raydan raydan:
Although "protecting my rights by shooting anybody who tries to take my gun from me" is the right thing to do on your side of the border... that's not how it's done over here.
...Sorry, I'm not sure what kind of smilie to put here... sarcasm maybe?

On first blush I can see how my comment looked. No offense taken.
I'm looking at it from a LEO perspective that when you go to arrest someone for a serious crime they tend to be more cooperative then when you show up for something (relatively) trivial and bureaucratic.
Seriously, you go to arrest a bank robber and they may resist but because they know they are wrong they tend to draw a line on their resistance.
When you go to enforce a court order to seize a kid, or a divorce action to seize a car then people have a myriad of emotional responses that include:
1. You're violating their rights.
2. With a cop coming out to enforce this order it's overkill and they're insulted.
This is when people get hurt.
In this case if the cops were out to seize a firearm because the owner had been convicted of a felony then the owner should have cooperated. In my experience, I'd have expected him to cooperate.
If they were out to seize the firearm because, as we know, the RCMP likes to seize firearms, then there's a bit of a quandary.
Knowing what I know, the RCMP is asking for needless trouble doing this kind of sh*t. And, if they're going to do this kind of thing anyway, then they need to show up in force and, of course, that won't go over well public-relations-wise when the neighbors see a full-on military assault team show up to seize a gun because someone forgot to file a piece of paperwork to satisfy some f*cktard bureaucrat in Ottawa.
That kind of thing ends up generating more such incidents.
I know you folks love your gun laws, and God bless you, but expecting everyone to just go along with the kind of things that topple governments in this world is a tad naive.