imported post
They put a certain group of people (poor/no car, etc.) in harm's way with that policy, that you can't take your guns (even one) with you if you want to LEAVE a natural disaster area. So you have to stay homeunderdangerous/life-threateningcondtions (even in a MANDATORY evacuation order)from a dangerous storm or perhaps even worse, get jerked out of your house in handcuffs by "the authorities" if you refuse to leave and/or disarm.
Maybe if you have the $$ to leave in your car (and be able to afford expensive lenghty hotel room stays) you can take them -- unless there are police/National Guard checkpoints,you get searched and they confiscate themthere-- but otherwise the only SURE way to keep your gun(s) is to STAY HOME and in storm's harm. If you're poor and have no way to leave, you have to be disarmed. That's discrimination against the poor.
Much like the earlier policy of not allowing people to leave with their pets, many people just stayed home in a dangerous situation because they would not leave their pets (and they shouldn't even have been put into that position of being forced to make such a choice).
Now, I suspect some people willSTAY in harm's (Gustav's) way because they choose NOT to rely on "the authorities" to protect them and their families, will not give up the tool(s) to exercise their right of self-defense,or want to havejack-booted thugs in their residences (or looters, which ALWAYS seem to stay) if they LEFT,to rummage around looking for their guns...which, as we know, are NOT illegal/contraband and should be left alone. I know here in Galveston I had planned to STAY regardless of how bad Gustav got -- and even if it hit here -- partly for that very reason.
So for a nanny-state policy that is supposed to prevent violence -- guns on the bus, in citizens' possession at disaster/refuge centers, etc. -- people staying home is also a form of violence visited upon them from the storm, a direct result of the "you can't take it with you" policy.
What also gets me is that here in TX, even if you have a CHL, it doesn't matter, you can not carry your gun. What complete crap. If "the authorities" -- or civilian bus companies -- can't trust a person who qualified to get a CHL in the first place, they shouldn't have CHLs available because the permit apparentlymeans nothing in reality.
Yes, we need "the authorities" -- and bus companies, with won't let US cary any guns but also won't provide anarmed guard on board who could at leastTRY to prevent violence to passengers -- they need to be sued big-time.
-- John D.
P.S. Besides searching for firearms, did they also search for the crack and alcohol thelow-lifes were bringing with them?