Gun Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A Shocking Story of Gun Confiscation In America

The video you will see on this web site is horrifying. The crimes committed against law-abiding gun owners are beyond comprehension. The arrogance of anti-gun politicians and government officials and their hate of freedom will churn your stomach.

The law is the law, the Constitution is the Constitution. If ONE local mayor or police chief can decide what the Second Amendment means, it opens the door to tyranny—where ANY mayor or police chief can say what the Second Amendment means.

That's why I'm asking you to make a special contribution to help guarantee that all firearms confiscated by New Orleans Mayor Nagin and Police Superintendent Compass are immediately returned to our fellow gun owners.

With your help we're going to make the first time in New Orleans the LAST time in America. Thank you!

http://www.givethemback.com

- Janq

Nite: Gun owners pay attention to the "Brutally Disarmed" video. When cops show up at your house looking for guns, it might make sense to not stand around with as much in hand unholstered waving it around talking gibberish. The old lady got owned and found this out the hard way.
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
I read about this in the NRA article they sent to me this week. What scares me is when something like bird flu hits if something like this is going to happen again.

I would NEVER let them have my guns... never...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Fatcat,

What sucks is that in many states and counties folks have to register their firearms in order to lawfully possess in general, never mind having a CCW license.
The govt./police/military know what you have, where you live, how many folks are likely to be in your home, your age (level of expected resistance), and pretty much everything.

This kind of thing is horrible.

- Janq
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
Most of my guns are legaly not registered, got them privately and there for they dont know where they are, ferthermore I have a few more rifles that I have not shown on the forums. I figure why give away that ace up my sleeve with pictures on an open forum.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Ditto.

All of mine are legally unregistered within the state, but they are registered in a Federal database thanks to FFL transfer requirements and as per having a CCW license the state knows I have something. :\
Maybe when they come knocking I'll hand them my BB gun and some CO2 cartridges. :lol:

- Janq
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Bush Moves Toward Martial Law

FC,

Your fear is not without merit.
Take a peek at what went down on the 17th at the White House...

IndyMedia.org said:
Bush Moves Toward Martial Law
by repost Saturday, Oct. 28, 2006 at 2:39 AM

In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.

Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."

For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.

The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.

An article on "recent contract awards" in a recent issue of the slick, insider "Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International" reported that "global engineering and technical services powerhouse KBR [Kellog, Brown & Root] announced in January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division was awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency." "With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term," the report notes, "the contract is to be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," "for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) - in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The report points out that "KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton." (3) So, in addition to authorizing another $532.8 billion for the Pentagon, including a $70-billion "supplemental provision" which covers the cost of the ongoing, mad military maneuvers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, the new law, signed by the president in a private White House ceremony, further collapses the historic divide between the police and the military: a tell-tale sign of a rapidly consolidating police state in America, all accomplished amidst ongoing U.S. imperial pretensions of global domination, sold to an "emergency managed" and seemingly willfully gullible public as a "global war on terrorism."

Make no mistake about it: the de-facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both," is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will.

Unfortunately, this past week, the president dealt posse comitatus, along with American democracy, a near fatal blow. Consequently, it will take an aroused citizenry to undo the damage wrought by this horrendous act, part and parcel, as we have seen, of a long train of abuses and outrages perpetrated by this authoritarian administration.

Despite the unprecedented and shocking nature of this act, there has been no outcry in the American media, and little reaction from our elected officials in Congress. On September 19th, a lone Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) noted that 2007's Defense Authorization Act contained a "widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order WITHOUT the consent of the nation's governors."

Senator Leahy went on to stress that, "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders."

A few weeks later, on the 29th of September, Leahy entered into the Congressional Record that he had "grave reservations about certain provisions of the fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill Conference Report," the language of which, he said, "subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law." This had been "slipped in," Leahy said, "as a rider with little study," while "other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."

In a telling bit of understatement, the Senator from Vermont noted that "the implications of changing the (Posse Comitatus) Act are enormous". "There is good reason," he said, "for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy. We fail our Constitution, neglecting the rights of the States, when we make it easier for the President to declare martial law and trample on local and state sovereignty."

Senator Leahy's final ruminations: "Since hearing word a couple of weeks ago that this outcome was likely, I have wondered how Congress could have gotten to this point. It seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the Conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it."

The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact.

The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions," authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."...

The complete story can be found at; http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/10/1732834.php
- Guy Fawkes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Janq said:
- Guy Fawkes
Rmember, remember, the gunpowder treason and plot. I can't think of a reason the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
When that movie came out people laughed at others who sad it was reflective of today.
Today just a year later it's not so laughable, and one can only wonder what tomorrow brings.

- Janq is not a tin hatter
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
What the fuck. I didn;t know about that. That is indeed scary scary shit. (Well, I knew about the NOLA seizures, but not the Defense Authorization Act").

I wonder how it compares with the Disaster Recovery Personal protection Act which prohibits federal, state and local authorities from confiscating firearms during emergencies.

Does that mean he can round us up in the event of en emergency off to population centers but will allow people to be armed? ;)


p.s. nice guy fawkes reference, janq
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
What the hell is this country coming to? I've had about enough of this power grasping Bush-shit for my liking. What's next? A law giving the Feds permission to fuck my sister and drink my beer whenever they want?

**heavy sigh**

"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" - Ben Franklin
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
Jamz,

I made a post toward this new item, DAA, at NASIOC/PP last night to which YoungWilliams scoffed and replied with the DRPP Act.
My response to him was the following...

NASIOC/PP - 'Bush signs Martial Law bill' said:
Indeed, as Bush has already signed into law a bill outlawing the gun confiscations that happened in New Orleans.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=8299
True, but that law applies only towards feds and under very specific conditions.

SUMMARY AS OF:
7/25/2006--Passed House amended. (There is 1 other summary)

Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006 - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to prohibit any U.S. officer or employee or any person operating under federal authority, while acting in support of relief from a major disaster or emergency, from: (1) seizing or prohibiting possession of any firearm the possession of which is not otherwise prohibited (other than for forfeiture in compliance with federal law or as evidence in a criminal investigation); (2) requiring registration of any firearm not otherwise required; or (3) prohibiting the carrying of a firearm by any person otherwise authorized to carry a firearm.

Provides that nothing under this Act shall be construed to prohibit 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.

Authorizes any individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to seek relief by bringing an action for redress for deprivation of rights and by bringing a civil action in U.S. district court for return of a confiscated firearm.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR05013:@@@D&summ2=1&
This does not apply to state and local officers only feds and their agents (e.g. military) and under the condition that forfeiture is not required by federal law (which the president now has the power to invoke), and that an individual if they wish to be rescued by a fed must give up their weapons including sidearms otherwise lawfully allowed to be possessed on ones person (even if concealed) following state laws, during specifically a major disaster or emergency. Giving up of ones weapons will be "temporary" as they have been thus far for the Katrina victims. But atleast there is now a legal provision for future victims to have some sort of redress against the federal govt. after the fact if and when they find themselves being disarmed again.

Meanwhile the H.R. 5122 is far broader in scope and would not necessarily be restricted to a major disaster or even an emergency.

- Janq

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1126837
As noted above upon detailed review of the DRPP Act the protections provided are thin as based on narrow circumstance and can be superseded by actions under the guise of DAA, or otherwise.
Agreed Makarov. This is no longer about 'Bush sucks' or Jesusland versus Oontzstaters. This administration is affecting _everyone_ for the worst/negative and not just us but our children and by extension of future results from todays actions, our childrens children as well (!).
Anyone who is not upset with this and the latest turn of events, forget about Iraq, with these ridiculous laws being passed starting with Patriot and Patriot II going forward must either be completely unaware or have so much apathy toward themselves and their country overall that they themselves could be in my mind to be aiding & abetting those others foreign and domestic who scheme to see us as a whole fail.
I mean just read the Acts, it's right there spelled out most often in plain don't need to have a law degree english. How can one read this stuff and not have the hairs on the back of their necks raise up? :(

Americans overall have been and are being duped, everyone regardless of political affiliation.
Security is one thing but throwing the baby out with the bath water, thats something else completely and our babies today are mired in mud & sand.

- Janq

P.S. - For the record I used to be a Republican, back when republicans were both of the people and for the people. I currently am registered with neither party as an 'Independent'. I don't see myself as being liberal or conservative, I'm just American (!).
Today the republican party to my eye is fractured with 99% being sheep sold on traditional thought marketing and fear mongering as fed & lead by a 1% who are themselves proven to be wolves in sheeps clothing. Meanwhile the democratic supposed sheepdogs are off in left field busy chasing their tails and dreaming of polite ways to scare off wolves without hurting their feelings or breaking a nail.
Folks say that John Kerry muffed a joke. I disagree. The joke is on and is us, and by the fact that John Kerry's gaffe got more press than this latest DAA act is proof that we all are pretty much a crowd or lemmings gladly throwing ourselves off a cliff arguing amongst ourselves toward who stands first in line and stressed about those who might try to cut in front of us. Fifty years from now our children will look back at us and while shaking their heads wonder how we could have been so retarded. I have no idea how any of this and where we are at can be repaired muchless reversed. Pandoras box is open wider than Jenna Jamesons, IMHO.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top