Posted on 07/25/2006 7:43:11 PM PDT by LdSentinal
WASHINGTON (AP) - The House voted Tuesday to prevent law enforcement officers from confiscating legally owned guns during a national disaster or emergency. Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana lawmaker who sponsored the bill, said firearms seizures after Hurricane Katrina left residents unable to defend themselves.
"Many of them were sitting in their homes without power, without water, without communication," he said. "It was literally impossible to pick up a phone and call 911." The House voted 322-99 in support of the bill. Senators voted 84-16 earlier this month to include a similar prohibition in a homeland security funding bill.
The limitation would apply to federal law enforcement or military officers, along with local police that receive federal funds.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., repeatedly called the bill "insane."
He and some Democrats said the bill might satisfy the gun lobby, but it would put people into more danger during already perilous disasters.
"The streets of an American city immediately after a disaster are no place to abandon common sense," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.
The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed the measure. In a letter to Jindal, National President Chuck Canterbury said law enforcement officials concentrate on search and rescue during major disasters, and breakdowns in communications and transportation can lengthen police response times to calls.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Good. Government should not be conficating weapons.
"The streets of an American city immediately after a disaster are no place to abandon common sense,"
Common sense tells me if I am unarmed after a disaster, I am an easy target for looters and worse.
Individuals cannot count on anyone but themselves in situations like that.
When it comes to weighing in on schemes of leftist tyrrany, you can always count on the planetary Jerrold Nadler.
"House votes to block (SOME?) gun-seizing"
It sounds like there can also be SOME gun-seizing.
Just where is this dirtbag's district? In NYC proper?
Yep. The 8th district. Here's his webpage: http://www.house.gov/nadler/
The slob looks like he's shed a few thousand pounds - probably jet powered liposuction to make room for graft money in his wallet.
I suspect this is a winner in the House and Senate because all the congresscritters and senators know it's going to die quietly in conference committee.
I thought the Constitution forbade such things?
Will they obey this law whereas they don't ignore the Constitution?
Is this law more "powerful" than the Constitution? I thought the Constitution was the "supreme law of the land?"
BANG! ping.
To the collectivists, your individual welfare isn't important at all (unless you're a member of a "special" group). The right of the state to remain all powerful "for the good of the people" is what's important.
yeah, I caught that to. oh well, there is always the g. gordon liddy s.o.p. when that crash comes at the door at 3 am and the Nasty Girls are beggining (or trying to) weapons confiscation. come get mine kiddies.
It is a Federal law.
The limitation would apply to federal law enforcement or military officers, along with local police that receive federal funds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.