# Start of Hurricane Season Triggers Gun Debate



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

This is of special interest to me because I live in Florida!

"The start of hurricane season has become a selling point for gun-rights legislation spurred by Hurricane Katrina.

During the during storms chaotic aftermath, government officials hoping to ensure public safety seized hundreds of legally owned guns from Louisiana residents, some seeking to protect themselves from pillagers and assailants. The seizures have triggered outrage among gun-rights activists, spawning a lawsuit and bills nationwide to ban future confiscations.

These people were left to defend themselves from criminals, said Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association (NRA). It really became the proving ground for what American gun owners have always feared, and thats the day that bureaucrats threw the Bill of Rights in the trash can.

Since Katrina, state legislators in Louisiana, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and Arizona have unveiled bills that would ban weapons seizures by state and local officials during emergencies. In Washington, S. 2599 and H.R. 5013 would prevent federal officials from making the confiscations. Proponents are using the start of the hurricane season last week as a selling point for moving the legislation swiftly."

Full story
http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/060606/guns.html


----------



## Lisa (Jun 21, 2006)

Thanks for the link Arnisandyz.  It will be interesting to see what happens.  I can't imagine being left with nothing to protect ones self during extreme cases like Katrina.  Hopefully, I will never have to find out.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 21, 2006)

That's what swords and spears are for.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 21, 2006)

In the event of a Hurricane they will confiscate firearms... all righty then.

They should worry more about how they will respond to those that need assistance. 

As a side note, I once took an archery class in college and as I was walking across campus carrying my compound bow I had a thought, I cannot carry a rifle onto campus, but I can walk right by the campus police with a compound bow, with attached arrows ad no one cares.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 21, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> As a side note, I once took an archery class in college and as I was walking across campus carrying my compound bow...


 
Yup, got one of those too!!  74# composite recurve.  three dozen arrows.  Armed to the teeth, just not in a modern, conventional manner...


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> That's what swords and spears are for.



Actually...thats what the 2nd Amendment is for.  

But your right, I have alternate weapons othe than firearms that can be used, but when they take all of the firearms away from lawful registered owners the only ones that will be left are the ones not legally registered. Sword doesn't work too good against gangs with AK47s, I'd rather have my AR15.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 21, 2006)

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Actually...thats what the 2nd Amendment is for.


 
Well, there is a whole host of Constitutional Rights violations that the government has been pursuing lately.  The 2nd Amendment is just one of many.


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Well, there is a whole host of Constitutional Rights violations that the government has been pursuing lately.  The 2nd Amendment is just one of many.




Agreed...but this thread is about "confiscating firearms at a time of emergency."  Since the Second Amendment deals with the Right to Bare Arms, I thought it was appropriate.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 21, 2006)

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Agreed...but this thread is about "confiscating firearms at a time of emergency." Since the Second Amendment deals with the Right to Bare Arms, I thought it was appropriate.


 
of course.  I was just pointing out that this is only one of many such problems we are all faced with.  Didn't mean to hijack the thread.  Just a minor and short-lived seque, if you will.


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

No problem...from the sounds of the article though, it sounds like the Bill will get passed soon, hopefully before we get too deep into hurricane season.


----------



## Kacey (Jun 21, 2006)

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Since Katrina, state legislators in Louisiana, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and Arizona have unveiled bills that would ban weapons seizures by state and local officials during emergencies. In Washington, S. 2599 and H.R. 5013 would prevent federal officials from making the confiscations. Proponents are using the start of the hurricane season last week as a selling point for moving the legislation swiftly."



Farther down the article, it also stated this:




> Jindal said the bill would not create any new rights; rather, *it would ensure current gun laws are not suspended during an emergency.* Hurricanes shouldnt be an excuse to break current laws, Jindal said.
> When youre in one of those tragic situations, when theres no 911, its up to you to defend your life and the life of your family.



Nowhere within the article did I see anything that stated why officials felt it was appropriate to suspend the current gun laws during an emergency; if the lawful owner of a gun is using it in a lawful manner, then it shoult not be confiscated; if the lawful owner of a gun uses it in an unlawful manner, then it should be confiscated, as allowed by law - regardless of the current circumstances.  No state of emergency or other circumstance should allow anyone, even (or perhaps especially) law enforcement officers to bypass the law.


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

Nowhere within the article did I see anything that stated why officials felt it was appropriate to suspend the current gun laws during an emergency;.[/QUOTE]

This was there reasoning, to ensure public safety!

"...government officials hoping to ensure public safety seized hundreds of legally owned guns from Louisiana residents..."


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 21, 2006)

* 
Second Amendment*  Right to keep and bear arms. 
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. 

I am not stating a for or against position here, the last thing I want is a second amendment debate, but it has always been an issue because of the wording which includes "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" which is not necessary before or during a hurricane, possibly after, so it is debatable as to whether is actually applies here. 

However I do feel that the bill as presented is a bit silly. A Katrina size hurricane would level pretty much everything, possibly including the place the take the confiscated guns to. It would seem to me that they would be better off setting up a better disaster management plan. 

And so they confiscate someones gun, now they feel safe. A cross bow or compound bow is pretty deadly actually, as are swords and spears. Although I will admit it is a lot harder to hide these weapons and it may take a different type of skill to use them.


----------



## Kacey (Jun 21, 2006)

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> Nowhere within the article did I see anything that stated why officials felt it was appropriate to suspend the current gun laws during an emergency;.





> This was there reasoning, to ensure public safety!
> 
> "...government officials hoping to ensure public safety seized hundreds of legally owned guns from Louisiana residents..."



How does that ensure public safety?  That's the part I don't understand, and that wasn't explained.


----------



## Lisa (Jun 21, 2006)

Kacey said:
			
		

> How does that ensure public safety?  That's the part I don't understand, and that wasn't explained.



don't know how that works either.  Kinda like Canadian gun laws.  Don't let the law abiding people have them and the problem doesn't exist.

Ostrich with its head in the sand theory.


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 21, 2006)

Kacey said:
			
		

> How does that ensure public safety?  That's the part I don't understand, and that wasn't explained.



My guess is the local government has a fear of its general populous, remember, this is New Orleans...nearly one in three of New Orleans' 485,000 residents live below the poverty level. Desperate time make desperate people do desperate things.  I'm not saying they were right, just trying to reason why the local government would violate the 2nd Ammendment.  Would this have happened in a more affluent city?


----------



## Kacey (Jun 21, 2006)

arnisandyz said:
			
		

> My guess is the local government has a fear of its general populous, remember, this is New Orleans...nearly one in three of New Orleans' 485,000 residents live below the poverty level. Desperate time make desperate people do desperate things.  I'm not saying they were right, just trying to reason why the local government would violate the 2nd Ammendment.  Would this have happened in a more affluent city?



The problem with so-called "preventive" actions like this is that they tend to backfire - and, as Lisa said, they also tend to leave the law-abiding without weapons, while not affecting the law-breaking at all, the latter group being more likely to cause problems.


----------



## trueaspirer (Jun 21, 2006)

So it comes to a time (now!) when we have to pass laws to make a law that was already legal, legal.
Y'know in NY state, weapon catalogs will ship you most knives and stuff, but not things like butterfly knives and sword canes and other things that hide themselves. I guess they want to know that if you kill a person, they know it, first.


----------



## arnisandyz (Oct 1, 2006)

Bill passed Congress. Bush just needs to sign it, looks like I get to keep my guns during a disaster.

Congress Passes NRA-backed "Disaster
Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006"
Fairfax, VA- The National Rifle Association (NRA) and law-abiding gun owners scored a significant victory yesterday when the United States Congress acted to prohibit the confiscation of legal firearms from law-abiding citizens during states of emergency, barring practices conducted by officials in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. This action was included in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill that passed both chambers of Congress. This bill now heads to President Bush for his expected signature. "Following the chaos and civil disorder in New Orleans when the city effectively suspended the Second Amendment, NRA vowed to make sure we never again witnessed this kind of desecration on our rights," declared Chris W. Cox. "As promised, NRA set out to pass legislation at both the federal and state levels to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens." H.R. 5013, the "Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act," was introduced in the House by Congressman Bobby Jindal (LA - 1) passed the House on July 25, 2006 with a broad bi-partisan margin of 322-99. Senator David Vitter (R-La) introduced the Senate version of the bill, which passed the United States Senate by 84-16, the largest margin of victory for a NRA-backed measure. "The essence of the 'Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act' was so compelling that it received strong bipartisan support in Congress," continued Cox. "When 911 is non-existent and law enforcement personnel are busy with search and rescue missions and other duties, law abiding Americans want to defend their families and loved ones in times of emergency. Your NRA helped guarantee their freedom to do just that." "On behalf of all NRA members nationwide, I want to thank Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Sen. Vitter for their leadership in introducing this legislation and seeing these fundamental bills through to passage," concluded Cox. -nra-


----------



## Grenadier (Oct 1, 2006)

This bill was more of a stern reminder to corrupt law enforcement officials, that they are not allowed to violate the law, even when disaster strikes.  

Confiscation of someone's lawfully-owned property is illegal, and what Warren Riley did was exactly that.


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Oct 1, 2006)

Glad to hear it passed.

Jeff


----------

