Where was the reporting on this

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Perhaps the largest crime in New Orleans during Katrina was perpetrated by the local government, the NOPD & those acting under their authority. Where the hell was the media attention on this Constitutional violation? I guess it wasn't as important as Chocolate City Nagin whining about Bush.

Gun rights activists were up in arms Friday after New Orleans Police Chief Warren Riley said he would confiscate weapons should disaster strike.

Frederick Thomas, from New Orleans, leaves New Orleans Police with his semi-automatic pistol that was confiscated in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans on Monday April 17, 2006.

The chief’s comments came after a federal lawsuit forced the city to return hundreds of firearms that were seized in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina
Click to expand...

I can't recall hearing one word about that. Talk about misplaced priorities.

Story
There still isn't a national (or even a large metro paper reporting on this travesty)

Watch this
 
Now how is it you so eloquently put it?

*SnP brain churning...*


Ah, yes. I think it goes something like this...



Gonz or close damn enough said:
Government has the right/duty to quell rebellion. Especially in the Southron States.
Click to expand...


Ring a bell?
 
Taking weapons from citizens is not quelling rebellion.

NOTHING was said about southern states. Don't put words in my mouth.
 
Want me to quote it?

Suspension of individual rights...check.

Illegal taking of personal property...check.

Violation of property...check.

Now if the government wasn't quelling some manner of rebellious behavior, why in the world would they take the guns away from their citizens? Or is this a case where rebellion does not equal rebellion?
 
Was NO planning on leaving the US? I think not.

Now, please don't highjack this thead on another lesson from 140 years ago. They are not parallel.
 
They actually are in a broader sense since the laws drawn up during the Civil War are the basis for what has been used since in the suspension of habeas corpus.

inter arma silent leges: In time of war, the laws are silent.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html

On 8/26/2005, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was placed under martial law after widespread flooding rendered civil authority ineffective. The state of Louisiana does not have an actual legal construct called "martial law," but instead something quite like it: a state of public health emergency. The state of emergency allowed the governor can suspend laws, order evacuations, and limit the sales of items such as alcohol and firearms. The governor's order limited the state of emergency, to end on 9/25/2005, "unless terminated sooner."
Click to expand...
 
Gonz said:
Was NO planning on leaving the US? I think not.
Click to expand...

Hardly the only definition of rebellion and actually an overwhelmingly narrow one Gonz. The NOPD expected the citizenry to use said weapons openly against the duly appointed civil authority (namely them and not without reason). Open rebellion in every sense of the word.

As unc says, the real question is why they kept them so long. Open market profiteering?
 
This story is two years old. Why is it being brought up now? It has been a topic of conversation on the gun boards ( http://www.thefiringline.com etc.) since then.

SAF and NRA have been fighting this since the illegal, unconstitutional NO confiscation happened after Katrina. Nagin, et al were found in contempt for refusing to obey a court order to return the confiscated weapons.

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/complaint.declaratory.injunctive.relief.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/memorandum.in.support.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/consent.order.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/motion.hold.defendents.contempt.memo.in.support.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/memo.in.opposition.to.defendents.motion.to.dismiss.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/motion.to.compel.for.contempt.pdf

http://saf.org/new.orleans.lawsuit/order.for.contempt.pdf
Click to expand...

Several states have passed laws against confiscation of arms during an emergency INCLUDING LOUISIANA.

This is old, old news.
 
If the sitting army in an emergency is the local cops and state guard... things might actually work like that.

I dare say that a Federal army order to surrender weapons would probably go into effect with or without a state law as they feel Federal trumps state every time... and as I said... Cicero actually... Inter arma enim silent leges. They will do what they need to do to restore their own sense of order on their own timetable in the context of a chaotic situation. Peacetime law is mere toilet paper at that point.
 
The Constitution of the United States provides for the suppression of rebellion and insurrection.

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Click to expand...
Article I, Section 8, para 15, Constitution of the United States

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
Click to expand...
Article I, Section 9, para 2, Constitution of the United States

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_transcript.html
 
public safety Therin lies the rub. It all depends upon ones definition of public safety. Public safety to one General might mean taking away all weapons as well as herding people like cats into internment camps. The courts could settle it all out later and reverse the action... but it still wont stop the military in the heat of the moment.

I can just see a few individuals screaming about how the army can't take away their weapons as it is against state law and the Constitution... right before they mow him down for failure to comply. God help the rest when one actually fires on the military. Then the thumbscrews will really come out.

I don't really trust the government to live within the letter of the law when everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off. I just don't. People will make irrational descisions and the military will make snap judgements... and the Constitution becomes a bruised fruit once again for future law school professors to fawn over and make students write papers about... but in the end, those guns are still going to end up in a random Quartermasters packing crate.
 
Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...

The state of emergency allowed the governor can suspend laws, order evacuations, and limit the sales of items such as alcohol and firearms.
Click to expand...

A gigantic gap exists between suspending sales & actually forcibly removing wepaons from citizens.

During a "State of Emergency" is precisly why the 2nd uses the terms "a well regulated militia".

Removing weapons from homes where noone was available to protect them I can see. Taking guns from the hands of citizens is an outrage. It's precisely why gun registration is a trap.
 
Gonz said:
Was NO planning on leaving the US? I think not.

Now, please don't highjack this thead on another lesson from 140 years ago. They are not parallel.
Click to expand...

I didn't have to. The point got made by others. Nice to see I'm not as lunatic fringe as your brush would paint me.

The parallels exist. Denying them doesn't make them go away. The very fact that you chose to include the word "another" simply bolsters the notion of how many there really are.
 
Every time I bring up problems with the federal gov't. you immediately go off on an anti-Lincoln tangent instead of addressing the thread. You carry on about how I'm pro-federal gov't & what a better place this would be had the secessionist gotten their way.

It's over. Address modern problems with modern ideas. Even if the South Had Risen, it wouldn't change jack shit today.

Our current crop of problems cannot be solved by discussing what might have been.

I don't kn ow where you get this idea that we are diametrically opposed. We have one major difference. It's over a war that started and ended before our grandparetns were alive.
 
To some, the war isnt over yet... sorta like Korea. There is a techinical state of war still in effect even though little shots have been fired in 50 years.
 
The war is over, or at least on one helluva hiatus.

The IMPACT it had is far from, and until people see what they lost I'll keep it up. That includes everybody. Like it or not. Mute me at will, just as you have with all the others who are presenting accurate history. The meeting at Appomattox was THE day America died. Everything since then has been a ghost of what could have been for both nations. Don't like hearing that?

Tough. Fuggin. Titty.

I am not responsible for how the message is received; I choose to be responsible for getting as much of it out as I can. Don't like that?

Tough. Fuggin. Titty.

It ain't my fault if you or anyone else chooses to remain deluded. It ain't my fault if you or anyone else is incapable of seeing the mistakes made, and their impact on the day to day life of every person living in this country. You find a problem, you trace it to its root, and you kill it there. You live too close to the root?

Tough.

Fuggin.

Titty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top