Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: goldstategop
This is a typical World Nut Daily article.

They take an article, such as this one from the Sun-Sentinal, copy it word for word, except they leave out the part they don't want you to read.

3 posted on 09/12/2006 2:36:33 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Ben Ficklin
Why don't you share then?

...and, I'm no fan of WND.

5 posted on 09/12/2006 2:41:37 AM PDT by TankerKC (Step Back! Doors Closing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Ben Ficklin
Seizure law riles Cooper City residents
6 posted on 09/12/2006 2:43:41 AM PDT by TankerKC (Step Back! Doors Closing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Ben Ficklin
Very true. Here is an important part of the Sun-Sentinal article that they left out:

Under the city law, once the city declares a state of emergency, officials would be able to regulate fuel and alcohol sales, close any place of public assemblage and prohibit public possession or display of firearms. In addition, they would be able "to confiscate merchandise, equipment, vehicles or property needed to alleviate any emergency condition."

Confiscated property would be returned within 30 days after an emergency ends. And the city must compensate an owner for using personal property, which would have to be returned in the same condition in which it was seized.


(A hat tip to TankerKC for posting the link.)

The article notes that the state of Florida already has this power legislatively along with other Florida communities but that it has not been used. Given the requirement to return the property in the same condition it was confiscated in and pay for its use (both conditions presenting endless potential for litigation), a town or city would probably be very reluctant to take on that expense and liability unless absolutely necessary, especially if free aid ain the form of supplies, equipment, and services were available from the state or federal government.

The only parts of the report that bother me are the possible confiscation of guns under the prohibition of public possession and display and the lack of some outside authority to terminate the emergency if the local government wouldn't at the end of 30 days. Obviously, for personal security and protection of personal property against looting after a natural disaster, citizens must retain their firearms. Anti-gun zealots might use a real disaster as an excuse to order police to seize firearms and retain them for the duration of the "emergency."
19 posted on 09/12/2006 3:29:49 AM PDT by Captain Rhino ( Dollars spent in India help a friend; dollars spent in China arm an enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Ben Ficklin

Do you take the conservative position on any issue?


70 posted on 09/12/2006 10:04:09 AM PDT by jmc813 (.)(.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson