New Orleans police state tactics: NEVER AGAIN!!!

progunner1957

Moderator
New Orleans police state tactics: NEVER AGAIN!

From Dave Workman of Gun Week magazine comes some thoughts on the question all gun owners have been asking: Is this America or not? After the police state debacle in New Orleans, some of us have been wondering...


Posted on Sun, Sep. 25, 2005
Did the Second Amendment wash away, too?
By DAVE WORKMAN

Special to the Star-Telegram

After New Orleans, will American firearms owners ever again be able to trust government, and especially police officers -- even ones they know personally?

A simple look at the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina reveals a disturbing chain of events that had the issue to do with anything but guns, there would have been an uproar in the media.

But this is about firearms and the law-abiding people who own them -- people who have had their guns, their private property, forcibly taken from them by what amounts to imperial edict without due process, without the benefit of warrant and, according to various legal experts, in direct conflict with Louisiana statute and the state and federal constitutions.

In at least one instance, a gun seizure took place before television cameras and was broadcast by San Francisco's KTVU and then circulated across the Internet.

That video shows an older woman declining to be evacuated, holding a small revolver in her left hand. She appears rational and tells police -- visiting officers from the California Highway Patrol -- that she simply wants them out of her home. In the next frame, we see her gang-tackled by at least two officers and subsequently led from her home in visible anguish.

New Orleans police officials ignited this fire-storm by declaring that they would confiscate everybody's firearms. They didn't cite any statutory authority or emergency regulation -- they just did it. Why?

Because apparently that's the way that New Orleans Police Superintendent P. Edward Compass III wants it. His infuriating quote to The New York Times: "Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons."

His deputy chief, Warren Riley, told ABC News: "No one will be able to be armed. We are going to take all the weapons."
Who made these guys kings?

I asked the department under what authority they were taking guns, where they are being kept and when they will be returned. As of this writing, I was still waiting for a reply.

Gun rights activists look at the film clip and statements from these law enforcement officials as disturbing evidence that, given the opportunity, police and government will disregard the Fourth Amendment while trampling the Second Amendment into oblivion, and it deeply troubles them.
Street cops insist that they are "only following orders." Where have we heard that before?

In the anarchy that reigned in New Orleans after the hurricane, it was more often than not legally armed citizens who provided the only semblance of law and order.

There were numerous reports of armed citizens protecting their homes, businesses and neighborhoods from roaming gangs of thugs and looters who were ultimately deterred by the muzzle of a gun or a warning shot fired over their heads.

Where were the police? Some left their posts; others turned in their badges. Some participated in the looting.

As order has slowly returned to New Orleans, those who survived -- many times in homes and businesses that were left high and dry even after the dikes ruptured -- have been ordered out and their guns confiscated.

One Associated Press report noted that "in the city's well-to-do Lower Garden District, a neighborhood with many antebellum mansions, members of the Oklahoma National Guard seized weapons from the inhabitants of one home. Those who were armed were handcuffed and briefly detained before being let go."

Last time I checked, Oklahoma was hard-core gun rights country. I wonder what they'd think about this back home.

According to gun rights legal expert David Kopel, Louisiana law allows for "regulating and controlling" possession, storage, display, sale and transport of firearms during extreme emergencies, but not their prohibition or confiscation.

The law, he notes, does not supersede the state constitution, which says: "The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person."

Traditionally, gun owners have been the strongest supporters of police officers, and that's as it should be. The concern is that the images from New Orleans could irrevocably change that. American citizens who have committed no crime should never be expected to meekly surrender their property -- in this case, firearms -- or their right to have a gun, and subsequently their right of self-defense, just because a police chief says so.

This is still the United States, not a police state.
 
Last edited:
Honestly might have read this. The colors and large section boldings gave me a headache. Perhaps someone who isn't prone to motion sickness will translate.

Technology for the sake of technology is not always your friend. Trust me on this. ;)
Rich
 
This is a good and rousing article.
I, too, regret the multihued type.
When almost everything is highlighted,
that which is not stands out.
 
But it is a great essay. Kudos to Mr. Workman.

And you all know the NRA got a restraining order on the gun seizures, right?
 
I'm assuming that if they get cornered, they will claim that they were only acting to protect the volunteers. Their example will be the firings earlier on rescue helicopters. In other words, play it down as an overzealous attempt to protect the heros.

Jim
 
Riiiiight. You're confused by the colors.

Why not comment on the content? Still more denials that this happened? Some here say there was too much fuss over random acts of gun theft by .gov. I wonder how RKBA-er would have looked to the gun grabbers had we remained silent, like so many here advocated?

That video shows an older woman declining to be evacuated, holding a small revolver in her left hand.
Yet another story that left out the part about her *not* having the gun until the police asked her to show it to them -- as she held it by the frame and with the cylinder open and, um, unloaded.

Rick
 
Actually, we have a response from Mr. Nagin and Mr. Compass.

If it's Ok with everyone, I'll just cut and paste my latest blog entry.

Update: Saturday, September 24, 2005 2:04PM
The Roaches Scatter

Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana issued a temporary restraining order on behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and National Rifle Association (NRA), bringing an end to firearm seizures from citizens living in and around New Orleans. District Judge Jay Zaney issued the restraining order against all parties named in a lawsuit filed Thursday by SAF and NRA. Defendants in the lawsuit include New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Chief Edwin Compass III. News reports quoted Compass as saying that only law enforcement officials would be allowed to have firearms and Deputy Chief Warren Riley as saying, "We are going to take all the weapons." Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association, states his group documented 30 to 40 cases of people having their weapons illegally confiscated by law enforcement after Hurricaine Katrina hit Aug. 29. The location and disposition of these weapons is being sought, as well as civil and criminal charges against those who instituted the acts of confiscation.

Not surprisingly, in documents filed in federal court in Baton Rouge, La., New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, Police Chief Eddie Compass and St. Tammany Sheriff Jack Strain deny ordering the confiscation of firearms. To wit:

Defendants, C. Ray Nagin, Mayor of New Orleans and P. Edwin Compass, III, Superintendent of Police for the City of New Orleans, deny the allegations in the Complaint For Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief and specifically deny that it was or is the policy of the City of New Orleans nor the New Orleans Police Department to illegally seize lawfully possessed firearms from citizens;

Defendants C. Ray Nagin, Mayor of the City of New Orleans, and P. Edwin Compass, III, Superintendent of the Department of Police for the City of New Orleans, specifically deny each and every allegation in the Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief and specifically reserving all rights herein and waiving none, assert the following:

1. C. Ray Nagin has not issued, nor has he any intention of issuing, any order, declaration, promulgation, and/or directive pursuant to the authority granted unto him by LSA-R.S. 29:721, et seq., ordering the seizure of any lawfully-possessed firearm from law abiding citizens, nor has C. Ray Nagin delegated any authority granted unto him pursuant to LSA-RS 29:721, et seq. to any other city official, department head, officer, employee, and/or agent of the City of New Orleans including, but not limited to, P. Edwin Compass, III, Superintendent of the Department of Police for the City of New Orleans and/or Warren Riley, Deputy Superintendent of the Department of Police of the City of New Orleans;

2. P. Edwin Compass, III acknowledges that no authority has been delegated to him by C. Ray Nagin, Mayor of the City of New Orleans, pursuant to the powers granted unto the said Mayor by the provisions of LSA-RS 29:721, et seq. to order the seizure of lawfully-possessed firearms from law abiding citizens and that any and all statements which are allegedly attributed to him in such regard do not represent any policy, statement, ordinance, regulation, decision, custom or practice of either C. Ray Nagin or the City of New Orleans, its agencies and/or departments;

3. C. Ray Nagin and P. Edwin Compass, III affirmatively deny that seizures of lawfully possessed firearms from law abiding citizens has occurred as a result of the actions of officers, city officials, employees and/or agents of the City of New Orleans or any of its departments and further affirmatively deny that any such weapons are presently in the possession of the City of New Orleans, its agents and/or departments;

4. C. Ray Nagin and P. Edwin Compass, III further affirmatively deny that it is the custom, practice and/or policy of the City of New Orleans, either officially or unofficially, to seize and/or confiscate lawfully-possessed firearms from law abiding citizens.

So, if I read this right, they didn't do it, they couldn't do it, and they wouldn't do it. The old SODDI Defense. Some Other Dude Did It. "Me and my homie wuz home watchin' TV." When the lights are turned on, roaches and rats scatter.

edited to add: A PDF file of the Restraining Order
 
Last edited:
That duck is quacking loudly.

Of course, if the judge finds that there was no "official" and notorized order of Hizzoner, that means that those LEOs who *did* confiscated firearms (as seen on TV), just might not have protection of sovereign immunity and may be sued as *individuals.*

Way to hang your hired help out to dry, Mayor and Chief.

Rick
 
Times like this makes you look back and really ask yourself if this really is still the United States of America, with our constutition being butchered and "officials" going on with their own agenda with no regards.
 
I hope any and all LEOs who complied with this order will testify to that effect and not "take one for the team." Correct me if I'm wrong, but did not the OP say something about a New York Times quote? I'm sure that will be admitted as evidence. I hope they hang these two embeciles out to dry. (Perhaps the prepositional phrase could be removed?)
 
These two need hung out to dry, as well as more than a few of the officers who acted the way they did. There is NO EXCUSE for following an order that hurts the people your are sworn to serve. Nothing short of SS tactics.

And to the thugs who jumped on that poor old lady, I would personally LOVE to be on that jury.
 
I would like to thank progunner for editing his post and making the article much more readable.

To see the actual article, go here. Be warned, one must register with the Star-Telegram to get online.
 
Why does the pro-gun right hang so much importance on isolated incidents? Not since Galveston was wiped from the planet has a storm done damage of this magnitude. And this is not the first time a politician has overstepped their bounds. Never again? What possible scenario can be forseen where this is likely to happen again? Humongous solar flares? It wont happen because the system worked. A TRO brought this nitwit to heel and redress will accrue.

Waco - Never again
Ruby Ridge - Never again

And why do you suppose these never happened again? Could it be that they were aberations, anomolies that were at the nexus of situations that had spiraled so far out of control by any party that they hadnt been seen before or since?

Of all the tragedies that occurred in NO this hardly rates as an inconvenience. Let it go, its already gone.
 
NO and a Bit Of Oversteppin'

Sendec,

This isolated incident would not have been corrected except for the vigilance and quick response of NRA and SAF.

The individuals who had their guns confiscated when it was manifestly obvious that the police and others were not going to be able to protect them are not likely to want anyone minimizing the arrogance and stupidity of these duly elected officials who evidently never attended any high school civics courses, and for sure had no idea they'd have to account for their actions.

Every time a petty bureaucrat has the chance to act the ass, and does it, someone needs to slap that ass down, and right now.

If left alone, these little isolated acts of nitwittery can become established turn into "precedent" and eventually get past our ability to stop them.

Woudn't it have been something if these clowns got away with their dumb move, proceeded to disarm the whole area, and then left everyone to the mercy of the still-armed criminals for the next storm?

Final Comment:

nra_web_recruiting_link.jpg

JOIN THE NRA TODAY!!
 
Waco - Never again
Ruby Ridge - Never again
And why do you suppose these never happened again?
You mean, "until the next time"? Sorry, but that's not logic; it's soundbyte. Waco was the "next time" after Ruby Ridge became "never again". Ruby Ridge was "the next time" after the "last time"....shall I post examples dating back to the Jim Crow Laws?

The cops here were wrong, sendec. From those giving the order to those engaging in the actions, they embraced criminal activity of the worst kind....forcibly taking tools of survival from citizens, in the midst of a disaster, and rendering them defenseless.

If you've no better place to argue from than the "just following orders" mantra, you'd be best to stay away from this one. The people involved are what you refer to as "perps"....simple as that. If you choose to take their side, you do so at the expense of your own rep.
Rich
 
Of all the tragedies that occurred in NO this hardly rates as an inconvenience. Let it go, its already gone.
The rule of law that binds our society together, whether it be written on the parchment of the Constitution, or carried in the hearts of patriots as common decency, this rule of law transcends the loss of life that has occured. The loss of life is a tragedy, to be sure. The loss of law, when it was needed most, by the very men intrusted with it's preservation, is a travesty that cannot and must not be tolerated.

People were illegally disarmed when they needed their arms most.

This will not be let go.
 
Back
Top