Every American Gun Owner Should See This!!!

[fishbait]

This was incredable..........

http://www.nraila.org/Multimedia/MMP...et.aspx?ID=105

[ORsouthpaw]

That is unbelievable! To think about how many hunderds of thousands of guns (some family hierlooms) that are now just lost in the system, taken from law abiding citizens. I'm not sure that I could allow that to happen to me although when you have several uniformed officers with automatic rifles pointed at you and your family it's comes down to a matter of how prepared you are to die to preserve your right to bear arms.

I haven't been an NRA member before but seeing how they stepped in and did the right thing it has me thinking that I need to join right now.

[Troutinator]

absolutely sickening... making sure law abiding citizens unarmed victims of the gremlins and trolls that run rampant during civil crisis.
Your government at work...

[smalldog]

Totally illegal and against our constitution.

[Rank Amateur]

The people who made the decision to confiscate firearms should be tried in Federal court on civil rights violations. It looks to me New Orleans needs to either return the firearms that were confiscated or start buying new ones, otherwise face criminal charges for each firearm taken.

Those officers who slammed that old lady should be ashamed of themselves, you could tell she was no threat.

[nakoa]

what an outrage

[Fatkid]

I'm not a gun owner, but this story sure makes me want to be an NRA member.

[Fast Water]

[bladehorn]

Scary

[Wreckless]

Thanks Fishbait - this will be forwarded to everyone I know.....


"We're from the government, we're here to help................

[Irish Pennant]

I'm sure that every metropolitan area has the same emergency management plans.

[rimrock]

There was a Police State Occupation of New Orleans in affect (which is different from Marshall Law). I’m not saying what happened was “right”, just saying when Police State rules go into affect normal civil rights & due process don’t have the same weight as before. Also I really think we can extrapolate much from the extraordinary events of New Orleans to a foreboding dark future regarding our ongoing gun rights. Apples and Oranges IMO.

[Incredible_Bulk]

Not to sound like some whackjob... but if the shoe fits.

Do some reading on FEMA's plans for Natural Disasters, gun confiscation is a portion of those plans, some of the same things occured in Greensburg following the tornadoes, done under the auspices of "securing loose firearms". Don't think that the same thing can't happen to you in your local town. This is the SOP for disaster management.

Read up on the FEMA camps that are being constructed, or are already constructed in the United States. According to the information provided, they will be filled with those that do not comply with the orders of the Police and Troops deployed in the event of a widespread disaster on U.S. Soil. Detention of prisoners while the await charges. Think Local Guantanamo. They're all over the place, in fact, there's probably one near you.

Interesting stuff. Type "FEMA camps" into Google and check it out. Most if not all is conspiracy theorist sort of stuff, but there's some truth in there. I think that one of them close to us is Wapato. Why hasn't it opened? Understaffed? Really? No funding? I don't buy that. That kind of oversight just doesn't happen, even in public government.

Happy Reading. Anyway, I'm going to go put my tinfoil hat back on.

Cheers,
Bulk

[crabbait]

If any of you don't have a passport, now might be a good time...

See you in Costa Rica!

[Mad Mikey]

That would have ended differently in NE Oregon......

Hmm, can't recall seeing this on the major news networks?

No suprise there.

[Got One!]

Yet another sad series of events related to Katrina.

[fishkisser]

They can have My guns ...
When they pry My cold dead fingers from around them ...

[Dave G]

As tragic as this event is, I believe it was the right move. Honest citizens don’t go around raiding flooded stores or abandoned homes, criminals do. Now lets all give them their guns back. I THINK NOT!!! But, was the situation handled correctly, no. There should have been a tracking system to get the property back to the owners.

[Cornbread]

Originally Posted by Dave G

As tragic as this event is, I believe it was the right move. Honest citizens don’t go around raiding flooded stores or abandoned homes, criminals do. Now lets all give them their guns back. I THINK NOT!!! But, was the situation handled correctly, no. There should have been a tracking system to get the property back to the owners.

I have to respectfully disagree with you there. They took the guns from regular law abiding citizens and the only people who had guns were the bad guys. I know a guy that went down there to help dressed in his military fatigues driving a five ton that he restored and everyone thought he was military so the law enforcement down there didn't bother him and he was shot at by looters while helping people evacuate. He shot back though and they took off and left him alone after that.

[Dave G]

Police should have confiscated all weapons or none at all.

[SaksMoJet]

Originally Posted by Dave G

Police should have confiscated all weapons or none at all.

so in this case (and many others), none at all...since when gun bans are in place the only people that still have them are the criminals. I have friends in law enforcement and they all agree on the same thing....Cops can't protect everyone at the same time, so we as citizens (victims) have to take responsibility for our own safety/security.

[No Fences]

Great reporting piece and no surprise that this is the first time I've seen it. Not gonna get my guns that easy, that's for sure. Head for the mountains if all else fails.

[fishonjon]

Oh my GOD. stands true when guns are outlawd only outlaws will have guns. From my cold hands!!!!

[HOGGEMIN]

I love my country but fear my government.

[ampersat]

Originally Posted by rimrock

There was a Police State Occupation of New Orleans in affect (which is different from Marshall Law). I’m not saying what happened was “right”, just saying when Police State rules go into affect normal civil rights & due process don’t have the same weight as before. Also I really think we can extrapolate much from the extraordinary events of New Orleans to a foreboding dark future regarding our ongoing gun rights. Apples and Oranges IMO.

Normal civil rights and due process are nullified? An event like this is specifically when these rights are either upheld or proved to be the sham they always were. Rights aren't really rights when everything is easy and no one is in harms way. The real proof of your rights in this country is in the pudding when things go horribly wrong. If you don't have rights when that happens, you don't really have rights now, right now, at this very moment, do you? You have privileges which can be revoked at a moments notice.

[JustCallMeDave]

Originally Posted by fishkisser

They can have My guns ...
When they pry My cold dead fingers from around them ...

You might wanna talk to your doctor about that circulatory problem you're having there.

[Ryan Pultz]

This is a sad situation made even worse buy the agencies that choose to disable the right of these home owners to protect themselves from harm. All i know if I was one of them I would have a lawyer right now rp

[Lead Bouncer]

Originally Posted by Dave G

Police should have confiscated all weapons or none at all.

You obviously did not click on the speech by the Mississippi Gov Haley Barber, who wrote an executive order that prevented ANY fire arms be confiscated during disasters and went on TV and told the public that citizens would not be prosecuted for shooting theives. They also had less looting than Louisianna.
Notice also, that New Orleans has lagged behind on repair and not much is said about Mississippi, who was hit by the same storm. New Orleans lies directly south and dead center of Mississippi. Pick your Mayors carefully.

[jvp]

why wasn't the nra there asap after the news shows them preparing to confiscate all weapons? seems they were reactive not proactive but glad we have them.

[rum runner]

Originally Posted by JustCallMeDave

You might wanna talk to your doctor about that circulatory problem you're having there.

now thats funny..... I wonder if they retrieved C. Hestons yet??

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by ampersat

Normal civil rights and due process are nullified? An event like this is specifically when these rights are either upheld or proved to be the sham they always were. Rights aren't really rights when everything is easy and no one is in harms way. The real proof of your rights in this country is in the pudding when things go horribly wrong. If you don't have rights when that happens, you don't really have rights now, right now, at this very moment, do you? You have privileges which can be revoked at a moments notice.

If you don’t like the power our Government has to declare a Police State or Marshall Law…than I suggest you work to change the Law of the Land. Under these conditions people can even be held without a formal charge…if that doesn’t sit well with you again fine, work to change that.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by rimrock

If you don’t like the power our Government has to declare a Police State or Marshall Law…than I suggest you work to change the Law of the Land. Under these conditions people can even be held without a formal charge…if that doesn’t sit well with you again fine, work to change that.

"The right of the people to bear arms....."

Unless someone declares martial law???

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Thumper

"The right of the people to bear arms....."

Unless someone declares martial law???

How do you think the Government can legally confiscate those firearms in N.O.? I am NOT here to defend what was done, but to point out what the Government can do...read and learn existing Laws or live in ignorance and be suprised after the fact.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by rimrock

How do you think the Government can legally confiscate those firearms in N.O.?

They could not. The issue of martial law and the second amendment is settled law.

http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/testimon.htm

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Thumper

They could not. The issue of martial law and the second amendment is settled law.

Marshall Law was not declared in N.O...a Police State existed which is different.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by rimrock

Marshall Law was not declared in N.O...a Police State existed which is different.

There is no approbative definition of a "police state" existing in the U.S.

[ORsouthpaw]

Lesson Learned: When a disaster happens and the police come knocking and ask the question, the answer will be; "NO sir I don't have any firearms!" Can we search? "You bet". When they look, they will not find any! I don't know about everyone else but after seeing this I can tell you one thing. None of my guns will be in the safe and I will conviently forget where I stashed them!

Regardless of the reason this is a basic right that was violated. I agree with an earlier post that the city and the police should be held responsible for what was a poor decision and that this wasn't done in the best interest and protection of the people. It was done because the police weren't prepared and disarming the general population was the easy button. Fact is that if they had allowed people to protect themselves then the amount of looting would have been far less. As it was the criminals/looters had nothing to fear because most of them still had thier guns while their victims were left defensless.

At least the NRA got involved enough to stop the order and tried to get some of what the police stole back to the citizens

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Thumper

There is no approbative definition of a "police state" existing in the U.S.

In the end they are similar, more of an issue of State vs. Federal. Only the Federal Government can institute Marital Law by an act of Congress and even this has been further limitated in court cases continually defining what the Feds can “do” under these conditions.

A Police State is something most State (and lower I believe) Governments can call when civil rule has broken down, suspending even the Bill of Rights. This State authority has been upheld in Federal Courts under declared emergency situations. A the reason why the State or Mayor of N.O. is not in jail or charged with a crime...as they didn't break any Law per se.

Again, I'm not agreeing just pointing out what somes States can do.

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by rimrock

A Police State is something most State (and lower I believe) Governments can call when civil rule has broken down, suspending even the Bill of Rights. This State authority has been upheld in Federal Courts under declared emergency situations. A the reason why the State or Mayor of N.O. is not in jail or charged with a crime...as they didn't break any Law per se.

Please provide us with some documentation of the legality of a police state declaration in the U.S.

[Just_learning]

Well, just another example of the government abusing its power. It was okay to let them suspend habeus corpus, now they dont have to give any other reason to revoke the 2nd amendment because its a "state of emergency".

You cant pick and choose which freedoms you are willing to sacrifice. Why is nobody doing anything other than complaining?

[Queeg]

Y'know ... if you weren't in New Orleans during the week after the storm, you are really doing the Monday morning armchair quarterback thing.

How would you have taken control of sheer anarchy and disaster, say you were a National Guard or a NOPD ?

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Just_learning

Well, just another example of the government abusing its power. It was okay to let them suspend habeus corpus, now they dont have to give any other reason to revoke the 2nd amendment because its a "state of emergency".

You cant pick and choose which freedoms you are willing to sacrifice. Why is nobody doing anything other than complaining?

I don't know, other than IMO too many people don't know what Government can do. Ignorance is dangerous. It's far greater than just the 2nd amendment but again IMO that's only what most are worried about here. The Government can in a "state of emergency" just arrest you which is easier than taking your guns...they can just take you.

But also the sky is NOT falling...civil order was lost in the wake of Katrina. The balance is difficult.

[Ni!]

It's difficult to maintain civil order when the cops are the looters.

Rimrock, I too would be interested in any information you can provide about the difference between "police state" and "martial law." I've never heard of this before and it sounds like it could be important to know.

[Just_learning]

Originally Posted by Ni!

It's difficult to maintain civil order when the cops are the looters.

Rimrock, I too would be interested in any information you can provide about the difference between "police state" and "martial law." I've never heard of this before and it sounds like it could be important to know.

Although it is disputed on WIkipedia, here is their definition.

The term police state is a term for a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population, especially by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional republic. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.



Martial law is when the military takes control and administers law. Most commonly found in occupied areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is the difference between to two, as narrow as it may be.

[jokester]

Originally Posted by Queeg

How would you have taken control of sheer anarchy and disaster, say you were a National Guard or a NOPD ?

I wasn't there, but I know that I wouldn't have any reason to disarm law-abiding citizens who weren't doing anything wrong. When it comes down to it, they might be the ones who come to my aid, should the situation arise...

Maybe START with the looters and the people destroying the town perhaps??

-jokester

[crabbait]

Originally Posted by rimrock

How do you think the Government can legally confiscate those firearms in N.O.? I am NOT here to defend what was done, but to point out what the Government can do...read and learn existing Laws or live in ignorance and be suprised after the fact.

Both you and Thumper are under the, in my opinion, false impression that the US is a nation governed by law. That has not been the case for some time now. The US Constitution is now a historical document to be studied in future "Fall of Western Civilization" classes. Nice while it lasted...

[rimrock]

Again “police state” or other terms are often used to reference a State level action rather than Federal…it’s really not much more than that. The affect is the same as martial law. The key issue is when a State of Emergency is declared what are the unique powers granted to the Federal/State/Local authorities at that time. If we get all caught up in nomenclature we may miss the real point.

For example, Louisiana state law doesn’t have the term “martial” in it, but the authorities had the right to suspend habeas corpus and other civil rights. Therefore a Police State existed.

BTW I was down in the Ninth Ward for 45 days after Katrina doing restoration work. I saw firsthand what was happening. Even though I was search and even held for a time, without cause or even writes read, I didn’t feel under the conditions of what was happening around I was wrongly violated, even though I was there helping people. One had to be there, it was a crazy time. I was in the wrong place at the wrong time...and that's all it was. The police were overall fine.

[Wreckless]

Unfortunately, Crabbait is right................

BTW - EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD SEE THIS. Not just gun owners!!

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by rimrock

Again “police state” or other terms are often used to reference a State level action rather than Federal…it’s really not much more than that. The affect is the same as martial law. The key issue is when a State of Emergency is declared what are the unique powers granted to the Federal/State/Local authorities at that time. If we get all caught up in nomenclature we may miss the real point.

For example, Louisiana state law doesn’t have the term “martial” in it, but the authorities had the right to suspend habeas corpus and other civil rights. Therefore a Police State existed.[/SIZE][/FONT]

You keep talking about the rights of a state or the feds to invoke a "police state" or martial law in a way that abrogates the rights of legal gun owners, and we keep asking for your sources, but you give none.

Please help us understand this "right" of a state or the federal government to confiscate the guns of law-abiding citizens.

Oh, and I think Crabbait is all wet. The constitution is alive and well.

[Ni!]

Originally Posted by Just_learning

Although it is disputed on WIkipedia, here is their definition.

The term police state is a term for a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population, especially by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional republic. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.



Martial law is when the military takes control and administers law. Most commonly found in occupied areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is the difference between to two, as narrow as it may be.

That's how I've always understood those terms, but Rimrock seems to be using them in a different way, and suggesting that in the US there are legal definitions of these two terms that can come into play during emergency situations. I'm interested in his sources for this information since it seems to be very different from what I've always been led to believe.

[PGJPJ]

Kind of off topic, but I remember when I served in the Marines we referred to civilians as “silly-villains.” At the time, I didn’t think much about it, it was more of a running joke. But since then I’ve thought about how it was really an institutional culture of the military, possibly also the police. Maybe the same could be said for our government as a whole.

I think we are really viewed as sheep that need to be taken care of, and in this case the government thought it would be best to shear the pesky silly-villains of their guns so they didn’t hurt themselves.

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Ni!

That's how I've always understood those terms, but Rimrock seems to be using them in a different way, and suggesting that in the US there are legal definitions of these two terms that can come into play during emergency situations. I'm interested in his sources for this information since it seems to be very different from what I've always been led to believe.

That is how I meant it. Again Martial Law is not in LA but was in affect, when we were down there it was understood a Police State existed by the authority of the State not Feds. They are the same thing it's just terminology one more to a Fed the other more used to a State, but just terms understood by people (atleast most of the time : ) I think it's a molehill becoming a mountain. I was getting at Martial Law was not invoked in N.O. but the same conditions applied...i.e. a Police State existing. I'm not sure how many times I have to say that??????? It's the same thing...just terms in a State of Emergency called by who.

[crabbait]

Originally Posted by Thumper

Oh, and I think Crabbait is all wet. The constitution is alive and well.

Man, I hope you are right, Thumper. I would love to be wrong.

Here are a couple of small tests to see if the Constitution, and our personal freedoms are alive and well. Ask yourself:

-Am I careful of what I say on the cell phone for fear that someone might be listening?

-Does the phrase, "you have nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong" raise any alarm bells or is that just the way things should be?

[Norm]

Originally Posted by rimrock

For example, Louisiana state law doesn’t have the term “martial” in it, but the authorities had the right to suspend habeas corpus and other civil rights. Therefore a Police State existed.

At no time does any government entity have the right to suspend the constitution. The constitution is not something we just follow when it's convenient, and no state has the right or power to violate the rights gaurenteed under it.

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Norm

At no time does any government entity have the right to suspend the constitution. The constitution is not something we just follow when it's convenient, and no state has the right or power to violate the rights gaurenteed under it.

Really ya guys just need to spend time reading and learning on your own. Why do I have to spoon feed people with links...it's all there to be read if you want to spend the time? The Government can in the Constitution suspend your rights, even habeas corpus a foundmental constitional right. As incredible as it may seen, under certain conditions they can.

[Ni!]

Originally Posted by rimrock

That is how I meant it. Again Martial Law is not in LA but was in affect, when we were down there it was understood a Police State existed by the authority of the State not Feds. They are the same thing it's just terminology one more to a Fed the other more used to a State, but just terms understood by people (atleast most of the time : ) I think it's a molehill becoming a mountain. I was getting at Martial Law was not invoked in N.O. but the same conditions applied...i.e. a Police State existing. I'm not sure how many times I have to say that??????? It's the same thing...just terms in a State of Emergency called by who.

I just wanted to make sure what authority you were relying on to make your claims, and whether that authority had the legitimate power to declare martial law or police state conditions as was done in New Orleans. I think it's been demonstrated that they greatly exceeded their legal authority and the video at the beginning of this thread is just one example of where they did that. The gov't does not have the authority to confiscate firearms at will, even in an emergency. A situation such as Katrina is exactly when citizens need their guns the most, and when the 2nd Amendment rights we both hold so dear are most needed.

Originally Posted by crabbait

Man, I hope you are right, Thumper. I would love to be wrong.

Here are a couple of small tests to see if the Constitution, and our personal freedoms are alive and well. Ask yourself:

-Am I careful of what I say on the cell phone for fear that someone might be listening?

-Does the phrase, "you have nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong" raise any alarm bells or is that just the way things should be?

You're paranoid because you want to be. The gov't is not tapping your phones unless you're conversing with foreign terrorists. If you want to be paranoid about gov't powers, the drug war that started 20+ years ago would be your best target.

[Just_learning]

Originally Posted by Ni!

You're paranoid because you want to be. The gov't is not tapping your phones unless you're conversing with foreign terrorists. If you want to be paranoid about gov't powers, the drug war that started 20+ years ago would be your best target.

The government doesnt need to prove you are conversing with terrorists. They can drop in and listen until they get the evidence they need. The current mechanism in place to strip people of their freedoms allows further penetration into your privacy. I am not a terrorist, nor do I converse with them, but I do disagree with anyone but me and the person on the other line listening to what I have to say. Period.

Removing the basic rights granted by the constitution is not only a dereliction of duty by government officials, but also an aggregious violation of the principles this country was founded on. Whether it is freedom of speech or the right to bear arms.

[reelbigfish72]

Originally Posted by Norm

At no time does any government entity have the right to suspend the constitution. The constitution is not something we just follow when it's convenient, and no state has the right or power to violate the rights gaurenteed under it.

I'm not sure what the government has a "right" to do has to do with anything. Maybe they didn't have the "right" to do what they did in New Orleans, but they did it. They certainly DID have the power to violate some rights guaranteed under the constitution. It was pretty apparent from watching the video that if the government wants to do something, they're gonna do it, constitution or not.

The gov't does not have the authority to confiscate firearms at will, even in an emergency.

It kind of makes me laugh when I keep seeing statements like this. Maybe they don't have the authority to do it, but they clearly did it....I watched the video. What's scary is that we're pretty powerless to stop the government if someone decides they want to do things like this. What they can leagally do, or have a right to do, or what they have the "authority" to do means very little. They have the power to do pretty much whatever they want.

[Joe C]

Originally Posted by Just_learning

You cant pick and choose which freedoms you are willing to sacrifice. Why is nobody doing anything other than complaining?

I'm pretty sure that our politicians addressed this issue through a funding mechanism, due to outcry after Katrina

Vitter Amendment No. 4615, which was voted on in the U.S. Senate at 6:13 PM on July 13, 2006. Here's the text:

To prohibit the confiscation of a firearm during an emergency or major disaster if the possession of such firearm is not prohibited under Federal or State law.

The amendment, which was attached to a Homeland Security appropriations package, was approved 84-16. The bill itself was signed into law in October 2006.

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla...fforts-of.html

[rimrock]

Originally Posted by Ni!

I just wanted to make sure what authority you were relying on to make your claims, and whether that authority had the legitimate power to declare martial law or police state conditions as was done in New Orleans. I think it's been demonstrated that they greatly exceeded their legal authority and the video at the beginning of this thread is just one example of where they did that. The gov't does not have the authority to confiscate firearms at will, even in an emergency. A situation such as Katrina is exactly when citizens need their guns the most, and when the 2nd Amendment rights we both hold so dear are most needed.

It's a reasonable question Ni. Did the mayor or Gov. have the right to declare these conditions? I don't know. What actions are allowed and which aren't? I don't know. They existed I even experienced them when I was there. The Government can do quite a bit given an emergency, but that's for the lawyers to figure out. I have no animosity what happend to me.