·11250 Waples Mill Road · Fairfax, Virginia 22030 ·800-392-8683
Posted on 02/22/2010 8:58:30 AM PST by neverdem
| Bill O’Reilly On Citizens Maintaining Second Amendment Rights During States Of Emergency: “That’s a pretty extreme position.” |
| Friday, February 19, 2010 |
|
As we have often reported, in the wake of the illegal gun confiscations in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, NRA focused its attention on legislation to amend existing emergency-powers statutes to guarantee that local authorities never again attempt the confiscation of lawfully owned firearms during states of emergency. As you know, following Hurricane Katrina, many New Orleans residents legally armed themselves to protect their lives and property from civil disorder. With no way to call for help, and police unable to respond, lawful citizens were able to defend themselves and their neighbors against looters, arsonists and other criminals. However, just when these people needed their guns for self-protection the most, New Orleans’s Police Superintendent ordered the confiscation of firearms, allegedly under a state emergency-powers law. Fortunately, an NRA lawsuit brought an end to the seizures, and subsequent NRA-backed legislation ensured the gun confiscation travesty would not repeat itself. Unfortunately, many states have “emergency powers” laws that give the government permission to suspend or limit gun sales, and to prohibit or restrict citizens from transporting or carrying firearms. In some states, authorities are authorized to seize guns outright from citizens who’ve committed no crime, and who would then be defenseless against disorder. Within the past few weeks, a state of emergency was declared in King, North Carolina following a relatively heavy snowstorm. As a result of the emergency declaration, local residents were banned from carrying firearms in their vehicles. Entering into the fray this week was Bill O’Reilly, host of The O’Reilly Factor, on Fox News. In a February 18, interview that discussed, in part, the confiscation of legally-owned guns during a declared state of emergency (as was the case in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina), O’Reilly affirmed his support of such confiscations. When it was explained to O’Reilly that whether or not there’s a state of emergency, it’s still unconstitutional to confiscate lawfully-owned guns from honest citizens wanting to defend themselves, the Fox talking head retorts, “That’s a pretty extreme position.” Perhaps in your opinion, Bill. But for most law-abiding Americans, the notion that the government can suspend the Constitution and leave citizens without the most effective means of self-defense just because of a snowstorm or hurricane -- well, that would qualify as an extreme position. Of course, no one condones the mindless violence of those who would loot a helpless city, or shoot at rescue workers. But one reason for the citizens to retain a legal right to arms, is precisely because the government has no legal duty to protect them. Legislative bodies can, and should, act to protect the self-defense rights of citizens at the times when those rights are most important. NRA-ILA was instrumental in passing H.R. 5013--the “Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act,”--federal legislation to protect gun owners’ rights during emergencies. And we continue to fight for state legislation to do the same. NRA-ILA has successfully passed Emergency Powers legislation in 28 states since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and we will not rest until we reform all emergency powers laws to prohibit these types of arbitrary attacks on Second Amendment rights. |
It specifically says in the Constitution, in the a state of emergency, the government can temporarily suspend the 2nd Amendment in order to get things under control.
Where does it say that?
The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”
Which in the case of the aftermath of Katrina required it, it was lawful according to the Constitution to ban firearms.
The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“ The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“ The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”
Call me on my BS.
IMHO he vacillates from idiot blowhard to mindless narcissist in the blink of an eye.
“The Articles enumerated within the Constitution’s Bill of Rights are not conditional. 100% behind the 2nd Amendment, are you? Obviously not.”
Read the Suspension Clause of the Constitution (Article One, Section 9, clause 2) which states “ The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
I am behind the Costitution 100%, Then again, I understand most of.
Ok, one more time
The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”
Ok. I'll bite. What does suspending habeas corpus have to do with suspending the 2d?
What section of the Constitution sez such?
The writ of habeas corpus seeks release from imprisonment; it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. Even if habeas corpus may be suspended (to allow imprisonment of, eg, suspected enemies without enough proof to override a habeas corpus objection), it’s irrelevant to the Second Amendment.
Ditto for me as well...
Where, pray tell, does it say that? Post it, please.
Then it is up to the court to decide if the temporary suspension is credible or not.
Really?
But the law is the law, and you can’t claim to support one part of the Constituttion and not the other part.
Which part is that, the PART YOU MADE UP? Or is it right next to the part that privides a "right" to have an abortion?
It specifically says in the Constitution, in the a state of emergency, the government can temporarily suspend the 2nd Amendment in order to get things under control.
Section 9 - Limits on Congress
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
Habeas Corpus
habeas corpus n. Law A writ issued to bring a party before a court to prevent unlawful restraint. [<Med. Lat., you should have the body] Source: AHD
Just How does that apply to the 2nd amendment?
For Reference:
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: bait and switch
1 : a sales tactic in which a customer is attracted by the advertisement of a low-priced item but is then encouraged to buy a higher-priced one
2 : the ploy of offering a person something desirable to gain favor (as political support) then thwarting expectations with something less desirable
Where does it specifically say “in the a state of emergency, the government can temporarily suspend the 2nd Amendment in order to get things under control. “?
I watched that interview. BOR did not do his homework and was anticipating an interview with a raving tinfoil militia type. He simply was not prepared for a valid debate. His guest was calm, cool, armed with completely valid points, and Bill looked foolish.
“Where does it specifically say”?
Right here
The Suspension Clause of the United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“ The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.”
“Just How does that apply to the 2nd amendment?”
Gee, I don’t know, when you have a bunch of armed people running around in New Orleans after Katrina, looting places and law enforcement is in shambles, which causes a concern for the safety of the citizens of N.O., I’m pretty sure this aplies. But like I said, it’s up to the court to decide if the reasons for the government to issue this are legitimate.
Maybe your handle should b F’ed up instead?
I don’t think you even know what parts of the Constitution you don’t understand, let alone those you claim to understand.
Where, pray tell, does it say that? Post it, please.
Read the Suspension Clause. Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states:
“The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it”
Read into it, you learn more that way.
“Ok. I’ll bite. What does suspending habeas corpus have to do with suspending the 2d?”
Gee, i don’t know. When a bunch of armed people in N.O. are running around looting places, causing the safety of the prople of N.O. to be in jeapardy. And law enforcement is in shambles. I’m pretty sure this applies.
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.