because they already have:



Think it can't/won't happen in America? You're already wrong...


"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

si vis pacem para bellum

[This message has been edited by OKflyboy (edited 12-07-2008).]

This kind of thing makes me sick to my stomach....You can have my gun, when you pry it from my cold dead fingers....

Now, I'm going to preface this a bit. I am pro-gun, pro-2nd amendment.

Those video clips were from post katrina New Orleans area, when temporarily, there was put into place an ordinance that prohibited ownership of guns by private citizens due to crime problem in the empty ravaged city and surrounding parishes.

The ban didn't last long, and was quickly hit with an injunction. Here's a copy of a story related to the injunction:
http://www.washingtontimes....050923-105240-4724r/

It was a complex situation, in my opinion a bad decision, however there is a bit more to things than that video shows. I will also state though, that particularly in that period, the NOPD had a reputation for protecting and serving.... themselves. The department was very bad for a very long time because of some bad apples, but not everyone there was bad. They are making strides in cleaning up their act as well.

I just figured it was important to point out the context behind what happened in that little video, and well.. maybe open up some more debate about things talked about in there - Including how in this case, the system of courts, ultimately upheld the rights of the citizens when push came to shove and the attempt was made to take those guns, it didn't fly for very long.

Post hurricane area was a very rough place with alot of problems however, so... just take it all in context is how I'm going to open things

quote Originally posted by ckfiero: Now, I'm going to preface this a bit. I am pro-gun, pro-2nd amendment. Those video clips were from post katrina New Orleans area, when temporarily, there was put into place an ordinance that prohibited ownership of guns by private citizens due to crime problem in the empty ravaged city and surrounding parishes. *snip*

It was still unconstitutional. ( and counter productive )

quote Originally posted by User00013170: It was still unconstitutional.

Exactly.

The context is clear, the truth is that they had no Constitutional Right to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding NO residents, no matter WHAT their reasoning was.

quote Originally posted by OKflyboy: Exactly. The context is clear, the truth is that they had no Constitutional Right to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding NO residents, no matter WHAT their reasoning was.

It clearly shows what can/will happen when given the chance. "They" Are always ready to take that chance against us.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: It was still unconstitutional. ( and counter productive )

Agreed.

If you read the rest of my post you will see that I pointed that out.

And, the way our legal system works, now that an approach was tried once, shot down by the courts, it's not going to be attempted again because, surprise, it failed and there's precedent to block it. The very first time it's tried, instantly, one only needs to point to what happened and guess what, the effort falls flat on its face. Granted, right now that only protects those of us here in LA, but, its persuasive to every other court and enough to at least get an instant injunction until it can be litigated in other jurisdictions

quote Originally posted by ckfiero: Agreed. If you read the rest of my post you will see that I pointed that out. And, the way our legal system works, now that an approach was tried once, shot down by the courts, it's not going to be attempted again because, surprise, it failed and there's precedent to block it. The very first time it's tried, instantly, one only needs to point to what happened and guess what, the effort falls flat on its face. Granted, right now that only protects those of us here in LA, but, its persuasive to every other court and enough to at least get an instant injunction until it can be litigated in other jurisdictions

And yet they will still implement it and enforve it until itis shot down.

Wait until Obama is in power. He's CONSTANTLY going after gun owners.

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: And yet they will still implement it and enforve it until itis shot down.

Exactly. Just because they're not legally allowed to do it, doesn't mean they won't try. I mean, they weren't legally allowed to do it before the injunction yet they tried anyway...

quote Originally posted by ckfiero: And, the way our legal system works, now that an approach was tried once, shot down by the courts, it's not going to be attempted again because, surprise, it failed and there's precedent to block it. The very first time it's tried, instantly, one only needs to point to what happened and guess what, the effort falls flat on its face.

CK, I can appreciate that you live in NO and have a unique perspective. But if your reasoning were true, then we'd never have another "unlawful search and seizure" case in court ever again because all the 'suspect' would have to do is say "you're not allowed to do this" and they'd automatically stop... Nice thought, but completely improbable.

[This message has been edited by OKflyboy (edited 12-07-2008).]

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Wait until Obama is in power. He's CONSTANTLY going after gun owners.

But his radio commercials said he supports private gun ownership.. how can this be?!?!

Just shows you how much the media can manipulate the public. Personally i looked up his voting record on this issue.. it scares me, a lot.

quote Originally posted by OKflyboy: CK, I can appreciate that you live in NO and have a unique perspective. But if your reasoning were true, then we'd never have another "unlawful search and seizure" case in court ever again because all the 'suspect' would have to do is say "you're not allowed to do this" and they'd automatically stop... Nice thought, but completely improbable.

Oh I agree whole heartedly

The only thing I was trying to put nicely is... well... the level of ineptitude and corruption seen in the state and local gov't around here, including law enforcement is well... its something special that I'm not sure is passed anywhere else in this country.

Do I think they will try to do it again elsewhere, sure. Just as you pointed out. HOWEVER, I don't know that it would go to a no receipts issued (those guys I almost guarantee kept the guns for themselves, they did not make it to the stations) or having someone smash/destroy the weapons either. I guess the only thing I was trying to do was de-sensationalize part of what those videos showed because well, lets face it.

Even this year, New Orleans (NOLA) was rated the crime captiol of the USA. Yes, we unseated even Detroit. There's some very nice parts to the city, and some very very bad areas as well. It's not a stretch of try guessing a vast majority of the private residents own guns here, to try and keep safe. Part of the problem back then was what I wanted to address, and while not make an excuse for what they did (which *IS* very wrong in my opinion) at least show how it happened just to clear up context.

In this case, there were many irresponsible owners who did not secure weapons before leaving. The public official was not the brightest man, and had a good intention but put it into practice poorly. There is a problem here that does exist in other large metro areas of the south, that other areas of the country are not used to.

There were a great many people roving around with loaded weapons after the storm, those carrying for protection, and those carrying for less noble purposes seeking to murder, rob, and rape - which occurred ALOT in the time during and after the storm, even in the shelters like the superdome, etc. The problem was, how do you tell which is which? A couple guys, going down the street in a jon boat intending to rape and rob appear identical to two who want to check on their neighbors or for food/water. Think about it, even cleanliness standards no longer apply there to differentiate ruffians, because there are no normal hygenic services of ANY kind available - everyone looks a little rough around the edges. That's one of the reasons this past season when the storm came into LA the gov't said NO shelters of last resort. Well, back on topic... Even today, we have roving thugs. They ride around in cars, or suv's often into areas that are rebuilding or there is not alot of people out and around. At night, they go EVERYWHERE in the city. They ride around brandishing SMGs or other high capacity weapons, and rob at gunpoint when they see a victim. In some areas, the look for someone driving alone in a car, follow them, and then if the driver parks in a secluded area (private lot, etc) they rob them at gun point. They even pretend to ask directions to get someone over to a car at which point they show the weapon, etc, demanding money/wallets... its a unique and very bad problem. EDIT 1: I just want to clarify that I'm not saying that doesn't happen elsewhere, just that it doesn't to the DEGREE that is does here, its remarkably prevalent

Where I am going with that is, the official had the best of intentions, but did something very wrong. It is not a stretch to say he would not have been the brightest individual to begin with either. I stress that, and I feel like I already need to climb into a flamesuit here, but... what should have been done: declare the streets of the city a firearm free zone for the duration of the emergency - something that is within police powers, legal to do - it schools zones etc have long been firearm free zones, and allow people to keep the guns in their house to protect themselves, just not carry in public during that emergency. Instead they took the easy route, and said, lets sweep through and confiscate any guns left around, then we know anyone who still has them is the bad guys.

It was a bad idea, gone horribly wrong how they chose to do things, but, it was NOT a cut/dry easy situation either. During that period, criminals outnumbered legitimate residents for sure, many who were left did engage in looting and breaking of laws, EVEN POLICE THEMSELVES. That's why I say I have a problem with what was done, the people needed those guns... then again, I can say I understand where the bad idea came from and how it was applied incorrectly...

Having lived a great deal of time (percentage wise) in other areas of the country as well, ranging from Vermont where we didn't need a license to carry, to Massachusetts where I had to go through criminal background checks, get chief of police recommendation, etc to secure a special permit for what they called high capacity weapons and a license to carry for all lawful purposes.... well... theres a big range even throughout this country of how things go.

That said, that video, I just find to be misleading in some ways

yes, it does show what HAS and CAN happen again elsewhere...

but no, I don't think that the unique conditions necessary to provide the opportunity for such actions to be put in place, particularly in the extreme nature they were in those video clips are prevalent enough to see it again in this country, honestly... I just hoped to throw out some of the context and would continue to do so in the thread too, so far this seems to be some nice constructive debate.

I just don't want anyone walking away after watching that clip saying, wow, they did that there, how long before it happens in my town... because there is alot of context that needs to be taken along with it, and unique and rarely present situations, which, the maker of the video could turn it into a great educational tool *if* they go back and add in either as an intro, or conclusion

EDIT #2:

New Orleans, Louisiana

Rankings in Crime
Assault: 18
Murder: 1
Rape: 90
Motor Vehicle Theft: 12
Robbery: 29
Burglary: 2

As ranked in a study put out ~11/24/08, form an article written 12/01/08
http://www.walletpop.com/mo...ges/dangerous-cities

And, because I think it goes hand in hand, we have a fixed FBI task force wing operating on the streets here, as well as uniformed military, driving military hummers, responding to murder/crime scenes, that you can in the background as local TV stations shoot stories for the nightly news, etc etc... it's a special arrangement they arrived at because of the unique problems around here...

[This message has been edited by ckfiero (edited 12-07-2008).]

That video makes me sick if its post katrina or not in LA...

I don't have any guns nor do I collect them..

The reason why things like this happen is because of The Patriot Act that basically overided our whole bill of rights.
If they impose a ban on weapons they have a right to search and seizure with out a warrant.
Each one of those victims were set up for the NOPD's Rules of Engagement. With her carrying the revolver
they saw her as a threat. When that older man on the boat was walking to where the weapons were he was seen as
a threat because he could've pulled it on the NOPD.

I am not against having guns, concealed carries, or any of that. Either way there is going to be a bunch of weapons on the street
history taught us this and still does, the government just doesn't want to listen.

I am head over heels against the patriot act and the majority of things Bush and Ashcroft put in place to fight terorism.

Arguing constitutional or not isn't the point. We know it's unconstitutional. That ban was proven unconstitutional. The point is the ban can be passed and enforced regardless of being legal or not. It's just a matter of how long until it get overturned - IF it gets overturned.

Pay attention to the big picture. Our Constitution prohibits bans like the one after Katrina, but that didn't stop them at the time. All it takes is for a government, local, state, or Federal, to say there's a current situation that calls for extreme measures, and they'll do whatever they please.

quote Originally posted by Psychosis39: The reason why things like this happen is because of The Patriot Act that basically overided our whole bill of rights.

I'd like you to cite how this ban of private gun ownership, taken by local/state government officials, was enabled by the Patriot Act. Cite me the reference they used, please.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I'd like you to cite how this ban of private gun ownership, taken by local/state government officials, was enabled by the Patriot Act. Cite me the reference they used, please. John Stricker

I second that.

They no longer need "references", John..............they do what the hell they want, when they want and take what they want.

Google is your reference.

Think of any possible outrage against the people, private property, or individual rights, and google will return 30 pages of references.

Screw you and your system, John. The time for that kind of game is over. Its now time for the people to simply enforce thier rights.

Time for the sword to be mightier than the pen.

quote Originally posted by MidEngineManiac: They no longer need "references", John..............they do what the hell they want, when they want and take what they want. Google is your reference. Think of any possible outrage against the people, private property, or individual rights, and google will return 30 pages of references. Screw you and your system, John. The time for that kind of game is over. Its now time for the people to simply enforce thier rights. Time for the sword to be mightier than the pen.

The Canadian view of American rights?

Hey man.........ex-Californian here, and besides that a lot of Americans are friends. I'm not inclined to let my friends be stripped of their rights.

They looked after me pretty good, least I can do is return the favor.

And your rant has what, exactly, to do with the Patriot Act?

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by MidEngineManiac: They no longer need "references", John..............they do what the hell they want, when they want and take what they want. Google is your reference. Think of any possible outrage against the people, private property, or individual rights, and google will return 30 pages of references. Screw you and your system, John. The time for that kind of game is over. Its now time for the people to simply enforce thier rights. Time for the sword to be mightier than the pen.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: And your rant has what, exactly, to do with the Patriot Act? John Stricker

I think he is saying they do what ever they want.
I did see a news show stating that the FBI has used the patriot act literally thousands of times illegally. Never heard anything else about it though. Maybe not the kind of thing people want to hear.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: But his radio commercials said he supports private gun ownership.. how can this be?!?!

But he also said he supports "reasonable" restrictions!

Confiscation is "reasonable " to him and his fellow DIMocrats! A renewed and much more restrictive (and permanent) Assault Weapons Ban is "reasonable" to him. Raising taxes on all ammo making it prohibitive to purchase is "resonable" to him. Limiting gun purchases to one a month is "reasonable" to him. Microstamping ammo is "reasonable" to him. Making guns "child-proof" is "reasonable" to him. Allowing cities to sue gun manufacturers is "reasonable' to him. Banning the private ownership of any ammo used by any military force in the world is "reasonable" to him. Licensing ALL gun owners is "reasoanable" to him. Banning ownership of any firearm in any household where there is anyone under 18 is "reasonable" to him. Enacting fees (taxes) to "allow" gun ownership is "reasonable" to him.

Every proposed gun control/ammo control bill by any DIMocrat or their lobbyist is "reasonable" to him and WILL be enacted! The non-DIMocrats cannot stop any legislation! This country gets what it votes for!

We got Hussien.

why dont we just make theft and murder illegal.....?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: why dont we just make theft and murder illegal.....?

or we could legalize... and then tax it. That way we could control it, and help make up budget shortfalls...!

quote Originally posted by Psychosis39: That video makes me sick if its post katrina or not in LA... I don't have any guns nor do I collect them.. The reason why things like this happen is because of The Patriot Act that basically overided our whole bill of rights. If they impose a ban on weapons they have a right to search and seizure with out a warrant. Each one of those victims were set up for the NOPD's Rules of Engagement. With her carrying the revolver they saw her as a threat. When that older man on the boat was walking to where the weapons were he was seen as a threat because he could've pulled it on the NOPD. I am not against having guns, concealed carries, or any of that. Either way there is going to be a bunch of weapons on the street history taught us this and still does, the government just doesn't want to listen. I am head over heels against the patriot act and the majority of things Bush and Ashcroft put in place to fight terorism.

quote Originally posted by blakeinspace: or we could legalize... and then tax it. That way we could control it, and help make up budget shortfalls...!

NICE ONE!!
I love it!!!!

A little on the lighter side but with a lot of truth:

something I heard long ago comes to mind....." give them and inch.....and theyll take a mile "

Soon as they get away with something, they just make up some new reasoning later, to get away with a little more......etc. etc.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: something I heard long ago comes to mind....." give them and inch.....and theyll take a mile " Soon as they get away with something, they just make up some new reasoning later, to get away with a little more......etc. etc.

Yep, no matter the reasoning or excuses, confiscating guns from law abiding citizens was a violation of the rights of those people. It's so much safer for them to attack a scared old lady in her home or some guys in a boat than to confront some guy firing an AK-47 from his rooftop.

Looks like confiscating shoes was a priority for the NOPD too, LOL:



Mike

I remember when I first saw that news clip after Katrina. I'm surprised the "police officer" didn't arrest the news crew for obstruction of justice or some other trumped up charge.
It's quite clear at the time they were doing whatever the hell they wanted and the laws and Constitution be damned.

NOLA might be a wonderful city full of history and music and art, but it's also a cesspit of corruption that goes from the bottom all the way to the top. You didn't hear about problems like this in Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama after Katrina, and they all got hit hard. NOLA turned into a third world country literally overnight.