NRA - 2nd Amendment Foundation


ecocks

New member
GO! GO! GO!

Link Removed

I have been hoping that the mayor and police authorities (policy-makers and senior officers that implemented this action, not necessarily the rank and file) would be called to task over these actions. Here's hoping they have to pay a price for a flagrant 2A (and common sense) violation. :mad:
 

HK4U

New member
Theft

GO! GO! GO!

Link Removed

I have been hoping that the mayor and police authorities (policy-makers and senior officers that implemented this action, not necessarily the rank and file) would be called to task over these actions. Here's hoping they have to pay a price for a flagrant 2A (and common sense) violation. :mad:


I am sure the mayor, police chief and other officials have some new guns in their collection. I guess if your the government stealing is o.k.
 

DrDavidM

New member
I certainly hope the majority of people receive their guns back. Maybe the government will learn a lesson from this. Oh wait, what am I thinking. At least somebody stood up for these people.
 
E

echo_5

Guest
...mad

:mad:...trying my best to remain civil and keep calm, but it is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS that after a natural disaster when emergency services and the ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE is gone that; 1. the police would attempt to seize lawfully owned firearms and 2. that legal owners would relenquish such tools of self defense. To be clear, I am a supporter of LE, but I shudder to think about how it would play out when I didn't give up my CONSTITUTIONAL right to protect my family. Good luck to the NRA and the citizens they represent. I've been dragging my feet but, in light of this legal action, I am joining the NRA
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
I'll preface this by saying that I don't live anywhere near Louisiana (I'm in Florida) and was not in the storm, and haven't really spoken to anyone who was a resident.

Did LE, in fact, seize people's guns from them? As in, they come up to you and say, "Hey...we're collecting guns from residents. Give me yours." Or were they, as they said, "collecting guns that had been stolen or found in abandoned homes"?

The former would be an abrogation of the 2nd Amendment, of course. The latter may have a legitimate law enforcement purpose, as there were roving gangs going around afterwards, and letting the BGs have one extra gun is making the problem worse. I heard about this a while back, but didn't really get any more information about it. I'm just checking for some reliable documentation that this happened, before I get all mad about it. :)

BTW - hope this clears any doubts some may have about the NRA's commitment to gun rights. If you really read into their reasons for everything that they do, it always checks out, even if it seems a little counterintuitive to start with. Strategy isn't always straightforward. I'm on the EPL plan so I'll be a life member in probably about 8 years or so.
 
Last edited:

EdMaxx

New member
Did LE, in fact, seize people's guns from them? As in, they come up to you and say, "Hey...we're collecting guns from residents. Give me yours." Or were they, as they said, "collecting guns that had been stolen or found in abandoned homes"?
How's this for starters?
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
How's this for starters?
That'll do; I would be interested to see how many documented cases there are once they get them all compiled. I'll also be following this case.

The NRA should send out emails to people in potentially affected areas next time that remind them of their rights, specifically where disaster conditions are involved. While all citizens should comply with the law, it would also be helpful if they could also consistently and confidently advise law enforcement that their actions are illegal.

The local authorities should be called to task on each one of these cases and made to apologize publicly for violating the Constitution. They probably won't, but it's a nice thought.
 

sailor

New member
"Gun Grab"

toreskha - and anyone else interested - "The Great New Orleans Gun Grab- Descent into Anarchy" by Gordon Hutchinson & Todd Masson (ordered mine thru Louisiana Publishing, Inc., P.O. Box 1199, Boutte, La 70039) - [hope this is legal to post, if not, mod delete]. Any question about whether or not the various police (NO-PD, Calif. SP, NM SP, others?) forcefully disarmed law abiding, legal gun owners in New Orleans, will be answered in this well written book (I have no stake in this book). Litigation is on-going. This should have never happened in the USA, hopefully, will never happen again - but I wouldn't bet on it. I'm only 1/4 way into the book, and have to put it down to let my blood pressure go back to normal. We live on a very "thin edge" of civil law enforcement. (I was not allowed to post this book on this site in "Books").
sailor
 

sailor

New member
more "Gun Grab"

I am over 1/2 way through "The Great New Orleans ...", and am almost a basket case! The grossly illegal actions of various LEO groups is astounding. I am wondering if any LEOs have read or are reading this book - I would love to hear from them how this came down, and how we the people can hang their (the perps) sorry you know whats. Probably hopeless, but to have gotten away with theft, piracy, & destruction "under color of law" needs some really strong reaction! Time to back off for a while, and let the blood pressure come back down. :mad: Next order of business, how do we deal with this kind of lawlessness by some state police, the next time it happens (it will, in my opinion, some natural or manmade disaster)? Trusting the law enforcement agencies is becoming a whole lot more problematical. If LEOs out there think that I'm bashing them, read the book, or other sources of REAL information, and draw your own conclusions. I will try to have my local (small town) police department, some of whom are friends of mine, read this book, and get some input from them.
sailor
 

sailor

New member
"Gun Grab"

In my post above, I showed a reluctance to believe that the existing laws to prevent the type of lawlessness by "law enforcement" as exhibited in New Orleans, would solve the problem for the future. From the book, page 190 "In a local radio interview on June 2, 2006, after Governor Kathleen Blanco signed the Louisiana statute into law, NOPD Superintendent Warren Riley was asked his opinion of the new law, and what would happen in New Orleans in the event of another disaster of the proportions of Katrina? Riley thought briefly and then answered:'During circumstances like that, we cannot allow people to walk the streets carrying guns. As law enforcement officers, we will confiscate the weapon if the person is walking down the steet, and they may be arrested'". So --- the law means absolutely nothing to the superintendent of law enforcement - surprise! Looks like we are literally on our own. So what do we do in a situation where the criminals have been joined by "law enforcement? :confused:
sailor
 

ecocks

New member
Well

is open carry legal in Louisiana? Or isn't this one of those really fuzzy states where they can't get a straight answer? This seems to have been a topic on the PDO site and I don't remember a conclusive answer.

That aside, it is terribly disappointing that a senior law enforcement official of a city currently facing litigation on the subject is still making comments like these. I hope the attorneys are paying attention since it seems to represent the attitiude of the city administration even after the event. I don't see any remorse or even critical thinking in evidence here.
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
In my post above, I showed a reluctance to believe that the existing laws to prevent the type of lawlessness by "law enforcement" as exhibited in New Orleans, would solve the problem for the future. From the book, page 190 "In a local radio interview on June 2, 2006, after Governor Kathleen Blanco signed the Louisiana statute into law, NOPD Superintendent Warren Riley was asked his opinion of the new law, and what would happen in New Orleans in the event of another disaster of the proportions of Katrina? Riley thought briefly and then answered:'During circumstances like that, we cannot allow people to walk the streets carrying guns. As law enforcement officers, we will confiscate the weapon if the person is walking down the steet, and they may be arrested'". So --- the law means absolutely nothing to the superintendent of law enforcement - surprise! Looks like we are literally on our own. So what do we do in a situation where the criminals have been joined by "law enforcement? :confused:
sailor
Like many other situations, it seems to be based on convenience.

They're essentially giving us the message: "We'll uphold this law until it's inconvenient for us to do so, and the situation gets to be one where the reason why the law was passed in the first place becomes clear. It's only easy for us to protect people's rights during peacetime."

We don't have the Bill of Rights because we need it when the going is easy; we have it for when there's no "logical" or "common sense" way to justify us having those rights. That's the whole idea of the rule of law - the law, which should be made during the best of times, is beholden to no one, and stands up for us in the times when everyone would, in a knee-jerk reaction, give up those rights.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,354
Messages
622,661
Members
74,170
Latest member
Strategicfirearmtraining
Top