DaKnife wrote:And one more time. I'm not saying I agree with the decision. Many of those I know who were there did not like the order one bit, but my point is that it's not "pure BS" that it was made. The situation was extreme and the residents of NO had demonstrated an incredible ability to do exactly the wrong thing every step of the way through that disaster. A state of emergency (the closest thing Louisiana has to Martial Law) had been declared giving law enforcement (those who weren't too busy looting Wal-mart on national TV) emergency powers. The National Guard troops from all over the country were loaned by their respective Governors to LA and were then deputized by order of the Governor of LA, and thus their actions were police actions under the authority of the LA Governor.
And just to show you how the situation really was, go across the river to Mississippi, where they really got clobbered. Remember NOLA was only sideswiped by Katrina, it hit Mississippi head on wiping towns off the map. But those people listened and got out of the way. Those people were far more prepared. And those folks were not disarmed because they did not shoot at their rescuers.
Was it the right thing to do? Not really but it was the lessor of two evil choices. Far lessor in my opinion.
bagpiper wrote:And that, my friends, is how we justify gross infringements of constitutional rights. The lessor of the arbitrary options we've presented. Classic case of fallacy of false dichotomy. Here is the proper answer: abide the constitution even when inconvenient.
No doubt a lot of residents of NO behaved very poorly. Some of them may have even fired on rescue vehicles and/or personnel.
But martial law and emergency powers do not grant authority to infringe on RKBA. Indeed, when such decrees are needed is when private ownership and possession of guns is also most needed.
The constitution allows the suspension of habeas corpus. Someone can be arrested and held when otherwise they would have the right to come before a judge for a release order.
But no where does the constitution even contemplate the suspension of RKBA. National emergency is when the local militias should be called out to help keep the peace. It is when individuals most need the ability defend themselves. It is when the usual "minutes" for police to respond might be turned into "hours" or "days" or never.
The order to seize guns was worse that total BS. It was unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, and an affront to our freedom and heritage. Any and every member of the military who had any part in originating, perpetuating, or effecting this order violated his oath. Any who would justify it as anything less, have rationalized in their own mind that they will violate the rights of their fellow citizens rather than stand up for their oaths to defend the constitution if push comes to shove.
We have a law in Utah specifically prohibiting such conduct here. What a pity that such a law is needed rather than having sufficient respect for fundamental rights as to know that lacking specific constitutional allowance to seize guns from citizens, an order to do so would never be given and would never be followed if given.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest