Katrina - New Orleans Disarmament Indictments

This is a discussion on Katrina - New Orleans Disarmament Indictments within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Examiner Bio New Orleans indictments further vindicate Bellevue group’s post-Katrina lawsuit http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seatt...atrina-lawsuit Five years ago, in the post-apocalyptic environment that was New Orleans following its ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Katrina - New Orleans Disarmament Indictments

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array DaRedneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    628

    Katrina - New Orleans Disarmament Indictments

    Examiner Bio New Orleans indictments further vindicate Bellevue group’s post-Katrina lawsuit

    http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seatt...atrina-lawsuit

    Five years ago, in the post-apocalyptic environment that was New Orleans following its devastation by Hurricane Katrina, the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation moved quickly to intervene when local police officials – acting under color of law, but without any warrants, probable cause or true authority under Louisiana statute – announced that in the chaos and anarchy, private citizens would be disarmed.

    Now, one of the uglier aspects of this disaster has become clear with the indictment of several police officers for the shooting of several unarmed citizens.

    The police decided to suspend the Second Amendment, for everyone but themselves. It has never been acknowledged who actually originated the disarmament effort, or whether then-Gov. Kathleen Blanco and then-Mayor Ray Nagin were involved, but then-Police Supt. Eddie Compass and his successor Warren Riley made the announcement. It visibly stunned SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, who quickly began making phone calls.

    James Letten, the chief federal prosecutor in New Orleans, said Tuesday's indictment offered "compelling evidence" against officers who "abused their power in committing violent crimes against unarmed citizens they were sworn to protect."-USA Today

    As SAF began working quietly on a lawsuit, the National Rifle Association was also preparing to step in. Rather than trip over each other, the two gun rights organizations joined forces in what would become a landmark joint court effort that became the launch pad for a series of state legislative efforts to pass laws preventing this kind of thing in the future. They sent investigators to New Orleans, hired a local attorney and literally turned them loose to dig out the facts.

    The four are charged first with shooting into a group of six unarmed people who were walking across the city's Danziger Bridge on Sept. 4, 2005, in search of food and other scarce supplies, killing James Brissette, 17, and wounding four others.

    In the midst of anarchy, which saw police officers captured on film apparently engaged in looting, or forcibly disarming citizens, several unarmed people were shot, and two were killed by police. Note, the reports say these victims were all unarmed. While it is true that some people were apparently firing guns at emergency personnel and equipment, the people who actually got shot evidently had nothing to do with that.

    As part of the investigation that followed the SAF/NRA lawsuit, NRA News dispatched its gutsy correspondent Ginny Simone and a crew to the city. The report she produced from that visit should be required viewing for anybody who thinks “only cops should have guns.”


    Today, the city and the state are “under new management.” But what occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina should stand as a lesson on what can happen when only the police have guns. Four officers – Sgts. Kenneth Bowen and Robert Gisevius, and officers Robert Faulcon and Anthony Villavaso – face charges that, if they are convicted, could reportedly result in the death penalty. Also charged in the indictments are supervisors Gerard Dugue and Arthur Kaufman, who allegedly conspired to cover up the killings. Earlier Thursday, three of the four entered not-guilty pleas.

    PBS’s Margaret Warner filed this report, with some interesting interviews.

    What appears to me is that the officers, based upon the admitted statements, immediately decided to not tell the truth. That's just disgusting. It's an insult to everybody who does this work. It's an insult. It's an insult to the community, obviously.”—Ronal Serpas, New Orleans police chief

    About two weeks ago, SAF filed a federal lawsuit – discussed by this column here – in North Carolina, seeking to nullify provisions in that state’s emergency powers statute that allows the governor or local government officials to prohibit people from being armed outside of their residences during a declared state of emergency. As we saw in New Orleans, when anarchy reigns and police are not responding to emergencies (and may be part of the problem, rather than the solution), that is no time to be suspending the Second Amendment, and preventing people from defending themselves and their families, wherever they may be. This is yet another example for taking away from police and sheriffs the discretionary authority to deny someone a carry permit or license, as this column discussed here.

    In some sections of the city, there were reports of armed neighbors defending entire neighborhoods from roving bands of looters.

    By odd coincidence, Washington also has an emergency powers act that allows the governor to prohibit “the possession of firearms or any other deadly weapon by a person (other than a law enforcement officer) in a place other than that person’s place of residence or business.”

    Citizens do not surrender their civil rights just because of a natural or man-made disaster.”—Alan Gottlieb

    This column does not suggest that all police would conduct themselves like a handful of cops in New Orleans allegedly did. That will be sorted out in court. Indeed, nobody is suggesting anything.

    At some point, according to earthquake specialists, the Puget Sound region could be hit by “The Big One.” If that happens, local authorities are going to have their hands full, and probably the last thing they will want to be doing is running around trying to disarm people who aren’t doing anything wrong.
    "He who does not punish evil commands it to be done." - Leonardo da Vinci

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,226
    The is going to be an endless chain of lawsuits following the McD Vs C of Chi. decision. Living in hurricaneland, I am not going to disarm for any "emergency." Desparate people will do desparate things, but not in my house (or what's left of it).
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  4. #3
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    The main reason for the disarmament statutes is so that the police can enter homes without knocking in the search for victims and not get shot by the residents.

    My first thing in any major disaster will be to PAINT IN LARGE LETTERS that "WE ARE OK!" on the house. Another sign will go up in the yard - "Get off my lawn. This means YOU."

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    I'm 70 miles from the gulf of mexico,A friend of mine has a diesel generator with about 1000 gallons of diesel on hand,I would load up all my guns and food and haul over to his house to set up defenses with perimeter alarms,did I mention he has several private FA guns available,and thousands of rounds of ammo.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    The main reason for the disarmament statutes is so that the police can enter homes without knocking in the search for victims and not get shot by the residents.

    My first thing in any major disaster will be to PAINT IN LARGE LETTERS that "WE ARE OK!" on the house. Another sign will go up in the yard - "Get off my lawn. This means YOU."

    Ummm, this kind of defeat the purpose, because if they go to your home and disarm you...then they already know you're okay!
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  7. #6
    Member Array jg45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bartlett, TN
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by dukalmighty View Post
    I'm 70 miles from the gulf of mexico,A friend of mine has a diesel generator with about 1000 gallons of diesel on hand,I would load up all my guns and food and haul over to his house to set up defenses with perimeter alarms,did I mention he has several private FA guns available,and thousands of rounds of ammo.
    I need friends like that.

    I am still waiting for the indictments of the officers/agents that went around disarming citizens during the crisis.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by ctsketch View Post
    Ummm, this kind of defeat the purpose, because if they go to your home and disarm you...then they already know you're okay!
    Ah, but you see, if I post the sign then they already know that I'm ok and that they don't need to drop by and disarm me under the pretense of checking if I'm ok.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Guardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Wichita Falls, Texas
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    The main reason for the disarmament statutes is so that the police can enter homes without knocking in the search for victims and not get shot by the residents.

    My first thing in any major disaster will be to PAINT IN LARGE LETTERS that "WE ARE OK!" on the house. Another sign will go up in the yard - "Get off my lawn. This means YOU."
    You might have a point Rob P.. I say the other point is during a crisis, those folks don't want resistance from the very same people they have sworn to defend and up hold the law, an armed citizen is someone to take seriously and peope in power hate people who can fight back, history has proven that time and time again, thus the laws that violate our Constitution and New Orleans and this very thread are evidence of such cowards and who they fear.
    "I dislike death, however, there are some things I dislike more than death. Therefore, there are times when I will not avoid danger" Mencius"

  10. #9
    New Member Array knite7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale
    Posts
    5

    Florida Statue against disaraming citizens?

    I seem to recall that shortly after the Katrina disarming incidents, Florida passed some kind of law prohibiting that kind of action.
    Can anyone elaborate on this?

    Knite7

  11. #10
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by DaRedneck View Post
    ...As part of the investigation that followed the SAF/NRA lawsuit, NRA News dispatched its gutsy correspondent Ginny Simone and a crew to the city. The report she produced from that visit should be required viewing for anybody who thinks “only cops should have guns.”
    Here's Part 1 of the video that Ginny Simone produced for the NRA

    http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4ds50...eature=related
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  12. #11
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917

    Part 2

    Here's Part 2 of the Ginny Simone Video for NRA

    http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=zkKiJF...eature=related
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  13. #12
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917

    Part 3

    Here's The Untold Story Video

    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    The most egregious thing about this is the position it puts responsible citizens in. Either submitting to unlawful confiscations and be left defenseless or forcibly resist and risk death or prison.

  15. #14
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    The most egregious thing about this is the position it puts responsible citizens in. Either submitting to unlawful confiscations and be left defenseless or forcibly resist and risk death or prison.
    My biggest fear right there buddy! The last thing I ever want to do is to be shooting at our own law enforcement officers or military personnel. Not because I'm afraid of being killed in return, but because I just don't want to shoot at our men and women who wear the uniform!

    But when they come for the guns, we all are going to be forced to make that choice! And it's a tough one!

    I would much prefer they use foreign troops to do it instead of highway patrolmen from another state. I'd have a much smaller moral dilemma resisting United Nations troops.
    Last edited by Bark'n; July 23rd, 2010 at 08:53 PM. Reason: Fixed some typos
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    I definitely agree re UN troops. It will be interesting to see if new state laws will prevent a reoccurrence, or if some will try it again when it is prohibited in black and white in state statutes.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Soldiers pledge to refuse disarmament demands
    By Reborn in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: March 25th, 2009, 01:38 PM
  2. Veterans Disarmament Act To Bar Vets From Owning Guns Has Passed
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2007, 12:39 AM
  3. D.A. To Seek Indictments Against Officers
    By mzmtg in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 12th, 2007, 07:53 PM

Search tags for this page

citizens disarmed after katrina
,
disarmament during hurricane katrina
,
disarmament in new orleans
,
disarming citizens after katrina
,

disarming citizens during katrina

,

hurricane katrina disarmament

,
hurricane katrina disarming
,
hurricane katrina disarming citizens
,
katrina disarm citizens
,

katrina disarmament

,
katrina disarming citizens
,

new orleans disarmament

Click on a term to search for related topics.