loki0629 55 Posted April 5, 2007 Report Share Posted April 5, 2007 More NO residents arming themselves since Katrina. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1606587,00.html I really wonder at what point law enforcement decided that personal defense should not be a viable option for a citizen? The comments in the article made by the police sergeant echoes the mentality we see here in NJ as well. I especially liked his concept of a "gun-waving victim"....wtf??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Juggernaut 11,054 Posted April 5, 2007 Report Share Posted April 5, 2007 After everyone was unconstitutionally Dis-armed after Katrina, I'm glad to see the population Re-Arming Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tokageko 8 Posted April 5, 2007 Report Share Posted April 5, 2007 Best defense against tyranny, right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted April 6, 2007 Report Share Posted April 6, 2007 "And it's not the usual gun hobbyists that are buying. 'They're not gun aficionados,' Mayer says. 'They're just doing it because they feel they have to.' " Good to hear the non-gunners are buying too, not just the collectors who lost firearms to the police/military. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scoutjoe 276 Posted April 6, 2007 Report Share Posted April 6, 2007 "And it's not the usual gun hobbyists that are buying. 'They're not gun aficionados,' Mayer says. 'They're just doing it because they feel they have to.' " Good to hear the non-gunners are buying too, not just the collectors who lost firearms to the police/military. And those are the people we need in our ranks, because they are from all over the place. They might not know everything, but they've seen enough to realize that there are sometimes when a firearm is a great peice of mind Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted April 6, 2007 Report Share Posted April 6, 2007 Exactly Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Azrial 1,091 Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 New Orleans Police Department Sergeant Donovan Livaccari is a dammed idiot. Please have a right to protect themselves and anybody that simply waves a gun at a armed criminal deserves to be mugged, or worst. But the people are the worst idiots, they elected Ray Nagin Mayor again! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 I almost drove down there myself when I heard about the facist pricks stealing the honest citizens' guns. people must be nice in NO or something, because up here, youd get shot trying to do that. and I bet they might, next time, from the way it soounds like people are arming themsleves down there. its about time people got a grip on reality and used thier 2nd amendmant right. the seizures in NO was basically an act of tyranny, and as such, not the american governement anymore. that is how wars start, right there. Ive had the police steal my property as well, once upon a time, illegally, and it isnt going to happen again while I have air in my lungs. personal property and land is a hell of a thing when it comes to what you can and cannot do to keep or protect it. sooner or later, I expect to have a problem with the SS when Im out shooting when the governor is home. Im hoping that he will be a good neighbor, but I am not counting on it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loki0629 55 Posted April 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2007 What pisses me off to no end is that even when they were confiscating the guns they seemed to be selective about it, with the wealthy and their bodyguards being exempt. And I agree that reelecting Nagin was idiotic. Anybody misguided enough to think that law abiding individuals don't have the right to defend themselves especially during a natural catastrophe should be booted. And what instrument did they use to figure out who had guns anyway? Registration records? And no one bothered to pause and think that criminals would not have registration records because well...they are criminals. Fucking brilliant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 as far as I know, you have to suspend habeous corpus to seize a law abiding citizen;'s guns. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
joelrod47 373 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 ........for the most part, the guns they confiscated were from little old ladies they could overpower as a result of being in the house in force, or from people they greatly outnumbered when they encountered them............ Two guys in a boat don't stand much chance when facing 20 M-16's, and as a result, their guns were stolen from them. The only method of selection was if the person with a gun was greatly outnumbered by the gun-grabbers........... "people in NO must be nice or something........"...............well, not the people I know in and around NO........!! None of my friends guns were confiscated, and their property was not entered into by any law enforcement agency.......and believe me, they're all known shooters in the area............. Wouldn't have gone well for anyone trying to take their guns at any time, much less in a disaster scenario............... I'm going down there soon for a visit.........gonna introduce 'em to the S-12 !!!!! Laissez les bon temps rouler !!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 send em here while yer at it! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
brain3278 1 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 More NO residents arming themselves since Katrina. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1606587,00.html I really wonder at what point law enforcement decided that personal defense should not be a viable option for a citizen? The comments in the article made by the police sergeant echoes the mentality we see here in NJ as well. I especially liked his concept of a "gun-waving victim"....wtf??? Wow! Thank God I don't live there. Did he just say something to the affect that your more likely to get SHOT BY A POLICEMAN if you try to protect yourself from a criminal by using your gun? What a Fucking idiot! People like this should not be wearing badges! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
joelrod47 373 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 If I'm in process of protecting myself or my family or friends from a criminal, and someone decides to shoot at me......I have a firm policy of shooting back. It would be unfortunate that the person shooting at me might happen to be a law enforcement officer who doesn't properly assess the situation he's observing. That does not, however, change the policy of returning fire. It's always been a bit flaky in New Orleans as regards the police force..................................... It must especially be the case now. Their recent behavior towards the population there wouldn't foster a great deal of trust or confidence. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MD_Willington 11 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 More NO residents arming themselves since Katrina. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1606587,00.html I really wonder at what point law enforcement decided that personal defense should not be a viable option for a citizen? The comments in the article made by the police sergeant echoes the mentality we see here in NJ as well. I especially liked his concept of a "gun-waving victim"....wtf??? Wow! Thank God I don't live there. Did he just say something to the affect that your more likely to get SHOT BY A POLICEMAN if you try to protect yourself from a criminal by using your gun? What a Fucking idiot! People like this should not be wearing badges! I'm sure there are some honest cops there, but for the most part there seems to be a real lack of them in NO... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loki0629 55 Posted April 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 I'm sure there are some honest cops there, but for the most part there seems to be a real lack of them in NO... I agree. Actually, I like to think that most of the cops down there are honest but maybe place too much faith on misguided leadership? I dunno. The wife and I went to NO a few months before the storm and spent a few days in the French Quarter. It was a great time and the law enforcement that we ran across along Bourbon Street were generally very polite and helpful towards us "tourists". That's the image I have of NO and I cannot fathom the idea of some of their law enforcement actually taking part in the looting. For the sake of the residents there I really hope it was just a couple of bad apples instead of a really corrupt police department...but I think the perception these days tends to lean towards the latter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MD_Willington 11 Posted April 9, 2007 Report Share Posted April 9, 2007 BTW, I try not to LEO bash. My grandfather was a Special Constable for the London Metro Police, British Army MP in North Africa, and a Commisionaire afterwards in Canada (Inglis Hi Power was his sidearm). He was issued various firearms, even back in Britain (.455) only shot one guy that I know of, a looter, and he shot him in the ass with a .45ACP. My wifes uncle is ex-RCMP in Canada, issued the same sidearm that I first purchased a Gen 3 S&W semi-auto. MD Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tokageko 8 Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 I've always wondered if shooting (or otherwise assauling) a police officer who is trying to arrest you (or seize your property) illegally is an illegal act.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aethelbert 1 Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 I've always wondered if shooting (or otherwise assauling) a police officer who is trying to arrest you (or seize your property) illegally is an illegal act.... Don't know about down in NO but I was a cop in Oregon some years (as in many) back and there you have no legal right to defend yourself against a cop who is making an unlawful arrest (of you). The law since 1971 has taken the position that you will have your day in court. And as for using deadly force to prevent an unlawful seizure of your firearms or other property, The use -- or even the display) of deadly force is strictly forbidden. It is permitted only if you, as a so-called "reasonable person", feel in fear of your life -- again, providing the person making you fear for your life is not a cop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aurbis 1 Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 So even in an instance of police brutality, you have no right to defend yourself? Just lay there and take it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aethelbert 1 Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 So even in an instance of police brutality, you have no right to defend yourself? Just lay there and take it? Good point but... unfortunately, not much right. Unless, of course, you want to add 'resisting arrest'...? It has to be a judgment call on your part. Try to minimize personal damage by not resisting? Or fight back -- remembering that most cops are in better physical condition than most civilian types, are much more heavily armed and will be willing to mace, taser or gun you down and then get through either a 'shooting board' or a civilian review board later. The cop is also frequently accompanied by at least one other cop at the time and has the capability to call in reinforcements to help subdue this 'perp'. Keep in mind, though, that these days there's likely to be at least one person (non-police typ) nearby or maybe even two or three that have a video camera in hand, even though none of the people directly involved in the incident may be aware of it. Remember Rodney King? Remember that retired teacher in NO who was beaten by several cops? A beating that was recorded on someone's vid cam? Ah, yes! Fodder for the courts and big lawsuits! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loki0629 55 Posted April 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 I've always wondered if shooting (or otherwise assauling) a police officer who is trying to arrest you (or seize your property) illegally is an illegal act.... Don't know about down in NO but I was a cop in Oregon some years (as in many) back and there you have no legal right to defend yourself against a cop who is making an unlawful arrest (of you). The law since 1971 has taken the position that you will have your day in court. And as for using deadly force to prevent an unlawful seizure of your firearms or other property, The use -- or even the display) of deadly force is strictly forbidden. It is permitted only if you, as a so-called "reasonable person", feel in fear of your life -- again, providing the person making you fear for your life is not a cop! What about in the case of undercover "no-knock" warrants? Take in point the case of the woman who was shot to death because the drug enforcement officers (undercover) came through her door, she proceeded to shoot at them, and they shot her down. Now the kicker of the case is that the drug enforcement officers had the wrong address...they were not where they were supposed to be and being undercover, this woman did not know they were police officers. I do not have all the details of this incident although I remember hearing about it in the news some time back. I'll see if I can remember enough to google the article. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aethelbert 1 Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) What about in the case of undercover "no-knock" warrants? Take in point the case of the woman who was shot to death because the drug enforcement officers (undercover) came through her door, she proceeded to shoot at them, and they shot her down. Now the kicker of the case is that the drug enforcement officers had the wrong address...they were not where they were supposed to be and being undercover, this woman did not know they were police officers. I do not have all the details of this incident although I remember hearing about it in the news some time back. I'll see if I can remember enough to google the article. Good question! Let's also go back to 1971 -- New Jersey (IIRC). Some punk trying to keep himself out of trouble acted as a 'reliable informant' and told the county police that a guy had grenades and automatic weapons. Now, as it turned out, he had one inert practice grenade and had a cap-n-ball replica of the .44 Colt Walker revolver of 1848. The undercover cops had long greasy hair and the 'quaint' clothing of the time (Serpico would have been proud of them) when they burst through a steel-clad back door (rather than going through the flimsy wooden front door). The wife screamed "They're coming through the back door!" She testified that they gave no indication of they're being cops. The only thing to indicate that was the armband that each wore (not that I would be looking for police armbands when several unsavory looking types waving guns smash their way into my house). Hubby was half-dozing in a hot soapy tub. When his wife screamed, he climbed out, reached across the hall into the bedroom and grabbed the loaded .44 Walker Colt. The cops shot him several times, including in the left forehead -- as he was right-handed this hollow-point .357 bullet destroyed most of the left side of the brain and, with it, his ability to do a few minor things like recognize people, walk... or even talk. After several years, he learned who his wife was, how to speak again and how to walk, even though haltingly. Yes, the cops had a warrant. Yes, the address was correct. The DA's office in my county in Oregon went over that case in one of our training classes because of the number of procedural violations contained in it, any one of which could have gotten the case dismissed: 1. Unless specified to be served after sunset, all such warrants were (at that time, anyway) to be served before sunset. In this instance, although local, county and state police had surrounded the house as much as two hours before sunset, they waited until after sunset to 'serve' the warrant which was a search warrant rather than an arrest warrant. 2. The raiding party failed to identify itself as police. 3. The first officers through the door should have been in uniform to show visually that this was a police operation. Instead, the first officers through were the undercover officers with their dishevelled clothing and hair/beards. There were a couple of other considerations discussed by the assistant-DA but, after 36 years, doggoned if I can remember all of them. In short, in the event of a 'no-knock' raid, yes, you can use deadly force. After all, in the confusion of the moment you probably wouldn't know right away that they are officers and you could mount a defense in court that you feared for your life and those of your wife and children -- providing that you survive long enought to even get to court. But the result is likely to be the same -- they will employ overwhelming force and, once you have been seen or even merely thought to have a weapon or to be going for a weapon, you will be on the wrong end of a hail of gunfire. And if they can't get you, they know a SWAT team that they can call in that is probably drooling in some Pavlovian manner at the mere thought of being able to kill something -- in this case, you! Yes. I believe in the right of self-defense. Have a CCW permit and rifles and my .410 in the house, along with edged weapons, for use in the eventuality that they may be needed but -- please Lord! -- let the raiders be 'ordinary' home-invaders. At least, then I would have something of a chance. Edited April 17, 2007 by Aethelbert Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tokageko 8 Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 I believe there have been several incidents of that type. Ruby Ridge was a very well documented case where federal agents were the first to fire, and didn't announce their presence or identity. Of course, we all know that whole situation was a cluster-f**k from the beginning. http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?showtopic=16257 Check the post from 6500RPM. That's some food for thought. I can't even think about this right now. I don't want to stir up anything either. For the record: I'm grumbling quietly to myself in a corner, wearing my tin-foil hat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 well, tokageko, you know how it went, they had a right to shoot back..... at the time.... there will be no peace. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
loki0629 55 Posted April 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 In short, in the event of a 'no-knock' raid, yes, you can use deadly force. Aethelbert, Thank you for taking the time to post that....very informative. So basically, if some undercover cops ever bust through my front (or rear) door with weapons drawn I may be justified in using deadly force but hopefully my wife and kids will survive the incident to collect the settlement from the state. I currently reside in NJ and the gun laws here are ridiculous to say the least. The same politicians who stated that 911 and the police have no legal obligation to protect individuals are the same ones who make it impossible for a citizen to carry a concealed weapon. I believe it was interim governor Cody (who is again filling that position) who said that after a woman from an affluent neighborhood was abducted from a train station and murdered. Here is an article written some time ago about that incident: An especially sad case made for Carrying a Concealed Gun/Police can not and will not Protect You Philadelphia Inquirer - Front Page ^ | December 1, 2001 | Dwight Ott/Maureen Graham Posted on 12/01/2001 11:51:14 AM PST by Attila_the_Hun Dispatcher ignored 911 call about kidnapping A woman was abducted from a N.J. train station and killed. Police say the operator failed to act when a witness called. By Dwight Ott and Maureen Graham INQUIRER STAFF WRITERS The night that Christine Lynn Eberle was abducted and murdered, Camden police dispatchers received a 911 call reporting an emergency and asking for help at the Ferry Avenue station of the PATCO High-Speed Line. But the information was never relayed to officers on patrol, according to police, and within hours Eberle was dead. Last night, a 20-year veteran dispatcher with the Camden police was suspended without pay for failing to pass on the caller's information. The dispatcher, identified as Marie H. Cupparo, 69, of Camden, did not respond to a request for comment left on her answering machine, and no one answered the door at her home last night. Police Chief Robert E. Allenbach said that he suspended Cupparo for "failing to take action on information supplied in a 911 call." Eberle, 27, a Center City office worker, was on her way home to Washington Township when she was abducted about 8 p.m. on Nov. 12 in the 1,200-space parking lot. Her body was found the following night about three miles away in a wooded area. Two Camden men are facing murder charges in the case. According to investigators, the caller telephoned police from his car in the PATCO lot to say that he saw a woman struggling with two men. The caller, whom police would not identify, said a woman was screaming as she was being dragged into a car. The man followed the abductors' car through the parking lot and then lost sight of it, investigators said. All the while he was on the phone with police dispatch, they said. The dispatcher dismissed the incident as a domestic dispute and never relayed the information to patrol officers, according to investigators. Camden County Prosecutor Lee A. Solomon said his office was actively investigating the lapse. "If anybody failed to take action or acted in any way to contribute to what happened to Christine Eberle, there will be hell to pay," Solomon said. A transcript of the 911 tape was not available last night. Allenbach said the Camden Police Department would release a full account of the incident next week. "I assure that the Camden Police Department Internal Affairs Office and myself will investigate this matter to the fullest," Allenbach said. This comes as Allenbach is fighting to keep his job as police chief. The city's mayor, Gwendolyn Faison, has refused to sign a new contract with him. But Allenbach has many supporters and allies, among them Solomon, who said he would investigate how the information was leaked and whether word about the 911 lapse was leaked to discredit the Police Department. "If this was leaked for political purposes, or to gain a political advantage, it is reprehensible," Solomon said. Eberle's mother, Linda Reis, said earlier yesterday that she had not been told of the 911 call. Eberle was a financial manager at Delaware Investments in Center City and was engaged to be married in April. When she did not come home from work that night, her fiance went looking for her. He found her 2002 Ford Explorer in the PATCO lot about 1 a.m., but it was not there when he returned about 5 a.m. That morning he filed a missing-person report with the Washington Township police. Later that day, suspect Ryshaone H. Thomas, 23, of Camden, was spotted driving the Explorer and was arrested. That night, Eberle's beaten body was found in a wooded area in the Fairview section of Camden, not far from where Thomas lived with his grandmother. Police said she had died warding off a sexual assault. The second suspect, Marcus D. Toliver, 22, was arrested Nov. 16. Both are being held in the Camden County Jail on $1 million bail. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dlivaccari 0 Posted April 22, 2007 Report Share Posted April 22, 2007 I have to say that I am glad to see that the article that appeared in Time generated such interest. However, I would like to clarify a couple of things: First, my message to citizens arming themselves is simple. Make sure that you give the weapon you choose to carry the respect that it deserves. You may be an expert when it comes to guns and carrying guns. However, you can't believe that everyone buying a gun after Katrina has the same knowledge and experience. My point was simply that you should know what you are doing before you choose to arm yourself. Secondly, as for disarming citizens following Katrina, I would also like to set the record straight. Guns were taken from abandoned homes (so looters didn't get them first), from looters, and from people seeking transport on military aircraft to evacuate. In any event, the owners of any firearms that were seized were given an item number so the weapon could be retrieved later. Take it any way you want, but I think you would agree that anyone carrying a weapon should know how to use it and what laws apply. I owned guns before I was on the police department, but I also made frequent trips to the range and made a point of learning the applicable laws. Sgt. Donovan Livaccari Quote Link to post Share on other sites
joelrod47 373 Posted April 22, 2007 Report Share Posted April 22, 2007 Sgt. Livaccari, First, let me be very clear as to my understanding of the problems with being a police officer in the City of New Orleans....... Of all the cities in the United States, this has to be one of the most difficult places to be LEO.......... Between the tourists wanting an unlimited party ticket, and the predators who work the tourists, and the overall lure of New Orleans as the ultimate place to kick out the stops and let your hair down.......a N.O. cop's job is an absolute nightmare on a good day............ That's not even mentioning the makeup of the city itself, taking the tourist factor out of it entirely.............. I've been familiar with NO since the Morials, and have friends and family in the area, and for the most part have great respect for anyone who can be LEO in New Orleans............. Secondly, as for disarming citizens following Katrina, I would also like to set the record straight. Guns were taken from abandoned homes (so looters didn't get them first), from looters, and from people seeking transport on military aircraft to evacuate. In any event, the owners of any firearms that were seized were given an item number so the weapon could be retrieved later. On the above quote, however, let me be the first to call bullshit. You, personally, may have handed out item numbers so these weapons culd later be retrieved, but that was not the general procedure employed by overall law enforcement in the area post-Katrina. I have close friends in St. Bernard and St. Tammany who directly contradict your statements. We all saw the little old lady Uptown who was body-slammed over showing her little .32 revolver to the dozen or so cops in her kitchen............. Taking weapons from vacant homes to prevent them being stolen by looters, taking weapons from looters, and taking weapons from people boarding military aircraft is within the limits of law and reason........the other confiscations were illegal and reprehensible, and have no place within this country...... Can you tell us why there's so much problem with getting the guns back if everyone has item receipts for the guns that were stolen from them.........??????? Why is Nagin denying there were guns taken at all ????? How can you justify taking these peoples arms in a time of peril......removing their ability to protect themselves ?????? Your reasoning to this point as you've stated it so far just doesn't hold water.......and we're all very interested here to get a valid explanation. We'll wait.......get back to us........... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.