Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

NO/LA Authorities Seizing Firearms

Katrina New Orleans Seizing firearms

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 11 September 2005 - 08:41 PM

New Orleans Begins Confiscating Firearms as Water Recedes

Quote

Waters were receding across this flood-beaten city today as police officers began confiscating weapons, including legally registered firearms, from civilians in preparation for a mass forced evacuation of the residents still living here.

Quote

But that order apparently does not apply to hundreds of security guards hired by businesses and some wealthy individuals to protect property. The guards, employees of private security companies like Blackwater, openly carry M-16's and other assault rifles. Mr. Compass said that he was aware of the private guards, but that the police had no plans to make them give up their weapons.

1) This is extremely disturbing and potentially a gross violation of the 2nd Amendment at the State, Local, and Federal (if they donít put a stop to it) level.

2) It depends on the context of what weapons they are seizing.  If they are seizing weapons from say gangs wandering the street looting or trying to enforce their own version of the law then good on them.  Or to be fair it this was a case of taking them away from people wildly brandishing them around others or the police.  They've had plenty of mass incidents involving gun toting thugs but the answer isn't taking the guns away from everyone.  If this was a case of temporarily holding the gun in storage for eventual return when youi pick up the person for evacuation then that is a smart idea.  From the wording of the NYT (hardly pro gun) it sounds like they are grabbing any gun in sight.  

This tends to read like a case of them grabbing every gun in sight just because they might be a security threat and to hell with the 2nd Amendment.  If they are entering peopleís residences, properties, or businesses taking their guns (their means of defense and property), and then leaving that person there to wait for later evacuation or to get out on their own this is wrong and illegal.

3) Something is wrong when guns are being taken from property owners unless you have money to afford a rent a cop to protect your property.  

Some people may be willing to let the Federal Government slide on the realistic and valid screw-ups FEMA made in regards to New Orleans.  That said I can see this one really coming back to bite Bush in the butt in part of his base if he doesnít make a stand if this is a case of grab every gun in sight.

Edited by CJ AEGIS, 11 September 2005 - 08:46 PM.

"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#2 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 11 September 2005 - 10:06 PM

I got to agree that if a person was acting in a dangerous manner seizing his weapons would be valid. But if they are evacuating and not causing trouble there is NO reason to seize his weapons,  Yeah the government needs to calm down about thisand work in a constructive manner.

This is something that is going to cause people to resist.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#3 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 11 September 2005 - 11:09 PM

There can be no possible reasons to disarm innocent law-abiding citizens than pure evil. There's no lower scum out there in politics than the sanctimonous, pompous anti-gun prix.

#4 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 12 September 2005 - 06:12 AM

I can't imagine what these people have gone through. First, the hurricane, then the chaos and lawlessness, then a knock at the door and "'Scuse me, we're going to have to remove you from your house, but first we need your guns."  I'd very much be wanting to hang on to my guns as long as I lived in Dodge City.

There may be some way around the 2nd Amendment if martial law applies. I don't know enough about it.

To me, it's primarily a matter of adding to the distress of Katrina's victims: not only must they feel like they've lost their city but their country as well.

However, I did see a young man interviewed yesterday who is charged with forcible evacuation. He was completely sympathetic with those who wanted to stay and said it was pretty much gut-wrenching work. What he does (which made me feel better) is negotiate people out of their homes. He'll do anything to address their concerns and fears--contact relatives, take their pets with them, etc. Many don't want to leave their homes because, as one man said, "I don't want to end up in Utah or some trailer park."

While I understand the worries that a resistant evacuee might turn violent, the chances of that are remote and can be made even more remote by doing what this young man does--form a relationship with them and address the fears that keep them from leaving their homes.

Edited by Spectacles, 12 September 2005 - 06:13 AM.

"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#5 Zwolf

Zwolf
  • Islander
  • 3,683 posts

Posted 12 September 2005 - 08:14 AM

They're probably just trying to take as many guns out of the picture as possible to protect rescue workers... but they have to understand that a lot of law-abiding citizens need to protect themselves from the criminal types until those rescue workers get there.   I can understand not wanting the bad guys to have guns, but taking all the guns isn't a solution, especially when letting the good people keep their weapons may save lives.

Bad situation all around...

Cheers,

Zwolf
"I've moved on and I'm feeling fine
And I'll feel even better
When your life has nothing to do with mine."
-Pittbull, "No Love Lost"

"There are things that I'd like to say
But I'm never talking to you again
There's things I'd like to phrase some way
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'd put you down where you belong
But I'm never talking to you again
I'd show you everywhere you're wrong
But I'm never talking to you again

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you

I'm never talking to you again
I'm never talking to you
I'm tired of wasting all my time
Trying to talk to you."
- Husker Du, "Never Talking To You Again"

#6 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 12 September 2005 - 08:47 AM

Further consideration reveals there is a potential breaking of the 4th Amendment on top of the 2nd.

Quote

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#7 Jid

Jid

    Mad Prophet of Funk

  • Islander
  • 12,554 posts

Posted 12 September 2005 - 10:21 AM

Spectacles, on Sep 12 2005, 05:12 AM, said:

There may be some way around the 2nd Amendment if martial law applies. I don't know enough about it.

Best as a quick bit of research can tell:

Quote

The Court stated what is almost painfully obvious: "Martial law ... destroys every guarantee of the Constitution."

...

Did this mean that martial law could never be implemented? No, the Court said. The President can declare martial law when circumstances warrant it: When the civil authority cannot operate, then martial law is not only constitutional, but would be necessary: "If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course.
~ http://www.usconstit...sttop_mlaw.html

As it stands, legal interpretation would appear to show that constitutional rights are fair game so long as martial law is in place.  (That said, I freely admit I'm no expert on the matters, so I will freely defer to any information on the subject, that proves the contrary.)

Edited by Jid, 12 September 2005 - 10:22 AM.

cervisiam tene rem specta

#8 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 12 September 2005 - 11:30 AM

Add to the fact that Louisiana has a legal jurisdictional problem - crimes committed in New Orleans may not be prosecutable right now (we had a thread about it last week), then the fact that there is martial law in New Orleans may justify this action.  IF (and I can think of very little way for this to be honestly practicable) a citizen is returned his or her  lawfully registered firearm upon exiting the jurisdiction under martial law, then I would consider this justified.  BUT... I don't see a realistic way to actually implement this, and I don't believe that's what's actually happening here.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#9 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 13 September 2005 - 04:44 PM

Jid, on Sep 12 2005, 10:21 AM, said:

As it stands, legal interpretation would appear to show that constitutional rights are fair game so long as martial law is in place. 
I'll have to do some research...  I do know in the other cases of martial law I'm not aware of any where the 2nd Amendment was stomped on so badly.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#10 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,147 posts

Posted 14 September 2005 - 03:52 PM

They would have to pry it from my cold dead hand.
Can't Touch This!!

#11 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 14 September 2005 - 04:00 PM

Well it definately looks like violations of the fourth and second amendment. And I wouldn't be surprised to see mass civil suits brought against those officials that ordered the violations of those amendments, once all is said and done.


Quote

I can't imagine what these people have gone through. First, the hurricane, then the chaos and lawlessness, then a knock at the door and "'Scuse me, we're going to have to remove you from your house, but first we need your guns." I'd very much be wanting to hang on to my guns as long as I lived in Dodge City.

There would be no way in hell I'd give them my gun...and the first officer that tried to take it...Well, it wouldn't be pretty, that much I can say. Because in that situation I think a person is merely defending themselves, and lethal force is justified.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Katrina, New Orleans, Seizing firearms

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users