• 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.

Can the Police Take Your Gun(s) During a State of Emergency?

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
Last edited:

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
"Can" they? In other words is it physically possible for them to do it? Certainly.

New Orleans proves this.

The local LEOs are no different than the National Guard or any other locally organized paramilitary group. They can and will do whatever they are told, by such powerful people as the governor, the mayor, the sheriff, or the chief of police.

No piece of paper is ever going to stop them.

The problem in New Orleans was that people, somewhat depraved, were shooting at rescue helicopters as the choppers were flying by. This was out of frustration, for not being rescued themselves.

So the N.O. mayor and police chief came up with the bright idea on their own to confiscate all guns from all homes. A very stupid idea, but classically fascist. And just goes to show the U.S. Constitution means nothing whenever push comes to shove and local leadership gets desperate.

"Should" they? I do not believe that they should, but they did.

"Will" they do it again sometime in the future, or will some other mayor try to do the same thing? Probably will.

The best thing before Katrina would have been to pack up and bug out. Those who did not bug out when told to do so paid a high price.

Everyone needs to have a bug out kit, and a plan to go.

For homeless people this includes a backpack with a tent and sleeping roll. If they cannot afford to ride, then they need to start walking. Simple survival. A lot of people died in New Orleans during Katrina because they did not bug out when they should have. That's what it's really alll about.

It was a bugging out issue. Which then turned into chaos in the aftermath of the storm. Which then became a gun issue when the mayor and police chief started confiscating all guns. As they will again if the same thing happens again.
 
Last edited:

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
This is being discussed on the WI Carry FaceBook page.
No, it's not legal.
Yes, WI has a law prohibiting confiscation.
http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/323/II/24
323.24
Prohibition against restricting firearms or ammunition during emergency.
A person who is granted emergency powers under this subchapter may not use those powers to restrict the lawful possession, transfer, sale, transport, storage, display, or use of firearms or ammunition during an emergency.
323.16 grants certain emergency powers to volunteers, law enforcement officers, traffic patrol, and conservation wardens, so it seems to me that 323.24 applies to all of them.

There is also a federal code prohibiting any federal employee, including members of the uniformed services, from taking lawfully-held firearms, with two exceptions:
They may temporarily hold a firearm for the duration of transport, but it must be given back at the end of the ride,
and in connection with a criminal investigation.
Auric (Shotgun) posted the text of the federal code:
Title 42, Chapter 68, Subchapter V, §5207
No officer or employee of the United States (including any member of the uniformed services), or person operating pursuant to or under color of Federal law, or receiving Federal funds, or under control of any Federal official, or providing services to such an officer, employee, or other person, while acting in support of relief from a major disaster or emergency, may—

(1) temporarily or permanently seize, or authorize seizure of, any firearm the possession of which is not prohibited under Federal, State, or local law, other than for forfeiture in compliance with Federal law or as evidence in a criminal investigation;

(2) require registration of any firearm for which registration is not required by Federal, State, or local law;

(3) prohibit possession of any firearm, or promulgate any rule, regulation, or order prohibiting possession of any firearm, in any place or by any person where such possession is not otherwise prohibited by Federal, State, or local law; or

(4) prohibit the carrying of firearms by any person otherwise authorized to carry firearms under Federal, State, or local law, solely because such person is operating under the direction, control, or supervision of a Federal agency in support of relief from the major disaster or emergency.

(b) Limitation
Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit any person in subsection (a) from requiring the temporary surrender of a firearm as a condition for entry into any mode of transportation used for rescue or evacuation during a major disaster or emergency, provided that such temporarily surrendered firearm is returned at the completion of such rescue or evacuation.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
This is being discussed on the WI Carry FaceBook page.
No, it's not legal.
Yes, WI has a law prohibiting confiscation.
http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/323/II/24

323.16 grants certain emergency powers to volunteers, law enforcement officers, traffic patrol, and conservation wardens, so it seems to me that 323.24 applies to all of them.

There is also a federal code prohibiting any federal employee, including members of the uniformed services, from taking lawfully-held firearms, with two exceptions:
They may temporarily hold a firearm for the duration of transport, but it must be given back at the end of the ride,
and in connection with a criminal investigation.
Auric (Shotgun) posted the text of the federal code:

Thanks MKE. I didn't think leos can do whatever they want. I know that they are also under law. As for face book. Where I live I have no internet. I depend upon my son's wifi from his phone whenever he is on the net playing games, wich is rare. Our company blocks FB.
 

Kc.38

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
81
Location
Central Wi
While I agree that one should evacuate when told to there is more to think about here. My big concern would be looters. Should a person stay to protect what things may not be replaceable by insurance? I think that was one of the problems down in N.O. was the BGs were standing on the street corner waiting for the community to clear out and then they would come in and take what they wanted. Myself, I would have a hard time leaving if I thought there was a pretty good chance of surviving the disaster while protecting what is mine.
 

PQ36

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
50
Location
Frozen Tundra, Wisconsin
While I agree that one should evacuate when told to there is more to think about here. My big concern would be looters. Should a person stay to protect what things may not be replaceable by insurance? I think that was one of the problems down in N.O. was the BGs were standing on the street corner waiting for the community to clear out and then they would come in and take what they wanted. Myself, I would have a hard time leaving if I thought there was a pretty good chance of surviving the disaster while protecting what is mine.

Or it could be stated.... "One should evacuate when they have made the decision to do so, based on facts/circumstances rather than orders from gov......"

Each person, family, etc, will have different levels of prep, and different levels at which thresholds are reached with regard to decision points. To stay or go. Only you can decide.

I disagree with the other post that claimed it was a bug-out issue that led to confiscation. It was a tyranny issue that lead to confiscation. Plain and simple.

.02
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Tyranny holds no compunction nor knows no limitations. Tyranny must be dealt with on a equal footing and with decisive action. Tyranny will not prevail in the face of those determined to exercise liberty. Man seeks liberty as a moth seeks the flame. As with a flame that might harm the incautious moth, so too will liberty, if exercised imprudently.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. - Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Archibald Stuart, December 23, 1791
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
If they force themselves into your home to get them, all you can lawfully do at the moment is verbally protest.

90% preparation, 10% perspiration. Every citizen should own a 308 or 50 cal rifle ...

I was threatened with a swat team to effect an illegal entry into my home ... I resisted, I'm here, I'm free ... it is lawful.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
With my .308 or 50 cal duh.
Perhaps you are confused. This thread is not about video games. I thought you were serious that you had a story to share regarding how you "resisted" the actions of a SWAT team entry. I must have been mistaken.
Regarding a rifle chambered in .50BMG, I would dissuade most people from spending their money on one. It is simply a novelty for most. Most do not have the funds nor the time to get sufficient trigger time in order to be proficient with it. There are many other more affordable calibers which will suit their needs far better.
 
Last edited:
Top