now have a situation where there is some sort of amnesty, however not really an amnesty, because the Government of the day does not have a Majority. If the Conservatives do get a majority in the next election then this gun registry will be out the Window, and all that took place prior to it, will be history. With this in mind you would think that there would be very little if any attempt to enforce these laws, as obviously they have failed, and do not have the support of the Government of the day.

Posted by: thereasonableman on October 5 2006 11:33 AM

Very professional conduct, I'd be proud of this man....not. It doesn't matter that he had the right, the matter in which he conducted himself far outweighs any right he had in the first place.

He brought the public perception of the force into disrepute, and ignored proper procedure in favor of doing things his own way. Now that I have a badge, I AM THE LAW.

Without identification, he could have been taken down at gunpoint, had his weapon seized, and escorted to the nearest RCMP detachment for consideration of charges of impersonation or proper identification.

Also, I know the Colebank family and personally vouch for them being very upstanding citizens in all regards. These are not people that you would have had to resort to "bad attitude" to deal with.
These are people you would have been probably found hunting with while off-duty.

Yes, they should have had their documentation in order, but that is overshadowed by the officer's conduct by a wide margin.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on October 5 2006 12:41 PM

Did you ever stop to think Don, oops - I should start again.

Don, read the story again. One person had an outdated PAL, effecting one gun. The fact that one in the party an outdated PAL is a technicality not evidence of an intent to not follow the intent of the law. A judge will rule this a minor offence equivalent to a waste of court time.

The RCMP in this case can not be defended. Your defense of the conduct and nature of the event, also lowers the respectability of the RCMP. I would suggest you not help make matters worse for the RCMP involved. Rambo is going to get the door on this one.

Posted by: islander1 on October 5 2006 12:55 PM

D. McKenzie, you say they should be charged for not registering firearms and an expired PAL, maybe you should read before expressing that view, the amnesty protects individuals from ANY charges relating to the unauthorized possesion of an unrestricted firearm. That is why they got no paper work for their guns and no charges from the cops, they didn't have a leg to stand on.

Here is the bulletin sent out to the police to answer their questions about the amnesty. Obviously this officer doesn't read, or maybe he doesn't know how to read:

http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/compliance-conformite/bulletins/police/bulletin70_e.asp

Some quotes from it:

"During the term of the amnesty, protected individuals cannot incur criminal liability under the Criminal Code for unauthorized possession of a non-restricted firearm."

And what is the purpose of having an amnesty if the police can still take firearms at their discretion? It would be fine if this cop showed discretion, but he didn't.

"Individuals protected by the amnesty cannot incur criminal liability for possessing a non-restricted firearm without a valid licence or registration certificate. However, they are still in unauthorized possession of the firearm and police have the authority to seize the firearm at their discretion . We suggest that you conduct a risk assessment. In conducting your risks assessment, you may wish to include whether the person is of interest in your area, prior convictions or arrests, and any other information that may be a cause of concern relating to public safety. Please note that the Canadian Firearms Information System only conducts automatic, continuous, public safety checks on individuals with a valid licence. "

Were any of these people a risk? No. Did they have prior convictions, or were they a concern to public safety? I doubt it.

This is just a case of an @**hole cop. He even admitted it!

Posted by: Don Mackenzie on October 5 2006 1:14 PM

I said the police officer acted stupidly..I also said if the people would have followed The Law before leaving, got their paper work in order then NOTHING would have happened...Yes the officer was stupid But so were the People.

Posted by: islander1 on October 5 2006 1:30 PM

Posted by: islander1 on October 5 2006 1:36 PM

Posted by: Don Mackenzie on October 5 2006 1:50 PM

OK islander1 You posted the same thing 3 times in a row . So you must be right.

Posted by: lunarguy on October 5 2006 2:01 PM

The re-posting that happens like that is usually not the poster resending the post but rather if they just click on re-load in the web browser it causes the post to be sent again. In Microsoft terminology it is called a feature but to the rest of us it is called a flaw.

Posted by: fedup on October 5 2006 2:04 PM

Another negitive store for the police I wounder how bad it really is maybe we need a study.These officers need to stand back and look at who they are supposed to be working for.And if they want any kind of respect form us the people then start treating us with some respect.

Posted by: islander1 on October 5 2006 2:17 PM

woops.

Posted by: ammonra on October 5 2006 2:24 PM

I find it really funny, Don Mackenzie being attacked by the pro-gun group :-()

However, be honest, he did not recommend those people be charged with anything, he said the people were stupid for carrying guns with lax paperwork, which they were, and the cop was stupid for going overboard, which he was.

Why is any comment about guns met with such intense resistance? Its almost as if gun people want to inhibit the debate completely. It won't work, the debate will continue. It would make more sense to participate in it rationally than try to stop it. Gun users do have a valid viewpoint but their "attack is the best defense" aproach just gets other people's backs up and their views get missed as a consequence.

Posted by: Chadermando on October 5 2006 2:29 PM

The RCMP are above the Law and need to be reigned in.

This guy reminds me of that native cop that used to run around PG with the pockle face harassing people when off duty using his RCMP immunity for his assaults. He also refussed to give his name.

I heard a few years ago about a guy who answered his door to cops who refussed to give their identification. These five cops tied him up with duck tape trashed his house looking for a grow-op (non existed), and the guy escaped jumping through his window and running to his neighbors house. When he returned to his house with his neighbor and some guns, the cops where gone. I would assume those were not cops to begin with, yet they wore the vest and carried the guns.

With that in mind I would be tempted shot and ask questions later if I found myself in the same situation where you have a rambo cop refusing to identify himself in the backwoods where I have broken no laws.

Look at Iraq where the deaths squads all wear uniforms.

I think the officer needs to be charged with some kind of crime for refusing to identify himself. Our collective security depends on it.

The RCMP need to be brought under the law of the land....

Posted by: ammonra on October 5 2006 2:30 PM

I really must say that one RCMP officer's attitude is not really representative of the majority. It may be true that a lot are overbearing in their attitude, but the fact is they put their lives and health at risk every day, and they deserve some latitude. I have always found that being cooperative with an officer works just fine, even when the instructions are given in an "in your face" way.

One of my sons went on a ride with RCMP officers years ago in PG on a Saturday night. He decided that night to drop his plans to join the force due to the amount of crap they had to deal with on a regular, nothing special evening. Thank them now and again, they do deserve it.

Posted by: islander1 on October 5 2006 2:46 PM

"But no Pal, a unregistered rifle, then Yes they should be charged."

I read this in Don's post, that is why I posted my reply. I was not attacking the poster but rather addressing the statement, with content off of the cfc website itself. I wanted to merely point out that they cannot be charged for either "offence".

Posted by: thereasonableman on October 5 2006 3:24 PM

Ammonra, you missed the point twice already. Do more reading.

This is not about the gun lobby, and this is not saying all cops are bad because one is.

These issues lately in the news (including this one) are generally referred to as "surface cracks".

A superficial symptom of a more serious underlying problem.

Stand back and see the big picture, you're looking at this through a microscope and it's not microscopic.

Posted by: ammonra on October 5 2006 6:14 PM

Islander1, you are quite right. I misread Don's post. He did indeed say that.

To the reasonableman: I haven't misunderstood the points, and I largely agree with them, it is just that we focus on the problem officers so much we forget about those doing a good job, and there are far more of the latter than the former. The microscopic are the problem. Actually, all my working life I used a microscope, as it happens, so you could be right.

Thew comment about the gun lobby was actually off topic, and merely an observation not related to this discussion. I probably should have posted it at another time and place.

Posted by: thereasonableman on October 5 2006 8:19 PM

Ammonra, you are right in most of what you say, but the good officers are the majority and aren't getting our attention.

I guess the best way to say it is, there are far too many that are a problem, nothing is being done to protect us from them, and the establishment continues to harbor them and refuses to take any action. That becomes a big problem when you are dealing with people who are not only armed, but also have wide sweeping powers. It becomes very dangerous very quickly.

Then, it tarnishes the whole force including those who used to serve. You don't dare admit it to anybody these days, but when I was a kid, it was something to be proud of.

This is not something you can write off to "it's only a few". It is a few compared to the 16,000 or so RCMP members currently serving, but it is far from being a small problem.

This particular story is simply bad acting, however, some people's lives have been endangered and some have even lost their lives. It's just not right. Somebody needs to take control of this horse and get it back on the trail.

Posted by: Palopu on October 5 2006 8:34 PM

Lefty. They have no problems with the promises they made in regards to Gun Control., and the issue for non restricted guns has nothing to do with (terrorists and the such).

Harper and his Government will bring in the necessary legislation to get rid of the imbecile gun registry as soon as they get a majority. If they dont, then it will be around for years and will be totally useless, like the Liberal, and NDP, Bloc politicians that brought it in

This is not a **New** climate of terrorists, it is just the climate that is being pushed to the 11th power by the Americans, British, etc; It wasnt that long ago that the IRA were the terrorists of the day, and also dont forget the Basque in Spain. The Mau Mau in the fifties were classified as Terrorists, and of course the Viet Cong. The list goes on.

Who will be to-morrows terrorists?????

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on October 5 2006 8:55 PM

Don

Posted by: ammonra on October 5 2006 10:46 PM

just one point Palopu, the NDP did not have a policy on the gun registry. Members were all over the place on the issue, from outright banning of guns up to no restrictions. Due to that, no policy was set and I believe it was a free vote for the NDP, although I could be wrong as I wasn't interested enough in the issue to follow it at the time. As far as I know that is still the case with the NDP. The majority thought the whole issue should have been left alone, as I did.

To the reasonableman: you are probably correct in your assessment.

Posted by: thereasonableman on October 5 2006 10:47 PM

Wasn't this story about some nice people getting utterly bullied by some gizmo amateur cop with a crappy attitude ?

YamaDoo, I'm going to cough out a lung if you make me laugh any harder tonight.

Posted by: thereasonableman on October 5 2006 10:53 PM

Here's another crazy cop story for you...probably this guy's twin brother.

Cops receive a 911 call, "man with a gun" at a house party. The whole detachment scrambles, everybody arrives and takes down the whole place. When they find the "man with a gun", it turns out to be a junior off-duty RCMP officer, who decided to pack his service weapon to a house party and get drunk. After numerous drinks, he gets a little brave and a little mouthy, and when challenged by someone for his crude talk, he stuffs his service weapon up the guy's right nostril and threatens him with his life.
Now what do you do ?

Posted by: Chadermando on October 5 2006 10:54 PM

Canada has ships in the Strike Force 5 currently conducting anti submarine exercises off Hawaii on route to the Arabian sea to hook up with the Ronald Regan and the Eisenhower strike groups at the end of the month forming the most powerful US naval strike force ever assembled.

Meanwhile Europe has formed the most powerful naval force it has ever assembled in the Eastern Mediterranean hoping to limit any spread of the conflict.

Some people say that with this unprecedented assemblage of military capabilities in the region that it can not be for exercise purposes and likely would not be a bluff, and therefore is a sign America will strike Iran in about 4 weeks. The new pipelines through Georgia and Turkey (opened same say as Lebnon war started) will be critical to protect from Syrian attack via Lebanon. Some say this war will be nuclear, and others say it will destabilize Pakistan and therefore require eliminating their nuclear capability as well with the help of India. This is why Musharaf had harsh words for Canada and harbours the taliban for operations against the Indian backed Afghan government.

Canada is currently on the side of the belligerent policy of pre-emptive action. Whether this is the right policy or not remains to be seen before Christmas IMO. IMO it all depends on the nuclear side of the war plan, and the Iranian ability to counter attack global oil supplies.