Gun seized after Katrina? NRA wants you

Gun seized after Katrina? NRA wants you

aftermathnews.wordpress.com

NEW ORLEANS - The National Rifle Association has hired private investigators to find hundreds of people whose firearms were seized by city police in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, according to court papers filed this week.

The NRA is trying to locate gun owners for a federal lawsuit that the lobbying group filed against Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Superintendent Warren Riley over the city’s seizure of firearms after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.foxnews.com
www.officer.com
video.aol.com

NRA lawyer Daniel Holliday said investigators have identified about 300 of the gun owners and located about 75 of them. Some of them could be called to testify during a trial, he added.

“Finding these folks has been a nightmare,” Holliday said. “That is really the guts of our case — to establish that there was indeed a pattern of the police going out and taking people’s guns without any legal reason to do so.”

In April 2006, police made about 700 firearms available for owners to claim if they could present a bill of sale or an affidavit with the weapon’s serial number.

Not only was it wrong for them to take the guns, exposing residents with no police protection to groups of armed thugs, robbers and criminals....But now we have one of the most notorious organizations that has implemented and lobbied for more gun control legislation than any other entity trying to save face by filing this lawsuit. A double edged sword here, for sure.

I would have much rather seen other TRUE gun ownership rights advocates file this suit. Hehe, like the people in Montana (you know the secession case, over the gun ban in DC?), if that rings any bells...

Even so, I hope they sue the royal you know what out of Nagin and Riley.

Does anyone here know of a death or injury case in Katrina that resulted because of the police/Guard seizing their weapon, and them not being able to protect themselves? I know there's gotta be at least one somewhere. I seem to remember that some people were robbed whose guns were taken by police/Guard.

Wouldn't it be great if there is an ATSer here who knowing this will now come forward and tell us their story. And better yet, call the NRA and get on board the lawsuit. We can never let this happen again.

What really pisses me off is that the police are now expecting those gun owners to show receipts for their guns in order to get them back. God, that makes me mad. Like someone is supposed to remember a gun receipt in the middle of trying to save their family's life? Grrrrrrrrrr. Why isn't just arbitrary proof of residence enough?

Other videos I have seen show cases where the owner asked for a receipt, agreeing to give up their firearm at gunpoint, only to be told to get a lawyer if they wanted their gun back, and "we'd be out here all day if we had to provide receipts."

Here's a video about it, showing several cases.



aftermathnews.wordpress.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 27-2-2008 by TrueAmerican]

I don't know the full details, but my ex-girlfriend's revolver was confiscated during the Katrina fiasco and one morning I got a call from her asking me just what kind of revolver she had, because if she failed to describe it properly she wouldn't get it back.

She's not much into firearms details and when we were together, she often ridiculed my insatiable interest in guns, but when I was able to describe her Ruger SP-101 .357 magnum to a tee, she was very relieved.

Just a week or so before I saw pictures of how many of the confiscated guns were stored and frankly, the ones I saw were unsalvageable.

At least hers was stainless steel and might be salvable with a thorough cleaning, a task she never showed much interest in either.

Many try to blame the federal government for Katrina, but the real blame lies with Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco.

Blanco was not reelected, but New Orleans reelected Nagin based on his race rather than his culpability in the deaths of thousands.

These are the reasons that gun control does not work, has never worked, and will never work.


[edit on 2008/2/28 by GradyPhilpott]

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


Interesting. She ever get it back? (forgive the one-liner please)

Actually, I don't know.

I don't initiate contact with her.

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


Well, what's more important...A brief lump in the throat or suing the bejesus out of these two to help make sure this is never done again...?

Never know, that could be your town that gets hit next time.

[edit on 28-2-2008 by TrueAmerican]

Incredibly disturbing, TrueAmerican...

I see your cause for anger about this crime. Believe me, when they
come for your guns, they are prepared for almost anything. almost

They seal the block; cut the power; position snipers; and start blurting
orders from a electric megaphone. Any order not followed, adds to your
'list' of charges! (if you can hear them over the helicopters!)

How do I know? don't ask...

We need a civilian version of court, where the cops are brought up on
charges of thier crimes against the individual, and against the
constitution! If we don't establish one fast, the fascists will win.

The NRA has had me for many years.

I first became aware of the firearm confiscations about 4 months after Katrina while my oldest son and I were helping along the Gulf Coast on a church sponsored effort to clear debris and restore some infrastructure.

We were all outraged enough to start asking the families we were helping if they had experienced this or had information about it. The info we gathered we forwarded to the US Representatives and Senators in both LA and FL.

To date we have received no follow up response from any of the politicians. The only positive response I am aware of was from the NRA who assured us that this matter was not going to be ignored.

Starred and flagged, at least some group has integrity and they cost me much less than my tax base.

[edit on 2/28/0808 by kerontehe]

reply to post by FRIGHTENER




I won't ask if you'd rather not tell. But it's nice to know a few are aware of what is going on. It IS disturbing. That's why I think Grady ought to really think about calling his ex and letting her know about the suit, even if she did get the weapon back.

Interesting that over 1,000 weapons were seized, and yet only 700 were offered back to the public. Waterlogged or not, all of them need to be returned.

And what about them running criminal background checks on those seeking to retain their weapons? I mean come on. They didn't ask for the storm. Return the damn guns upon arbitrary proof of residence. I say arbitrary because there will probably be several cases that because people lost everything, that will be difficult in their case to prove.

They should just not let anyone see them up front and specify which weapon very descriptively. If the resident cannot conclusively show ownership, then put those to the back of the pack with an additional delay, and set a time limit, like a year or so. No one else claims it, it's theirs.

Originally posted by kerontehe
We were all outraged enough to start asking the families we were helping if they had experienced this or had information about it. The info we gathered we forwarded to the US Representatives and Senators in both LA and FL.

To date we have received no follow up response from any of the politicians. The only positive response I am aware of was from the NRA who assured us that this matter was not going to be ignored.

Interesting. So can you tell us more about the info you gathered, or even post it? I'd be curious...

Hopefully something positive results from the NRA's litigation. It's ridiculous to take guns away from people when police service isn't available to combat crime. When Florida had hurricanes, gun owners kept crime down, discouraging looting and lawlessness, till services were up again.

reply to post by BlueRaja


I never thought we'd agree on anything BR, but welcome to the hopeful. But before I jump on your train, what positive results are you talking about?

I remember at the time stories about law abiding gun owners protecting their property(and their neighbor's property), in neighborhood watch type stuff, and keeping an eye out for criminal opportunists. I don't have the links as they weren't from the internet at the time. I'm not an unreasonable kinda guy, but like many here, I will defend my opinions vigorously.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Yes. Many armed homeowners were spared, when they clearly let robbers know that it might cost them their lives over a ransacking. I could agree to the seizing of abandoned weapons in evacuated houses. Makes sense not to let the thieves get them, causing further armed looting or shootouts. But there is no reason to disarm a homeowner wanting to stay and protect their property. That one video of them attacking the poor little old lady was just over the top. Talk about infuriating!

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

Yes. Many armed homeowners were spared, when they clearly let robbers know that it might cost them their lives over a ransacking. I could agree to the seizing of abandoned weapons in evacuated houses. Makes sense not to let the thieves get them, causing further armed looting or shootouts. But there is no reason to disarm a homeowner wanting to stay and protect their property. That one video of them attacking the poor little old lady was just over the top. Talk about infuriating!

Taking weapons from folks who have to/choose to stay is ridiculous. I could see if a home were abandoned, that you wouldn't want to leave weapons behind, but taking away the only defense someone has is asinine at best.

after seeing this video...... Im intializing my own policy..... Shoot 1st ask later....

Im done with what is supposed to be our rescue parties.... I got blowguns and some Ruffies... lets see how far they get lol....

hell I will booby trap my house if need be, sure sir can you stand over there or have a seat while i get that firearm sir, yes sir nothing like giving up my rights BOOOOOOM ! come back down to see the couch has collasped on itself oh dear, is there a party coming for you sir? Lemme confiscate your firearm now.....


that was Dispickable* So is my spelling but man that video was unreal...but reality is most often.

[edit on 28-2-2008 by Trance Optic]

One of the most vivid memory's I have concerning Katrina is watching a report on the TV news and seeing what appeared to be an elderly person having her gun confiscated by what appeared to be something like a Swat team . I think it was in relation to people being forced to evacuate.

Now I wonder how many of the people who had there guns seized would have sworn on a box of ammo before Katrina that they wouldn't let that happen ?

Katrina was something of a limps(SP?) test if the NRA stance was correct then why did people permit law enforcement to take there guns ?

This law suit is designed to cover up that talk is cheap and the fact that people didn't open fire on law enforcement in order to protect there rights. Note I am not looking for a debate on gun rights I am just pointing out that anybody can shout there mouth off but when it comes to the crunch things are very differnt and there no reason why peoples reaction wont be the same again .

reply to post by xpert11


Well, that video is just one, and it is included in the video posted in the OP. It is worth watching, for sure.

If you read the post above by FRIGHTENER, you might better understand what you could potentially be up against. Opening fire on the police or Guard is not too smart. You will die.

A better option is for the police and Guard to start taking some initiative to understand illegal orders, and make an effort to resist them. Even geniuses have trouble sometimes with common sense.

TrueAmerican I understand that US law enforcement is well armed .
So in spite of this people make claims that they wont let law enforcement take there guns. In the wake of Katrina this proved to be a load of hoopla because people valued there lives more then there guns.

My point is that the NRA is trying to divert attention away from this fact with this law suit. If they didn't do this people would question the wisdom that guns keep the government in check . Owning a gun wasn't enough to prevent law enforcement from forcing people to leave there homes nor has it stopped the curbing of civil liberty's but that is another topic .

Just something to think about that's all.

reply to post by xpert11


There were reports of groups of residents that banded together with arms and patrolled their own neighborhood. Interestingly, they didn't seem to have too much trouble with being disarmed. It seems the police and Guard prefer scenarios where there is minimal risk and overwhelming odds in tactics, weapons and personnel. 15 or 20 guards against 40 civilians armed with high powered rifles and scopes could potentially suffer some losses, and may choose to back off instead.