cjhsa
 
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 06:44 am
Congressman Jindal Introduces The "Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act Of 2006"



Friday, March 31, 2006

On March 28, U.S. Congressman Bobby Jindal (R-La.) introduced H.R. 5013, the "Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006." This NRA-supported bill would amend federal emergency statute laws to prohibit local authorities from confiscating lawfully owned firearms during times of disaster.

Representative Jindal stated: "The Second Amendment is a cornerstone of our country's freedom and independence. Particularly during emergencies like those surrounding Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, when incidences of looting, violence and lawlessness were broadcast around the country, we must ensure that law-abiding gun owners are not deprived of their Constitutionally protected right to bear arms. I am proud to offer this legislation to protect law-abiding citizens' Constitutional right to bear arms and to defend their lives, families and property against lawless criminals."

ILA's Executive Director Chris W. Cox said, "Hurricane Katrina taught us that lawful citizens need the Second Amendment most during disaster and crisis. New Orleans residents legally armed themselves to protect their lives and property from civil disorder."

Thirty three 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--something NRA-ILA is working to change. In some states, authorities can seize guns outright from citizens who have committed no crime--and who would then be defenseless against disorder.

Cox added, "This bill to amend the federal disaster laws is vital for the future of America. Legislative bodies can, and should, act to protect the self-defense rights of citizens at the times when those rights are most important.

"We would like to thank Representative Jindal for introducing this bill, and we look forward to the time when the government will never have the power to confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens," he concluded.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 5013, the "Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006!"
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,395 • Replies: 58
No top replies

 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 09:15 am
Re: Support H.R. 5013
cjhsa wrote:
In some states, authorities can seize guns outright from citizens who have committed no crime--and who would then be defenseless against disorder.

Far better to have them armed, so that they can fully participate in the disorder.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 09:16 am
You mean protect themselves from the disorderly. C'mon Joe, ya wimp.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 09:52 am
I think FEMA should pass out firearms, along with water and blankets, to victims of a natural disaster. The next time maybe the Red Cross can set up a table in the Superdome.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 10:12 am
I thought the UN was going to confiscate all the guns. At least, that was the last tizzy fit you were having, anyway.

But yes, arming oneself is probably the most useful response to any disaster. If only the folks at the Superdome had been able to fire a few rounds at the rising waters, that surely would've saved the day! Here in California, we're often in need of a good firefight to staunch a winter mudslide. And of course, as any fireman knows, popping some caps is the surest way to get the best of any wildfire.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 10:38 am
I shoulda gone to the Chicago A2K gathering. I could have robbed everyone with just my finger.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 10:51 am
blacksmithn wrote:
I thought the UN was going to confiscate all the guns. At least, that was the last tizzy fit you were having, anyway.

But yes, arming oneself is probably the most useful response to any disaster. If only the folks at the Superdome had been able to fire a few rounds at the rising waters, that surely would've saved the day! Here in California, we're often in need of a good firefight to staunch a winter mudslide. And of course, as any fireman knows, popping some caps is the surest way to get the best of any wildfire.


Were you purposefully demonstrating your complete lack of understanding, or was that accidental?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 10:59 am
cjhsa wrote:
I shoulda gone to the Chicago A2K gathering. I could have robbed everyone with just my finger.


I feel certain that in the real world cj, where people don't judge the size of their balls by their firearms, had you attempted to rob the group with your finger you'd have gotten the **** kicked out of you. Laughing
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 11:23 am
Did you see that group??? Shocked Wink
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 11:23 am
McGentrix wrote:
blacksmithn wrote:
I thought the UN was going to confiscate all the guns. At least, that was the last tizzy fit you were having, anyway.

But yes, arming oneself is probably the most useful response to any disaster. If only the folks at the Superdome had been able to fire a few rounds at the rising waters, that surely would've saved the day! Here in California, we're often in need of a good firefight to staunch a winter mudslide. And of course, as any fireman knows, popping some caps is the surest way to get the best of any wildfire.


Were you purposefully demonstrating your complete lack of understanding, or was that accidental?


Are you purposefully unaware of the use of sarcasm or just terminally obtuse?

Never mind, thanks to your incessant demonstrations, we all know the answer.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 11:32 am
I somehow guessed (it wasn't hard) that bill we were asked to support, despite its innocent title, would have to do with guns. After all, consider who started this thread.

Another legislator that the NRA has in its pocket. Is there any problem in this country that doesn't somehow threaten gun nuts? Such whining...
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 11:37 am
cjhsa wrote:
Did you see that group??? Shocked Wink


OBill could have probably taken you but he most likely would have let one of the women handle the light work.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:13 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
I somehow guessed (it wasn't hard) that bill we were asked to support, despite its innocent title, would have to do with guns. After all, consider who started this thread.

Another legislator that the NRA has in its pocket. Is there any problem in this country that doesn't somehow threaten gun nuts? Such whining...


So, you support the decision to disarm law abiding citizens who were simply trying to protect their property after Katrina?

That's what this is about. You can choose to believe in the 2nd amendment or not, but choosing not to doesn't mean it isn't the law. What it means is that you prefer to be a subject, instead of a citizen. I believe every law abiding citizen should have to own at least one gun. It should be your duty.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:15 pm
cjhsa wrote:
You mean protect themselves from the disorderly. C'mon Joe, ya wimp.

In a disaster situation, the lines between orderly and disorderly can be blurry. Someone taking food from a grocery store may be an opportunistic looter or it may be someone who hasn't eaten in three days. Disasters are dangerous and complicated enough without the citizenry being panicked, stupid, and armed.

cjhsa wrote:
I shoulda gone to the Chicago A2K gathering. I could have robbed everyone with just my finger.

That depends. I don't know where your finger has been.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:19 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
Disasters are dangerous and complicated enough without the citizenry being panicked, stupid, and armed.


Are you a politician? Ever work for Ray Nagin?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:26 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Are you a politician?

Good god, no. My political views are far too profound and nuanced ever to attract anything more than a small, cultish following.

cjhsa wrote:
Ever work for Ray Nagin?

Not that I'm aware of.

Any more inane questions that I can answer for you?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:31 pm
Well, the fact that you consider the populace "stupid" makes you an ideal fit for public service.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:35 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Well, the fact that you consider the populace "stupid" makes you an ideal fit for public service.

Quite the contrary. I'm confident that most politicians think far more highly of the general population than I do. They're the ones, after all, who thought that a fully armed citizenry was a good idea in the first place.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:44 pm
What?! You don't think it's a good idea that, in the event of a disaster, we all grab guns and race in a panic to the local 7/11 to duel to the death for the remaining Big Gulps and bad hot dogs?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 May, 2006 12:58 pm
I think gun ownership is for criminals or cowards...

If you are not doing anything wrong, what are you afraid of?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Support H.R. 5013
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 05:31:23