• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Hurricane Katrina gun confiscation

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Does anyone know if New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin or New Orleans police superintendent Eddie Compass ever faced criminal or civil suits for the hurricane Katrina gun confiscations??? I know that the NRA got the city to return all firearms, but I wonder if these two criminals ever got charged..
 
Last edited:

freak4cycles

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
46
Location
St Charles
I dont

I never heard anything? It would not suprise me. Look at the mega corperations and Banks. They steal every day and not ONE has been charged with a crime. I saw the video on youtube about the older lady that was knocked to the ground by those thugs. Her gun taken etc. All while saying they were there to help. If that is the help they offer, maybe a few rounds to the head would make them think twice? We dont want that kind of help GOT IT!
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
The agreement was a slap in the face to any citizen. Sounds more like the USSR asking for proof of land ownership from people who had their land stolen from them in the 40's & 50's...when the USSR destroyed all the records.

You cannot surrender your weapons is the lesson learned here and hope that some government judge will do anything about it--because they won't.
 
Last edited:

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
Did I read that right??? Sounds to me like the NRA "sold out" on that deal. How about they return all guns and make someone answer for why they were taken in the first place. Just imagine if a Mayor and Police Chief can make such an illegal and unconstitutional act happen what the Federal gov't could do.......SCARY....:(

Yup it's how I read it. Also interesting that there was no real resistance to the firearm confiscation (beside the grandmother courageously tackle by officer nit-wit) not that I would ever condone such a thing.... but you know you here a lot of talk about "they will never take mine!"....
 
Last edited:

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
A very troubling example

This was indeed a very troubling example of city government gone very wrong.

Where you had a mayor and a police chief each of whom took an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution, and yet the two of them openly violated it, as did each of their officers.

I suppose the best way to counteract would be not to open your door, talk through the peep and tell them to go away, or else not even answer it at all.

In this case you would need a loaded shotgun to protect yourself from these police, and no mercy for them if they tried to break in.

Very troubling. Reminds me of the gestapo and SS we read about and see on tv in history back in the 1930s and 1940s.

Of course, the Japanese in America went through the same thing in California in the 1940s as well, and this time it was Americans, giving them the same instructions as the gestapo and SS were giving jews in Germany at the same time.

Who says it cannot happen here? It did, twice so far, once during Katrina, and also after Pearl Harbor.
 
Last edited:

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Yup it's how I read it. Also interesting that there was no real resistance to the firearm confiscation (beside the grandmother courageously tackle by officer nit-wit) not that I would ever condone such a thing.... but you know you here a lot of talk about "they will never talk mine!"....

I was surprised by the lack of resistance myself. But they did pretty much do this one person at a time. When you do it that way you out number, out gun and out muscle the people (as in We the People) I wonder if the little old lady got any justice? That POS, low life, MF'er "cop" that tackled that old woman was nothing more than a Gov't criminal (as all of them were)

No damn reason to use any force against that lady, let alone that much force. Always a good day in America when our "protecters" are beating old women, breaking bones for citizens conducting legal activity. I'm not anti-cop, I'm just pro citizen but it would have been nice for a few people to stand their ground. I sure don't condone.....ummm.....'doing things' toward Gov't officials but a criminal is after all still a criminal...

I did read that Eddie Compass did resign. He later stated that his resignation was forced, and Wikipedia cites that the gun confiscation order was the reason why. But he had 26 years of service...enough to retire.. So no one really paid for anything except the LAC's..:mad::mad::mad:
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
any time a cop asks to see/handle your gun .. expect it to be stolen ... if you are OK with that outcome then hand over your gun...
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
I haven't read the agreement that was actually reached, just the press article...which can be called into question.

However, just based upon recollection and this article, you could say the NRA sold them out; however, the alternative was these folks would have never received their firearms back if it weren't for the publicity the NRA brought.

I'm not the biggest fan of the NRA right now; but in this case, it was the NRA either negotiate to get them back or never see them again. :confused:

Could more have been done to the local bureaucrats for this, IMHO, illegal seizure, yep!
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
I haven't read the agreement that was actually reached, just the press article...which can be called into question.

However, just based upon recollection and this article, you could say the NRA sold them out; however, the alternative was these folks would have never received their firearms back if it weren't for the publicity the NRA brought.

I'm not the biggest fan of the NRA right now; but in this case, it was the NRA either negotiate to get them back or never see them again. :confused:

Could more have been done to the local bureaucrats for this, IMHO, illegal seizure, yep!

Not saying that the NRA didn't do good...but I feel that if it had been the GOA they would have wanted heads on a platter.
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
Not saying that the NRA didn't do good...but I feel that if it had been the GOA they would have wanted heads on a platter.

Then the question begs.....where was GOA when all this took place? They could have taken the lead. So to respond, the GOA didn't show. Woulda, coulda, shoulda are mute points. I doubt the GOA would/could have done any better. Just my $.02.
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Then the question begs.....where was GOA when all this took place? They could have taken the lead. So to respond, the GOA didn't show. Woulda, coulda, shoulda are mute points. I doubt the GOA would/could have done any better. Just my $.02.

The fact that the GOA didn't show sure does hurt my argument that they could have done better. With that said, I am not a member of the GOA but I am a member of the NRA. But still I hate the fact that the NRA didn't do more. But I have to agree with you, the NRA did more than the GOA did.
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
The fact that the GOA didn't show sure does hurt my argument that they could have done better. With that said, I am not a member of the GOA but I am a member of the NRA. But still I hate the fact that the NRA didn't do more. But I have to agree with you, the NRA did more than the GOA did.

Nor am I a member of GOA. Not a big fan of them....the NRA is not real high either on my list, but I am a member...however, they are the biggest elephant in the room from a legislative standpoint. They have clout that most other 2A groups wish they had, put together. :confused:

I don't understand their (NRA) reasoning sometimes.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
But they did pretty much do this one person at a time.

Yes, and they don't announce "we are taking everybody's guns"...they say you are suspected of a crime, give me your gun. You know you have committed no crime.

If they wanted to get your gun all they have to do is look up your permit and link it to the DMV records and pull you over on a traffic stop and demand your gun for "policeman safety". The courts eat this stuff up like candy, yum yum yum, policeman safety. And they could be doing this all over town, you wouldn't know or you could be the first.

So, what do I tell cops when they ask me to do something because they feel like I make them feel unsafe? I tell them that I am not holding them there, they are free to go to a safer place if they wish; I have committed no crime so there is no reason for them to be with me; I cannot make you feel anything-that's a personal emotion that only the person feeling it can control.

Now, I'll bet that zero people had notices of trespass filed with the city telling the city to keep employees off their land. If they had, then once the police step on your land, they are the criminals, not you. The tables are turned and the landowner can take whatever measures he/she feels is necessary to boot them off or to have them arrested. A simple call to 911 or the police dept. would result in them leaving if you are firm with them about your notice being enforced.

Every person reading this should file a notice of trespass with your local clerks office and your state AG's office.

And I have booted off police from my property unarmed by simply telling the policemen that I have a notice of trespass filed and they are currently violating my notice and are trespassers. They have all left after crying about how they are the police and can go where ever they want (they make these cries while leaving of course lol).
And they don't even bother coming on my land anymore. Many notes of the PD are in their files acknowledging that my actions are legal and they should stay away from me as they believe I have firearms and may use them in a legal manner to thwart trespassers. A system is there to protect yourself from the police, people just choose not to use it.

So, if you own a gun to protect yourself from the police, you should use other legal means too. A notice of trespass is the strongest legal document one can file before an issue arises. All should file one.
 

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
Yes, and they don't announce "we are taking everybody's guns"...they say you are suspected of a crime, give me your gun.
Actually no, they didn't. They boldly went up to people and confiscated their firearms in some cases. I am reminded of the guys evacuating in a small fishing boat with their firearms and the police stopped them and confiscated them, then sent them on their way.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Did I read that right??? Sounds to me like the NRA "sold out" on that deal. How about they return all guns and make someone answer for why they were taken in the first place.

First, according to this article:

1. "Police have said they only took guns that were stolen or found in abandoned homes."

This is a flat out lie, as several videotapes and owners records have clearly proven otherwise.

2. "The settlement agreement filed Tuesday in federal court calls for the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation to drop their case if the city follows a plan for returning guns to owners who had them seized by police after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane."

They want their guns back. Reasonable.

3. "Both sides also are asking U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier to sign off on the pact and issue a permanent injunction barring the city from seizing lawfully possessed firearms. Barbier didn't immediately rule on the agreement, which doesn't involve a monetary award."

They also want assurances preventing this Constitutional atrocity from occurring again.

4 "Gun owners must sign an affidavit claiming ownership of a gun but don't need to present written proof, such as a sales receipt or serial number. A background check also is required to certify that someone claiming a gun can legally possess a firearm."

Looks like gun registration to me.

5. "The city won't be liable if a dispute arises over the ownership of a returned gun. Authorities can dispose of any guns that go unclaimed after two years."

Always a back door for the bad guys...

6. "This is all we've wanted all along: a practical return program," said NRA lawyer Stephen Halbrook, who estimated that the department should have 1,200 guns available for owners to claim."

And yet police report 552. Wow, what tight evidence lockers you have, NOPD....

7. "Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Superintendent Warren Riley were defendants in the case, which was scheduled to be tried next month."

Sued. Don't know what the outcome was. If someone does, please chime in.

8. "In response, the city argued that federal law doesn't apply to the plaintiffs' claims against city officials "because the right to keep and bear arms has never been recognized as a fundamental individual right."

SCOTUS upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms in federal enclaves in District of Columbia v. Heller. Later, in McDonald v. Chicago, they extended the individual RKBA to the states.

Thus, this argument is now defunct.

Just imagine if a Mayor and Police Chief can make such an illegal and unconstitutional act happen what the Federal gov't could do.......SCARY....:(

Both Heller and McDonald apply to the Fed, as well.
 
Top