what did they accomplish by seizing these guns?

Off to the smelter!!
---------------------------------------------------------
releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=62434

New Orleans Admits to SAF Attorneys They Have Seized Guns

3/15/2006 6:23:00 PM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: National and State Desks

Contact: Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation, 425-454-7012, Web: http://www.saf.org

BELLEVUE, Wash., March 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In a stunning reversal, the City of New Orleans revealed today to attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association that they do have a stockpile of firearms seized from private citizens in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

The disclosure came as attorneys for both sides were preparing for a hearing in federal court on a motion filed earlier by SAF and NRA to hold the city in contempt. Plaintiffs' attorneys traveled to a location within the New Orleans city limits where they viewed more than 1,000 firearms that were being stored.

"This is a very significant event," said attorney Dan Holliday, who represents NRA and SAF in an on-going lawsuit seeking to enjoin the city from seizing privately-owned firearms.

"We're almost in disbelief," admitted SAF Founder Alan Gottlieb. "For months, the city has maintained it did not have any guns in its possession that had been taken from people following the hurricane. Now our attorneys have seen the proof that New Orleans was less than honest with the court."

Under an agreement with the court, the hearing on the contempt motion has been continued for two weeks, the attorneys said. During that time, according to Holliday and fellow attorney Stephen Halbrook, the city will establish a process by which the lawful owners of those firearms can recover their guns.

"While we are stunned at this complete reversal on the city's part," Gottlieb said, "the important immediate issue is making sure gun owners get their property back. We're glad that the city is going to move swiftly to make that possible, and naturally we will do whatever is necessary to make this happen.

"What happened in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina was an outrage," Gottlieb observed. "Equally disturbing is the fact that it apparently took a motion for contempt to force the city to admit what it had been denying for the past five months.

-----

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-

Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt

Confiscation is just a tinfoil hat exercise, eh?

Well, it's not like they could've denied it.  The question is: were constitutional right suspended during that time.

The answer should be NO.

People should be arrested for this but they won't be.

HH

Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt

Keep dreaming.

Watch, now someone will say...."If we just had a record of serial numbers to owners, we could return all the guns."

well, it's not like we didn't already know it.

BTW:  The NRA lawsuit brought attention to the issue!

NRA:  Beacuse you don't want NOLA in your town.

Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt

I don't think so.

Now, re-think lawyers?

There are good ones for a good reason

GM

1,000 guns...

No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns.

Uh-huh.

Let this be a lesson to you.

Now if they can only get the "good stuff" back from the collections of the agents that seized them

Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt

Quoted: 1,000 guns... No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns. Uh-huh. Let this be a lesson to you.

No shit.  

Though, it depended on where you were.  The checkpoints in on 90, the State PD and, out of state
were offereing us ammo as we came in.  they were shocked we didn't have guns.

Quoted: 1,000 guns... No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns. Uh-huh. Let this be a lesson to you.

Cops were  doing it, the Army was not.  Any documentation on either the NG or the Army doing it?

Seems to me the article mentioned the city of NOLA doing it.  I see no mention of the Army or the NG.

Quoted: Quoted: 1,000 guns... No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns. Uh-huh. Let this be a lesson to you. Cops were  doing it, the Army was not.  Any documentation on either the NG or the Army doing it?

I just watched the ABC World News report from 8 September 2005.  The reporting is kind of vague.  The reporter says that the NG is confiscating, however, they only show the NOPD saying they will and only show the NOPD actually doing it.  The rest of the time they show the NG clearing the city house by house.  I'm kind of up in the air on whether the NG actually had orders to confiscate guns or if their orders were strictly to clear all people from the city.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 1,000 guns... No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns. Uh-huh. Let this be a lesson to you. Cops were  doing it, the Army was not.  Any documentation on either the NG or the Army doing it? I just watched the ABC World News report from 8 September 2005.  The reporting is kind of vague.  The reporter says that the NG is confiscating, however, they only show the NOPD saying they will and only show the NOPD actually doing it.  The rest of the time they show the NG clearing the city house by house.  I'm kind of up in the air on whether the NG actually had orders to confiscate guns or if their orders were strictly to clear all people from the city.

My guess is it's city-oriented.

NOLA has some crazy-ass laws that only go in the city limits.

The surrounding Parrishes basically said..."Uh...F-you" and armed citizens and set them out on checkpoints.  concentrating on NOLA confiscation is kinda tunnel vision.

Sad thing is I am sure they are all gun owners that took part in the grab.  Thats the worst kind of gun grabber. One that makes sure his family is protected but goes out of his way to make sure yours is not.

Wow.

I wonder how many were taken from law abiding citizens or just evidencied from thugs, stolen etc?

Quoted: People should be arrested for this but they won't be.

Exactly.

I'm interested in what's going to happen with the suit by that elderly woman tackled by the CHP officers.

For shame. but now we have to see how actually gave the order. Was it the police chief or the mayor?

We should start a pool.

ASSHOLES!!!

Quoted: Quoted: 1,000 guns... No, the NG wasn't confiscating guns, out of state police weren't confiscating guns, the army wasn't confiscating guns. Uh-huh. Let this be a lesson to you. Cops were  doing it, the Army was not.  Any documentation on either the NG or the Army doing it? Seems to me the article mentioned the city of NOLA doing it.  I see no mention of the Army or the NG.

I don't know about documents. I did see regular long arms leaned up against a table and a humvee at checkpoints staffed by some type of military guys. Don't know where they came from or from who or what happened to them.

Just wondering......Yeah I know NOLA citizens were disarmed...But, don't
think it was all over.

If you weren't there....(As i assume most weren't)...There wasn't one
citizen outside NOLA that was disarmed.

There were Parrish presidents mandating the deputizing of willing citizens.

This is pure country/city.

I was in MS......I can tell ya...there wasn't any looting there

This said, those that disarmed citizens should be tried for violations of federal civil rights
violations.

Just remember..It was only in a corrupt city.......Not where real people live.

so the cops doing it were just doing their job, and their still the good guy? and if someone shot a cop doing it would he be a bad guy for protecting his rights?!?!  

Quoted: People should be arrested HANG for this but they won't be.

Fixed it for ya

Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt

Two separate scales of justice.

Such law only applies to us serfs.

Quoted: Just wondering......Yeah I know NOLA citizens were disarmed...But, don't think it was all over. If you weren't there....(As i assume most weren't)...There wasn't one citizen outside NOLA that was disarmed. There were Parrish presidents mandating the deputizing of willing citizens. This is pure country/city. I was in MS......I can tell ya...there wasn't any looting there This said, those that disarmed citizens should be tried for violations of federal civil rights violations. Just remember..It was only in a corrupt city.......Not where real people live.

That's little consolation.

The fact that thousands of guns were confiscated by armed thugs (be they police, national guard, army or whatever) in a major American city is all that is important.

I firmly believe that confiscation leads to genocide and the victims of this confiscation were in terrible danger of having themselves robbed, raped and butchered. I will never allow myself to be put in that position. This should be a lesson to all of us.

I agree, those that violated the law abiding citizens rights should stand trial for Federal Civil Rights violations! That includes Nagin and his Chief Flatfoot!!

Incidently, there were reports of CA Hiway Patrol and Oklahoma Natl Guardsmen confiscating firearms at the behest of the NO Government.

One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command.

Every idiot on and off this board who defends those cops based on the orders they received is parroting exactly the defense that led hundreds of equally loyal, legalistically-justified, smartly-uniformed dirtbags to the gibbet at Nuremburg. A police officer who obeys a patently unconstitutional order should pay for it with his life or liberty. That is the policy announced by the United States at Nuremburg. That is a higher law than the General Orders of the NYPD or the Louisiana State Police.

Quoted: Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt Two separate scales of justice. Such law only applies to us serfs.

That pretty much sums up this situation.

The gun confiscation activities in New Orleans was just a practice run....................
................... soon to be coming to a state near you!!  

Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command.

The Constitution also provides protection from cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say executions in this case would fit that category. Or are you one of those people that believe the Constitution only applies to you and your causes? I see a lot of people like that on this board.

Quoted: Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command. The Constitution also provides protection from cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say executions in this case would fit that category. Or are you one of those people that believe the Constitution only applies to you and your causes? I see a lot of people like that on this board.

Disarming people in the face of known, lethal danger is serious business. Suppose I figure out a way to disarm a crew of cops on their way to execute a warrant on an HA clubhouse, and compel them to complete the raid anyway. No big deal, right? You think a $500 fine will square me up with the law?

The fact is that what the cops did in NOLA was not just the common crimes of theft and robbery, it exposed people to lethal danger and violated the Constitution those "officers" swore their dishwater oaths to uphold. I think death is appropriate punishment for that hellish bundle of treasonous wickedness, but I can see where those who take a softer attitude toward armed robbery might disagree. Are you saying that the Nuremberg defense should protect those people from mere incarceration as well?

The ideal outcome - which would avoid Constitutional implications - would have been the effective application of deadly force against a crew of Nurembergers attempting to seize guns, followed by a No True Bill from the Grand Jury based on the Armed Burglary/Robbery the gendarmes were attempting when shot. Then most everybody goes home happy, their Constitutional rights intact, and proper warnings doled out all around.

ETA: This business of limiting the death penalty to murder is is pure judicial legislation, and quite illegitimate. Odd to see a cop taking refuge in the worst excesses of judicial liberalism - but to put your mind at ease, the answer is no. I think anybody who steals guns from decent people in time of danger should die for his crime. Cops first, is all.

ETA 2: Besides which, what red-blooded American could fail to get a lifetime's amusement from the video feed of that fat CHP bastard who tackled the old lady crying like a little girl about "following orders" while the hangman slipped the mask over his face and the noose around his neck? Now that is quality entertainment that would warrant running cable TV to the the graves of Washington, Jefferson, and both Adamses.

Practice runs are sweet.
I expect this will become SOP in "disaster" zones now.

Terrorists running amok? No guns for you
Flooding? No guns for you
Hurricane? No guns for you
Massive Blackouts? No guns for you

Get used to it.

Pass the popcorn...

Quoted: Quoted: Now if the judge will put NOLA officials in jail for contempt Keep dreaming.

Yep!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command. The Constitution also provides protection from cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say executions in this case would fit that category. Or are you one of those people that believe the Constitution only applies to you and your causes? I see a lot of people like that on this board. Disarming people in the face of known, lethal danger is serious business. Suppose I figure out a way to disarm a crew of cops on their way to execute a warrant on an HA clubhouse, and compel them to complete the raid anyway. No big deal, right? You think a $500 fine will square me up with the law? The fact is that what the cops did in NOLA was not just the common crimes of theft and robbery, it exposed people to lethal danger and violated the Constitution those "officers" swore their dishwater oaths to uphold. I think death is appropriate punishment for that hellish bundle of treasonous wickedness, but I can see where those who take a softer attitude toward armed robbery might disagree. Are you saying that the Nuremberg defense should protect those people from mere incarceration as well? The ideal outcome - which would avoid Constitutional implications - would have been the effective application of deadly force against a crew of Nurembergers attempting to seize guns, followed by a No True Bill from the Grand Jury based on the Armed Burglary/Robbery the gendarmes were attempting when shot. Then most everybody goes home happy, their Constitutional rights intact, and proper warnings doled out all around. ETA: This business of limiting the death penalty to murder is is pure judicial legislation, and quite illegitimate. Odd to see a cop taking refuge in the worst excesses of judicial liberalism - but to put your mind at ease, the answer is no. I think anybody who steals guns from decent people in time of danger should die for his crime. Cops first, is all. ETA 2: Besides which, what red-blooded American could fail to get a lifetime's amusement from the video feed of that fat CHP bastard who tackled the old lady crying like a little girl about "following orders" while the hangman slipped the mask over his face and the noose around his neck? Now that is quality entertainment that would warrant running cable TV to the the graves of Washington, Jefferson, and both Adamses.

You're O.K. with suspending the Constitution whenever it suits you. You are no better than the people you want executed.

tagged for the morning reading

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command. The Constitution also provides protection from cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say executions in this case would fit that category. Or are you one of those people that believe the Constitution only applies to you and your causes? I see a lot of people like that on this board. Disarming people in the face of known, lethal danger is serious business. Suppose I figure out a way to disarm a crew of cops on their way to execute a warrant on an HA clubhouse, and compel them to complete the raid anyway. No big deal, right? You think a $500 fine will square me up with the law? The fact is that what the cops did in NOLA was not just the common crimes of theft and robbery, it exposed people to lethal danger and violated the Constitution those "officers" swore their dishwater oaths to uphold. I think death is appropriate punishment for that hellish bundle of treasonous wickedness, but I can see where those who take a softer attitude toward armed robbery might disagree. Are you saying that the Nuremberg defense should protect those people from mere incarceration as well? The ideal outcome - which would avoid Constitutional implications - would have been the effective application of deadly force against a crew of Nurembergers attempting to seize guns, followed by a No True Bill from the Grand Jury based on the Armed Burglary/Robbery the gendarmes were attempting when shot. Then most everybody goes home happy, their Constitutional rights intact, and proper warnings doled out all around. ETA: This business of limiting the death penalty to murder is is pure judicial legislation, and quite illegitimate. Odd to see a cop taking refuge in the worst excesses of judicial liberalism - but to put your mind at ease, the answer is no. I think anybody who steals guns from decent people in time of danger should die for his crime. Cops first, is all. ETA 2: Besides which, what red-blooded American could fail to get a lifetime's amusement from the video feed of that fat CHP bastard who tackled the old lady crying like a little girl about "following orders" while the hangman slipped the mask over his face and the noose around his neck? Now that is quality entertainment that would warrant running cable TV to the the graves of Washington, Jefferson, and both Adamses. You're O.K. with suspending the Constitution whenever it suits you. You are no better than the people you want executed.

Well said FLAL1A, couldn't agree more.

Sukebe, what exactly is "cruel and unusual" about punishing thieves for forcibly stealing the firearms of citizens who were trying to defend themselves and their property ?

Quoted: Sukebe, what exactly is "cruel and unusual" about punishing thieves for forcibly stealing the firearms of citizens who were trying to defend themselves and their property ?

If you want to argue that a person should be executed for confiscating firearms because it is a constitutional violation but can not acknowledge that the act of executing a person for "theft" is an unconstitutional act, you are a nit wit as well.

Not that I'm disagreeing with the foul stench of the NOPD and its confiscation actions, but I am wondering whether those "more than 1,000 firearms" were all Katrina seizures or were a mix of those plus guns that had been taken as evidence in various criminal cases.

Have we the means of resisting disciplined armies, when our only defense, the militia, is put in the hands of Congress? Of what service would militia be to you when, most probably, you will not have a single musket in the state? For, as arms are to be provided by Congress, they may or may not provide them. -- Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot Debates at 48

Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command. Every idiot on and off this board who defends those cops based on the orders they received is parroting exactly the defense that led hundreds of equally loyal, legalistically-justified, smartly-uniformed dirtbags to the gibbet at Nuremburg. A police officer who obeys a patently unconstitutional order should pay for it with his life or liberty. That is the policy announced by the United States at Nuremburg. That is a higher law than the General Orders of the NYPD or the Louisiana State Police.

Fortunately, we have a court system to decide what's constitutional, and what's not. It's not left up to knuckle dragging mouth breathers on internet forums to interpret based on their own agendas...

Quoted: Fortunately, we have a court system to decide what's constitutional, and what's not. It's not left up to knuckle dragging mouth breathers on internet forums to interpret based on their own agendas...

We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed. --- Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors. Quote on Militia

So where were all these guys who are going to fight to the death if their firearms are siezed by the government? Either talk is cheap or no one from this board lives in NOLA. This battle has to be fought at the legislative level. Now would be the time, keep the pressure on. Obviously they are feeling it.

Quoted: Quoted: People should be arrested HANG for this but they won't be. Fixed it for ya

Start with this idiot.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One - just one - officer who participated in the seizure of a firearm from a law-abiding citizen should be executed in public pour encourager les autres. Other participants should serve brief (12 months or less) jail terms without damage to their LEO credentials, so they can spend the balance of their careers warning other officers that they have an obligation to the Constitution which supercedes their departmental chains of command. The Constitution also provides protection from cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say executions in this case would fit that category. Or are you one of those people that believe the Constitution only applies to you and your causes? I see a lot of people like that on this board. Disarming people in the face of known, lethal danger is serious business. Suppose I figure out a way to disarm a crew of cops on their way to execute a warrant on an HA clubhouse, and compel them to complete the raid anyway. No big deal, right? You think a $500 fine will square me up with the law? The fact is that what the cops did in NOLA was not just the common crimes of theft and robbery, it exposed people to lethal danger and violated the Constitution those "officers" swore their dishwater oaths to uphold. I think death is appropriate punishment for that hellish bundle of treasonous wickedness, but I can see where those who take a softer attitude toward armed robbery might disagree. Are you saying that the Nuremberg defense should protect those people from mere incarceration as well? The ideal outcome - which would avoid Constitutional implications - would have been the effective application of deadly force against a crew of Nurembergers attempting to seize guns, followed by a No True Bill from the Grand Jury based on the Armed Burglary/Robbery the gendarmes were attempting when shot. Then most everybody goes home happy, their Constitutional rights intact, and proper warnings doled out all around. ETA: This business of limiting the death penalty to murder is is pure judicial legislation, and quite illegitimate. Odd to see a cop taking refuge in the worst excesses of judicial liberalism - but to put your mind at ease, the answer is no. I think anybody who steals guns from decent people in time of danger should die for his crime. Cops first, is all. ETA 2: Besides which, what red-blooded American could fail to get a lifetime's amusement from the video feed of that fat CHP bastard who tackled the old lady crying like a little girl about "following orders" while the hangman slipped the mask over his face and the noose around his neck? Now that is quality entertainment that would warrant running cable TV to the the graves of Washington, Jefferson, and both Adamses.

BRAVO! BRAVO! BRAVO!

Quoted: Quoted: Sukebe, what exactly is "cruel and unusual" about punishing thieves for forcibly stealing the firearms of citizens who were trying to defend themselves and their property ? If you want to argue that a person should be executed for confiscating firearms because it is a constitutional violation but can not acknowledge that the act of executing a person for "theft" is an unconstitutional act, you are a nit wit as well.

What the cops did in NOLA is the same as going to your house, making you strip naked, then dropping you off in the desert three day's walking distance from anywhere, with your hands still bound behind you.

People who do these things, who leave people utterly defenseless against the ravages of man and nature,  are sick, demented bastards who need to be purged from the gene pool just like any other criminal.