Why were guns taken from law-abiding citizens in New Orleans?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Defenseless Decision
Why were guns taken from law-abiding citizens in New Orleans?
By John R. Lott Jr.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200603210744.asp


In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans’ residents got an idea of what life is like without the rule of law. They had no telephones, no way to call 911. Even if they had, the police who reported for duty were busy with rescue missions, not fighting crime. Citizens had to protect themselves. This was made rather difficult by the city’s confiscation of guns, even from law-abiding citizens.

After five months of denial in federal district court, the city last week made an embarrassing admission: in the aftermath of the hurricane, the severely overworked police apparently had the time to confiscate thousands of guns from law-abiding citizens.

Numerous media stories have shown how useful guns were to the ordinary citizens of New Orleans who weren’t forcibly disarmed. Fox News reported several defensive gun uses. One city resident, John Carolan, was taking care of many family members, including his three-year-old granddaughter, when three men came to his house asking about his generator, threatening him with a machete. Carolan showed them his gun and they left. Another resident, Finis Shelnutt, recounts a similar story that the gangs left him alone after seeing “I have a very large gun.”

Signs painted on boarded up windows in various parts of town warned criminals in advance not to try: the owner had shotguns inside.

Last September 8, a little more than a week after the hurricane, New Orleans’ police superintendent, Eddie Compass announced: “No one will be able to be armed. Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns.” Even legally registered firearms were seized, though exceptions were made for select businesses and for some wealthy individuals to hire guards.

Undoubtedly, selected businesses and well-connected wealthy individuals had good reason to want protection, but so did others without the same political pull. One mother saw the need for a gun after she and her two children (ages 9 and 12) saw someone killed in New Orleans after the hurricane. The mother said: “I was a card-carrying, anti-gun liberal — not anymore.”

John C. Guidos was successfully guarding his tavern on St. Claude Ave on September 7, when police took his shotgun and pistol; indeed, it was the only time that he saw any cops. Soon afterwards robbers looted the tavern.

Wishing for a gun during disasters isn’t anything new. Just a little over a decade ago, police stood by, largely helpless, during the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King verdict. Yet, not all the victims were defenseless. Korean merchants stood out as one group that banded together and used their guns to protect their stores from looting.

A similar lesson hasn’t been lost on New Orleans’ citizens. As one resident, Art DePodesta, told the New York Daily News shortly after the storm hit, “The cops are busy as it is. If more citizens took security and matters into their own hands, we won’t be in this situation.”

Not only do law-abiding citizens with guns deter many criminals from committing a crime to begin with: Possessing a gun is the safest way to confront a criminal if you are forced to.

Deterrence works. The United States has one of the world's lowest “hot” burglary rates (burglaries committed while people are in the building) at 13 percent, compared to the “gun-free” British rate of 59 percent. Surveys of convicted burglars indicate American burglars spend at least twice as long as their British counterparts casing a house before breaking in. That explains why American burglars rarely break into homes when the residents are there. The reason most American burglars give for taking so much time is that they’re afraid of getting shot.

Even without a catastrophe like Katrina, it would have been a poor strategy for would-be victims in New Orleans merely to call 911 and wait for help. The average response time of police in New Orleans before the hurricane was eleven minutes. The Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey has shown for decades that having a gun is the safest course of action when a criminal confronts you, far safer than behaving passively.

It would be nice if the police were always there to protect us, but we don’t live in a utopia and the police understand that they almost always arrive on the scene after the crime has been committed. What does New Orleans’ Mayor Nagin recommend that people such as John Carolan and his granddaughter do the next time that have to fend for themselves? The city must know that there isn’t much of a defense for taking citizens’ guns; after all, it took them five months to admit to it.

— John R. Lott Jr., a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of More Guns, Less Crime.
 
Gun confiscators: The lowest form of life in America

I read somewhere that the scumbag mayor of New Orleans - Ray Nagin, wanted the city evacuated. Since alot of people were holed up in their homes with their guns and felt safe, he gave the police chief the order to confiscate all guns.

Now people are defenseless against looters, so they will evacuate. That was the "reasoning."

It turns my stomach that anyone can think like that. IMO, Ray Nagin and his lap dog of a police chief desreve to beaten to within an inch of their lives with sand filled radiator hoses.

If there's any justice in the universe, there's a special place in Hell for POS scumbags like Nagin.
 
1. Because they're corrupt, and they can. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutly.

2. Nobody fought back with force, did they? They all surrendered peacefully, which made the massive arms confinscation possible.

Those who fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. It can, and will happen again in the future. They may take my arms, but I will be dead Some of them will also be dead too. I won't need them after that. I'm not idle in those words either. You threaten my very life by attempting to sieze the tool which ensures my survival, I will kill you. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. You'll be dead, or I'll die trying.
 
Great posting. I enjoyed it very much.

I read that the SAF and NRA finally made some leeway with the New Orleans mayor and all admitting that they were wrong. It is good to know that pro-gunners are going to be able to shoot back (pun intended) when the time comes for a civil trial and perhaps a criminal one for violation of our civil rights.
 
They all surrendered peacefully

The authorities did kill and attempt to kill people for being armed and or shooting guns. I saw that televised. Police were also killed and attacked if the stories media presented are to be believed.
 
The simple answere to the question is this: The government of NO was placed in a position where it *could* confiscate guns, and so they did. It is really as simple as that and it would happen exactly the same way in virtually any city in the nation. If you give the government the opportunity to inflict it's will upon the people IT WILL, period.
 
Why Registration??? So they CAN Come and Take Them Away!

c_yeager is correct, given the opportunity, there is not a city in America that would NOT do the same danged thing. We the sheeple have caved to mongers who are in office.

But, my question is, when and by what avenue will the people now get their guns back?! After all, their paperwork is probably gone missing, and so what proof is there that they own it? And, where are the guns? In the bottom of the ocean? Or, were they melted? Chopped?

I'm sure the sheelpe's tax dollars will be used to pay each victim $5.00 for the value of the steel in the $1,200.00 collector's edition firearms.

Doc2005
 
It is my belief that personally owned firearms were confiscated in New Orleans for the same reason food and water were witheld from the Superdome and Convention Center.

It was a tactic to try to force people to evacuate the city. When taking guns did not work, New Orleans residents were forcibly loaded onto trucks, and shipped out of state.

Why were forced evacuations even attempted? Power, pure and simple. Whoever gets a piece of the "Rebuild NOLA" pie, especially the ability to hand out contracts, will become a very wealthy man. Nagin wants it. Mitch Landrieu wants it, many others, including the New Orleans Krewes want it. Attempts at seizing guns and evacuating the non-flooded Garden District was simply an attempt at grabbing the power to control huge amounts of federal money. If you control the money coming in, you get money for your decisions.
 
John C. Guidos was successfully guarding his tavern on St. Claude Ave on September 7, when police took his shotgun and pistol; indeed, it was the only time that he saw any cops. Soon afterwards robbers looted the tavern.

I hope that John sues for the loses suffered in this robbery, and that he wins big. While the courts have ruled that the police have no duty to protect you, I would think that you would have a viable case if these same police made you a sitting duck.

I hope that the good citizens of New Orleans (both "vanilla" and "chocolate") fire the evil and inept politicians who ordered this confiscation as well as every one of the Jack Booted Thugs (JBTs) who carried out these orders.

As was earlier stated, they confiscated these weapons because they could. Hopefully through the courts and through the ballot box the message that this type of behavior won't be tolerated will be heard loud and clear, not only in New Orleans, but throughout this land.

The new "battle cry" of gun owners, and liberty lovers, should be "Remember New Orleans!
 
It is my belief that personally owned firearms were confiscated in New Orleans for the same reason food and water were witheld from the Superdome and Convention Center.

It was a tactic to try to force people to evacuate the city. When taking guns did not work, New Orleans residents were forcibly loaded onto trucks, and shipped out of state.

Except that no attempt was made to actually evacuate the poor SOBs at the Superdome. They lined up and waited and died hoping for buses that didn't come.
 
I think the real question ought to be "Why did armed people simply let anyone, including out of state police, enter their homes without presentation of a lawful warrant or court order, and help themselves to their private property?"
 
And one that I'm a little unclear on, why did gun owners surrender ALL their guns? I mean, if I was secure in my home a week after a local disaster I wouldn't have all my guns in my safe, there'd be at least a couple in very secure very hidden locations.
 
Here's my question:
Why did the LEO's obey what was clearly an illegal order?

AFS

"Illegal Orders" only count if you lose the war. There wouldnt have been a Nuremburg if the nazis won.
 
New Orleans is probably the first major world city brought to an end by the effects of global warming and the resulting climate change.
speculation, especially global warming, and also off topic.
 
New Orleans is probably the first major world city brought to an end by the effects of global warming and the resulting climate change. It is bascially finished now as a viable metropolitan area.
Warming, Shmarming.
It was one of the few major cities that exist below sea level. The land has sunk, and that made it especially vulnerable. But it's always been vulnerable to floods from the Mississippi R.
Rebuild? Of course we'll rebuild. It's "someone else's money" after all.

regards.
 
New Orleans is probably the first major world city brought to an end by the effects of global warming and the resulting climate change.
Hurricanes are a new phenomenon, originating with the Bush administration.

New Orleans' diversion of levee reconstruction money to more pressing matters (like improving facilities for the floating oceanside casinos) had nothing to do with the flooding.
 
And one that I'm a little unclear on, why did gun owners surrender ALL their guns? I mean, if I was secure in my home a week after a local disaster I wouldn't have all my guns in my safe, there'd be at least a couple in very secure very hidden locations.
From what I've heard/read (NOT from personal knowledge), many NOLA residents are not wealthy. They may have considered buying more ammo for the weapon they had more important than buying another weapon? Or, maybe they just bought food so they would be OK in the event of an emergency...
 
I think coach pegged that problem.
A few hundred dollars is alot to part with. Assuming you can even afford a gun, an extra box of ammo should more than cover you needs if all hell broke loose. Spend some money on supplies and save the rest in hard cash just in case you need to run.
Why should I need an armory for some basic home defense?
What retards are going to come in my house where Im perfectly safe, to take the only gun I've got out my hand, when the city has fallen apart everywhere else?...(rhetorical question)


The siezures dont make any sense. Why use the disaster as an exceuse to go collecting weapons? Dont they have priorities?
It sounds more like someones personal whim that rocketed up the chain of command and became de-facto law... which is a dangerous thing, if you think about it. The government had a total breakdown of order and lost control over its own men... and those men had alot of expensive weapons and bodyarmor, that was then used to terrorize the citizens.
 
If a Category 4 or 5 wiped out Nawlins back in the 70s, it would have been blamed on global climate change as a result of the coming Ice Age. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top