who was responsible for the katrina gun confiscations ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it was the New Orleans police chief, whatever his name is. I remember the infamous news conference he gave saying that nobody will be allowed to be armed except police. Disgusting. :barf:
 
I rember the video of the old lady that was beaten and disarmed in her own home by police from Los Angelos CAL. who was responsable for their actions ? at this point me thinks not even the offending officers. Talk about :barf::barf::barf:
 
thanks for the effort,guys. i'm hoping for a definative answer. i realize that some out of state cops were doing the actual house-to-house, but i'm needing to know under whose authority and orders. i think state, but my buddy says it was the feds.......thanks
 
I want to know the individual person, with a mother and a father and uncles and aunts and brothers and sisters, who first conceived the idea and championed it through the decision process.

That's what I want to know.

Who is this individual person?
 
Nagin is responsible for the order to violate the Constitution.:fire:

lawson4
 
Compass was rightly fired before NO was out from under the water.

He was not fired for all of his illegal acts but for a bunch of other stuff instead.
 
OK national guard did some confiscations.
Commander said he didn't like doing it, but he was following orders.
What a tool!
That's what the Nazi's said a Nuremburg.
 
It originated with Mayor Nagin. We used to go to N'awlins every year for the Jazz Festival. However since the happenings during Katrina, and the fact that Nagin wants to have a "chocolate city", we refuse to spend another cent there voluntarily. Enough of our tax money is being sent there...:fire:
 
OK national guard did some confiscations.
Commander said he didn't like doing it, but he was following orders.
What a tool!
That's what the Nazi's said a Nuremburg
Click to expand...

I seem to recall hearing of a poll in a cop magazine that said less than a third of police officers polled would follow a confiscation order. About half (I think)of active duty military that were polled would follow an order from their commanders to confiscate.

This does not represent the personal beliefs of the military folk. For them, it is a matter of folowing orders from a commander. This is what they are trained to do. Now, are they required to follow an illegal order? I think most of your people in uniform should review legal/illegal order requirements, as this is likely to come to a head if Hillary gets in office.

The police have no excuse. They can argue they are also following order, but they are supposed to know laws well enough to know when someone is breaking them. I would think an outright violation of the 2A would flag as illegal.
 
FieroCDSP said:
This does not represent the personal beliefs of the military folk. For them, it is a matter of folowing orders from a commander. This is what they are trained to do. Now, are they required to follow an illegal order? I think most of your people in uniform should review legal/illegal order requirements, as this is likely to come to a head if Hillary gets in office.
Click to expand...

I just want to throw this into the mix since I personally had to deal with it on a small scale (personal crap) this week. Most people in the Army do not take well to having what they tell people to do disregarded. Esp if we are talking senior officers or (esp) senior NCOs.

It's very tricky to disregard most orders, unlawful or not. It's not like you can go "Oh, shenanigans. That's an unlawful order." Your boss isn't just going to go "Oh jeez, you're right. My bad." Their response will probably be more along the lines of "Mother****er, you do what the **** I tell you to do!"

I'm not saying that people in the military shouldn't disobery unlawful orders. However, they have to be prepared to not only disobey the order, but take the punishment until someone (hopefully) comes along and agrees that the order was actually unlawful. It is much easier to say that you disagree, but you are just following orders.
 
You disobey an order "at your own peril" so you better be right.

That said and having been a commander a couple of times I can not imagine a situation where such an order would be legal to follow or give and I would still be serving in uniform.
 
Put in the same situation how many of you guys would give them up? This sounds like a good reason to have your stash well hidden and leave out a sacrificial weapon, after the nazis leave you break out the stash.
Can someone explain how Nagin got relelected? He's nothing more then a liberal communist pussy:mad:
 
See kids this is where it gets a little slippery. Congress passed a law saying that "NO agency that received Federal Funds can confiscate weapons in a emergency."
Neet wording isn't it? Read it again. What that means is that means that Police, National Guard, or Military CAN'T confiscate your weapons. What it DOES mean is that cities CAN hire PRIVATE security, Blackwater, etc. to do it. :fire::fire::fire:
 
With today's nanny state just about everybody gets federal funds. If say NYC can afford the $200K+ per year to hire the Blackwater clowns, and those guys are crazy (and dumb enough) to do it things should get real interesting.

Technically this even rules out UN super troopers from grabbing US guns as well since they suck at the teat like no one else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
There WERE troops who refused to confiscate guns during Katrina
Replies
2
Views
898
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
NRA response to LA
Replies
7
Views
562
James T Thomas
J
M
  • Locked
Question: Reference confiscation of guns
Replies
4
Views
364
claytonfaulkner
C
C
  • Locked
my thoughts Hurricane Katrina response
Replies
0
Views
317
chink
C
S
  • Locked
Update On New Orleans Cops Gun Confiscations
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
6K
Steve Raacke
S
Back
Top