[Congressman Billybob]

If there is no declaration of martial law, then grabbing anyone's guns is illegal, unless the person is committing a crime with the gun at the time.

On the other hand, forcibly moving people out of their homes on public health grounds to prevent an epidemic of several dozen available diseases in that fetid water is legal under civil law. All states have some legal provisions for cutting off epidemics when they first threaten. (The Center for Disease Control provides information and support for any such effort. But the legal authority belongs to the state Health Department.)

John / Billybob

[mewzilla]

On the other hand, forcibly moving people out of their homes on public health grounds to prevent an epidemic of several dozen available diseases in that fetid water is legal under civil law. All states have some legal provisions for cutting off epidemics when they first threaten. (The Center for Disease Control provides information and support for any such effort. But the legal authority belongs to the state Health Department.)

FWIW, Billybob, arrording to FNC's Judge Napolitano, that's only legal if the authorities can prove the folks inside are actually a health hazard. If I understood the judge correctly :)

[dimquest]

Congressman Billybob wrote:
If there is no declaration of martial law, then grabbing anyone's guns is illegal, unless the person is committing a crime with the gun at the time.
On the other hand, forcibly moving people out of their homes on public health grounds to prevent an epidemic of several dozen available diseases in that fetid water is legal under civil law. All states have some legal provisions for cutting off epidemics when they first threaten. (The Center for Disease Control provides information and support for any such effort. But the legal authority belongs to the state Health Department.)

---

Hmmmm, -- who just wrote something to the effect that:


'I think most of the people will be able to to tell the difference between the subject under discussion, and another subject that is not currently on the table.' - ?

[CharlesWayneCT]

This is where we need courts to protect the people from an overreaching executive.

THere is no evidence that people in their homes in parts of the city that were not flooded are in any danger of any disease.

And they certainly won't be SPREADING any disease if they are holed up in their houses.

AND NO MATTER WHAT, there can be no excuse for taking their guns out of their houses, even if they take the people. The government has no right to come into my house without a warrant and take ANYTHING out of it, that's both ME and MY POSESSIONS.

You usually make such good sense.