Emergency evaluations…

Wasn’t the Fort Mcmurray fire also because of a controlled burn?

So in today's society, the government is openly encouraging dangerous drug use, then spending enormous police, and medical resources dealing with the predictable consequences. Creating huge waiting lines for emergency rooms, police who are too busy to respond to genuine criminal activities, while these drug addicts become career criminals, overwhelming the court system, and creating a homeless pandemic, straining all the resources that go along with that.
But when productive law abiding citizens are heroically willing to risk their own lives and livelihoods to protect public and private property, livestock, infrastructure etc, they are demonized and threatened. Under the excuse that by doing the right thing, they are risking straining the resources of the emergency response services who may need to intervene if things go wrong.

Does anyone see any hypocrisy in this?

Whoa. This needs distinguishing.

BC is opening encouraging dangerous drug use.

AB is actually trying to pass involuntary commitment for addicts.

This is why people can’t compared all governments as the same. Each one has its different approaches and those approaches can and do change.

They are changing out of necessity because they have been an unmitigated disaster.

But first, governments had to repeat the experiment all over the developed world.

if you drive around in the hood of Regina, drugees huddled behind garbage bins and in school grounds, parks, everywhere shooting up. The emergency wards of Regina hospitals filled with the results and then there’s the ones beat to a pulp, get patched up and back the next weekend.

According to the news many property owners seem to be working on protecting their property and fighting fires.

In other cases the authorities have evacuated communities and properties. Probably because the assessed risks are too high.

Who on this site thinks they have more training and experience assessing, coordinating, and fighting fires than the fire crews and authorities from the Counties and the Province?

Would you allow property owners and community residents to stay, when your training and experience says that they would be at serious risk? Your job and their lives depends on you making the best decision possible at the time in a volatile situation.

You have the overview and information from the air and central coordination. The property owner is likely exhausted from work, likely isn't sleeping well and is very scared. Would you let property owners make that life and death decision on when to evacuate?

Your number one job is to protect people. How many of you would allow residents to potentially become victims trying to save their home and property in an unpredictable and dangerous fire?

According to the news many property owners seem to be working on protecting their property and fighting fires.

In other cases the authorities have evacuated communities and properties. Probably because the assessed risks are too high.

Who on this site thinks they have more training and experience assessing, coordinating, and fighting fires than the fire crews and authorities from the Counties and the Province?

Would you allow property owners and community residents to stay, when your training and experience says that they would be at serious risk? Your job and their lives depends on you making the best decision possible at the time in a volatile situation.

You have the overview and information from the air and central coordination. The property owner is likely exhausted from work, likely isn't sleeping well and is very scared. Would you let property owners make that life and death decision on when to evacuate?

Your number one job is to protect people. How many of you would allow residents to potentially become victims trying to save their home and property in an unpredictable and dangerous fire?

So Danny Smith is saying no to mandatory evacuations and that provincial emergency laws are out the window?

That everyone has the right to stay and protect their property even if they are going to die?

And the ones that stay and get caught in a fire and are injured or needing to be rescued? They wont be calling emergency services? You are certain of that? They will have signed a document to that effect?

I think everyone sympathizes with the terrible situation that residents who have been evacuated are faced with.

But suggesting that everyone should have the right to face floods, fires and other natural disasters and that the authorities don't have the right to evacuate them is a big step backwards in emergency planning.

Is any provincial politician saying this is a good idea?

Right to evacuate them…

Why is that a right?

I mean, rights are pretty feeble claims anyway and subject to personal discrepancies, but why would a government have a right to evacuate anyone for anything?

It can be said they have a responsibility to evacuate those who cannot evacuate themselves, such as hospitals. But the right to enforce their beliefs on people, in a crisis?

The information should be given, the evacuation alert given, but to enforce it, no. If you start forcing people from their legally owned property and say it’s your right to do so, you’re towing a very dangerous line.

Which politicians are saying that the emergency management act should not have the power to evacuate during floods and fires?

Adults are capable of making their own decisions.