And to guide this back into legal:
The writer makes 3 critical legal mistakes:
1)
The writer fails to understand or mention that the NOLA confiscations were NOT legal to begin with, and furthermore, as a result of NOLA/Katrina, whole sets of laws were put into place to prevent that from happening again.
I have challenged anyone to show me unambiguous authority to perform door to door confiscations of firearms in LA statutes since Katrina, and the challenge remains to be met.
Furthermore, the courts agree with that position, and have issued various writs of "knock it the hell off", and "give them back their guns, you ijits".
2)
The assertion that Posse Commitatus has somehow been "eliminated" is to fail to understand what the act was in the first place.
It has _never_ been an absolute prohibition on the use of armed forces in CONUS.
The act removed domestic use of the army from local authority, and placed it firmly into the executive branch subject to the restrictions placed by Congress.
This was true in 1878, and remains true today.
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act)
3) The writer fails to understand that "martial law" can only be asserted by the Feds, in certain special circumstances (which IS a fair, but separate topic of discussion), or the complete and abject failure of the local and state authorities to function in any capacity.
Normally, what the press bandies about as "martial law" is actually a "state of emergency".
Furthermore, the press believes that in "states of emergency", the authorities can do whatever they want.
This is simply not so. During states of emergencies, which are restricted both in time, and in place, the authorities may wield extraordinary powers that are not normally available to them, but these powers are both finite and enumerated, spelled out in law.
Typically, they allow the authorities to prohibit the _sale_ of liquor, guns and ammunition. No jurisdiction I am aware of allows the door to door confiscation of firearms.
