What bothers me most is if there is a mandatory evacuation, how can private security not be forced to evacuate? they are not part of the government, and are not (as far as I know) current sworn officers...It appears they are being handed two things above mere citizens..the right to be in the area and the right to bear arms..thus advancing their status and value ($$$) over mere citizens....It's either martial law with the military in there evacuating everyone (security included)and if need be taking firearms or it isn't. These people clearly don't know what the heck they are doing.
1/3 or more of the NO (corrupt)police force deserts and looters ran wild and now they want to take people's firearms?
The authorities need a spokesperson to get on TV and tell everyone what they are going to do BEFORE they do it and cite their authority along with peoples options and penalties....The government at all levels works for the people and they should never forget it.
As far as the public health aspect, I agree they have the right to either quarantine or move people out. The public health dept. should make determinations first by neighborhoods, then if necessary, house by house, as to the conditions. Do they have water and sanitation?(either provided by city or themselves) if so leave them alone. A man's home is his castle....
Welcome to Louisiana, dogs and guns subject to confiscation...give us time we'll think of something else....
The same corrupt health department beholding to some LA politician?
The same code department that will declare whole neighborhoods unihabitable and then use kelo to procure the properties for redevelopment.
It is little wonder the police want to disarm people.
The fact they are allowing private security SCREAMS corruption.
"unless martial law is declared, this is unlawful, immoral and stinks.."
People keep saying this like it is a trigger and a requirement to turn over your guns. Not sure why we would *ever* have to turn over our weapons.
The authorities need a spokesperson to get on TV and tell everyone what they are going to do BEFORE they do it and cite their authority along with peoples options and penalties....
I agree it is immoral, and it stinks. As for unlawful or unconstitutional, there is no US precedent, that I am aware of, for mass weapons confiscation where the individial actors have shown no danger to the public.
I do predict, however, that the Federal courts will decide this case in favor of the government. Outcome-based rationale forthcoming. 2nd amendment applies, unless the area is under threat. Can't trust the public with guns, only the authorities are qualified.