The Great New Orleans Gun Grab

[rpm]

 

Nice troll. Even if the truth and the facts (see: "Landreau", and "Nagin") were nowhere to be seen. But then, we've come to expect that, considering the source. But don't let that stop you, we need the humor.

You'll do anything to ignore the fact Bush ignored the facts, won't you?

[bj229r]

Ya can blame Bush for his part of slow rescue response if ya want, (taking into account that the governor has to submit no small amount of paperwork to activate Guard, and 3 days berfore the monster hit, was still consulting lawyers on liability angles of ordering an evacuation) But I cant see where you blame gun grab on Bush...did General Honore order the gun grab?

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

You'll do anything to ignore the fact Bush ignored the facts, won't you?

Genius, until Landreau and Nagin declared an emergency and requested Federal help, Bush had nothing to do with it. Further, I seriously doubt Bush was micromanaging the relief efforts. That's just not part of the job, regardless of party affiliation. You'll stop at nothing to fabricate some sort of fault on Bush's behalf for anything that ever goes wrong. You endlessly supply comic relief for rational people. Thank you. No, really, thank you.

[FrodeMk3]

I was under the impression that it was the duty of the Guardsmen to disregard or refuse to commit any anti-constitutional order.  This is because they will not be able to claim that they were only under orders by the time they are tried.

Ok, here's the oath;

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Here's where I got it:http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/a/oathofenlist.htm

Now, the oath that officers' take, here in Wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Military_Oath_of_Allegiance

The Oath of Office is a solemn oath taken by officers of the United States Uniformed Services on commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service. It is statutory (i.e. required by law) and is prescribed by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code[1]. It is traditional for officers to recite the oath upon promotion but as long as the officer's service is continuous this is not actually required.[2] One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.

==Text of the Oath==

I, [name], do solemnly swear, (or affirm,) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God.)

Note that the last sentence is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection, as is true of all oaths administered by the United States government.

Note also that this is not an oath to defend any specific territory or persons or property. This is an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States.

The officers' oath states that there is no direct obligation to obey orders; However, Officers' have been in trouble for not following the orders' of a higher ranking officer before. Myself, I'm not sure how that plays' out.

[CptTrips]

Virgil,

  Why do you waste your time?


FrodeMk3,

I think "obey lawful orders" is the key phrase.  An order that violates the constitution is by definition unlawful. 

What if you officer "ordered" you to assasinate the President?

Wab

[bj229r]

Do we know from whom the order originated?

[CptTrips]

Do we know from whom the order originated?

My memory might be off, but I believe it was the Democrat mayor Ray Nagin.

Wab

[FrodeMk3]

Virgil,

  Why do you waste your time?


FrodeMk3,

I think "obey lawful orders" is the key phrase.  An order that violates the constitution is by definition unlawful. 

What if you officer "ordered" you to assasinate the President?

Wab

That's true; We can all assume, however, that an order to assasinate the POTUS is unlawful. Can an order to seize any and all firearms, legal or not, after both LE and Military units' have been fired upon, be considered unlawful? I believe I've seen somewhere that F.E.M.A. has an Executive order in such situations. Now, legally, if they have an EO, that makes' the seizure lawful, right?

The real problem with the 2nd amendment, is that they took something that they really should have been more careful to protect, and tried to word it much too simply. If they were going to take that route, they never should have mentioned anything about Militia's or anything else...They should have said that the right to bear arms' is an unalienable right for any law-abiding U.S. citizen. Throwing in anything else just introduced a loophole that a crooked gov't. could use to take that right away, it it so chose. Unless, of course, that was the intention of the founders' all along? In case the whole democracy experiment didn't work...?

To also note, that even though sporadic firing at Coast gaurd, Police, and National Gaurd choppers' took place, I don't think that such firing could have been construed as completely hostile. Hell, it mighta been folks' stuck on roofs', simply trying to get the attention(and pickup) of a rescue helo. I could imagine it might have been frustrating, sitting on the roof of your house for however long some of those folks' did, and seeing choppers' flying around, but none stopping to pick you or your family up...

...But since said firing did take place, It could have been construed as a hostile act against city or state military/LE personnel. Now, how many people can tell us what category you put yourself in, if you ping a UH-60 with even a .22? What is your status then? Do you stay a citizen in need of a rescue, or do you become an armed/enemy hostile, or classified as a domestic terrorist? It seems' like one gray area begets' another.

[rpm]

My memory might be off, but I believe it was the Democrat mayor Ray Nagin.

Wab

The mayor has authority over the National Guard? I think your memory is off and your wishbone is on.

[bj229r]

The mayor has authority over the National Guard? I think your memory is off and your wishbone is on.

I inquire again: Do we know from whom the order originated?

[NOT]

according to this article, the DEMOCRATIC mayor Ray "chocolate new orleans" Nagin gave the order.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/32966.html




NOT

[Thruster]

The article states towards the end that it was the police supt.'s order to confiscate. The truth may never be known. This was only one of the myriad abuses perpetrated by the "officials" that hit town in the days after the storm. The chain of command was so fragmented that about the only thing they all agreed on was the need to cover their respective butts. For a couple of days about the only people allowed into, or move around in the city were people in uniform or former badge carriers (a few parishes deputized former LEO's on the spot). Unofficial relief was kept away from the affected areas with an unbelievable degree of enthusiasm. It was patently obvious that many of the armed responders were in fact wishing they were overseas in a combat zone. The few that behaved with any discretion at all were in my experience all locals.

Even in the weeks after the flood there was far more evidence of peacekeeping efforts than actual humanitarian aid (sounds like Bosnia doesn't it?) I actually had to present my papers, leave my vehicle at a checkpoint and walk into a razor wire perimeter to check on some family property, unarmed of course.

There were so many stupid knee jerk decisions made during the aftermath that one can only conclude that the last place to look for help in a similar emergency is the government. It seemed as though the only official common sense efforts were those of the F.D.'s, U.S.C.G, and the medical community.

[lazs2]

nagin gave the order..   

if one or two people shot at relief workers or.. that story was made up as it now appears..   it makes no difference.. you can't trump up some story about shooting at police and use that to take away the guns of the law abiding.

But.. if you live in a city like orleans.. you probly deserve whatever happens to you.

lazs

[wrag]

Her you go..................

http://www.armedfemalesofamerica.com/content/EkpZyAkEpFyMHwIgQc.html

sounds ....

hmmm............... IMHO this doesn't sound good.

[BBBB]

FrodeMk3, just because there were random acts of violence taking place does not make it OK to violate every other citizens 4th and 2nd Amendment right. Lets not forget that people who were on dry land and who were unaffected by the storm had police and military personal forcefully enter their homes and perform illegal search and seizers. In some cases these people were forcibly removed from their homes and put on planes to other states. Some of these people where people that were totally unaffected by the storm. That is kidnapping.

 These police officers and military personal used intimidation, lying, force and firepower to completely shred the constitution. There was no order of Marshall Law. People, American citizens who had survived one of the worst storms in Americas history were now under siege from people they thought they were supposed to trust. These police officers and military personal used that trust to their advantage, so that they could carry out an unjust and unlawful order.

 The glee and joy they seemed to get out of slamming an 80 year old woman to the ground and taking her .32 revolver from her sicked me. These were officers from California brought in to assist with policing. Them patting each other on the back as if to say a job well done after the incident made it very clear to me that this is something they could get people to do in any town or city in America.

 I don't think a total gun ban will ever happen in my life time. However if that day does ever come I can promise you, you will find me dead in my boots with a smoking, empty firearm in my hand and if I am lucky a few of those "enforcers" laying dead around me. No way will I ever just hand over my rights.