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

Skip to comments.

Judge finds no right to travel (Katrina)
UPI ^ | 4/3/07

Posted on 04/05/2007 10:55:25 AM PDT by traviskicks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last
To: SubGeniusX
I would take Anarchy over Martial Law any day.

Good, you can have the anarchists, I'll take government that will protect me and my family. I'll send the anarchists your direction.

21 posted on 04/05/2007 12:29:07 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks
so I guess ‘public roads’ aren’t so ‘public’ after all...

We haven't had public roads for a long time.

They're all government roads, and they're all toll roads. It's just that on most, the toll is subjectively levied by government employees with guns.

22 posted on 04/05/2007 12:39:29 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SubGeniusX
These people were trying to get out of a disaster area and were PREVENTED from doing so by LEO’s whos job it is to “serve and protect” ... it sickend me when it happened ... and then they tried to blame the people on the bridge ... hell I would have rioted, to get out of there ...

Why did it sicken you? It was the correct response.

Remind me to not be near where ever you are when there is a disaster.

Where were they going to go to once they got over the bridge? There were no supplies or shelter on the other side of the bridge.

The area was under martial law at the time. People were also not allowed into the city. They didn't even want us to return from the evacuation shelter in Monroe for a few days. We allowed to leave the shelter unless we had a place to go to that wasn't in the South. {course you could walk away at any time}

Even a month after the storm, the bridge was closed at nights. I barely made it over the bridge on my first foray into the city. If I had been fifteen minutes later, I would have had to turn around and would have been stuck in the 4 hour or more traffic jam headed out of the city the other way.

Initially, city residents were not even allowed to return home. They were allowed in to check their properties and then had to leave by nightfall.

23 posted on 04/05/2007 12:40:05 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Inquisitive1

how far are you willing to go to demonstrate your inalienable rights?


24 posted on 04/05/2007 12:41:25 PM PDT by wafflehouse (When in danger, When in doubt, Run in circles, Scream and Shout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PAR35
I'll take government that will protect me and my family.

As soon as you find a government that can and will do that, let us know.

25 posted on 04/05/2007 12:42:53 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Inquisitive1
If a 'Right' is inalienable, granted by the Creator, is it wrong to assume that a state cannot revoke it?

Completely irrelevant. In 1833, the SCOTUS ruled that the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government. The Chief Justice was John Marshall who was one of the founders of the republic and along with Madison worked very hard to get it ratified.

That ruling has stood for almost 200 years and has never been overturned by subsequent courts. In fact, the later courts have gone out of their way even with the passage of the 14th amendment to not overturn it but go around it.

The fact of the matter is that at this moment in time the Bill of Rights apply only to the Federal government unless the SCOTUS has incorporated them via the 14th amendment. We can try to parse the constitution all we want, but the bottom line won't change.

In this case, I believe the authorities were wrong but unfortunately within their powers. Hopefully this case will reach the SCOTUS and it will either be incorporated or (ideally) Barron will be overturned via the 14th amendment.

26 posted on 04/05/2007 12:52:10 PM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

Yeah I hear you, but how can one travel to another State if one cannot leave the city? I think these people were deprived of their due rights.


27 posted on 04/05/2007 1:09:33 PM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42

And into another disaster area? Going across the GNO just brought them further away from supplies and rescue operations.

If the police allowed them to cross there would have been further looting and violence.


28 posted on 04/05/2007 1:16:01 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SubGeniusX

These people were trying to get into another disaster area.

As far as the racist angle I was told by a Gretna cop that the officer that fired a shot into the air was a black guy.


29 posted on 04/05/2007 1:18:15 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard
Yeah I hear you, but how can one travel to another State if one cannot leave the city? I think these people were deprived of their due rights.

I think we agree but just disagree on sematics. I think that ultimately, this decision will be overturned (via incorporation) but at the time of the incident, the authorities were acting under their understood powers.

An example would be the Lawrence decision. At the time of the arrest, the Texas police had the power to arrest and charge persons committing sodomy. After the SCOTUS decision, however, it was decided, retroactively, that they did not.

The one wildcard in all of this is whether the area was under martial law.

30 posted on 04/05/2007 1:28:02 PM PDT by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SubGeniusX

As long as I have plenty of Ammo ;>)


31 posted on 04/05/2007 1:46:13 PM PDT by TheKidster (you can only trust government to grow, consolidate power and infringe upon your liberties.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

I’ll take government that will protect me and my family

Like they did in NO after Katrina? Govt. protections are largely an illusion. You are protected only in as much as it is to the govt’s best interest. When protecting you conflicts with govt. or govt. officials’ personal interests, then you’re SOL most of the time.


32 posted on 04/05/2007 1:50:07 PM PDT by TheKidster (you can only trust government to grow, consolidate power and infringe upon your liberties.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TheKidster
Like they did in NO after Katrina?

Yes, like they did on the West Bank after Katrina.

33 posted on 04/05/2007 2:13:38 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

You have no idea how outright stupid most trial level judge are. Many see these trial judges in specific cases and are shocked.

Many of these judges are complete idiots on real life, are failed litigators, or were governemnt attorneys who got their job because their knew someone.


34 posted on 04/05/2007 2:17:04 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Taylor42

tough as it may seem, this seems to be 100% a case of NIMBY.

Somebody did not want refugees on their lawns.


35 posted on 04/05/2007 2:31:20 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TheKidster
As long as I have plenty of Ammo

I think that would apply under either situation ....(Martial Law or Anarchy)... maybe more so in the former

36 posted on 04/05/2007 2:35:43 PM PDT by SubGeniusX ($29.95 Guarantees Your Salvation!!! Or TRIPLE Your Money Back!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TheKidster

The problem is the police have serious turf issues with citizens protecting themselves.

Remember the NO going all Nazi and going door to door and taking LEGAL firearms “just because”.

Perhaps in times of declared natural disaster, areas which are under a hurricane warning should be declared “castle doctrine zones” where the castle doctrine is extended over the entire area.

My understanding is that the NO looting has NEVER STOPPED and continues in the deserted neighborhoods.


37 posted on 04/05/2007 2:39:44 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy
[b]Once again we see a perfect inversion of the Constitution. It was written as “everything is allowed except what we prohibit here”; it is interpreted in exactly the opposite way.[/b]

I don’t see any such inversion.

There is no Federal Constitutional Right to marry either! Those rights have been retained by the people. And, surprise, they are governed by the people through their state representatives.

This ruling only means — for people who purport to care about state rights and separation of powers — that no cause of action lies in Federal Court — because no Federal Right is implicated.

Painting this as a perversion of the Constitution is incorrect. This is exactly how the Constitution was designed. Federal issues are decided , if such disputes exist, by federal law. Other disputes, rules, regs, rights, etc., are determined by the states and state courts.

This ruling shows the system works. First, of course, one must understand the system as it was actually set up.

38 posted on 04/05/2007 2:42:48 PM PDT by Iron Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
tough as it may seem, this seems to be 100% a case of NIMBY. Somebody did not want refugees on their lawns.

I understand what they were doing and it's still 100% BULL$HIT.

If one finds oneself in a disaster area, the best course of action is to get the hell out once conditions improve enough such that travel is safe. With local law enforcement preventing movement and not providing relief supplies, what at the people supposed to do? Sit there until the government comes along to help. I don't think so.

39 posted on 04/05/2007 2:48:20 PM PDT by Taylor42
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

What ‘s the first thing they did when they eventually got to the Westbank? Loot and burn the mall.


40 posted on 04/05/2007 3:18:00 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last

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.

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