Dan Gross Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin has approved the forced removal of New Orleans residents today, per CNN. If you ask me, this, among other things that have happened, has come a couple of days too late. I was watching a "live rescue" attempt last night on MSNBC. Turns out, after all the effort of the USCG crew, he decided to stay...all that time wasted, effort expended, risk taken...now they have to go back there and force him. This could get interesting. We've seen forced evacuations before (just recently, in fact), but I know I've never seen one done in several feet of water. A person who wanted to be trouble could cause major problems to air/boat crews trying to forcibly remove them...it's not like they can just drag them down the street...This could be interesting. This is necessary, but it's going to be rough on the rescue crews... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin has approved the forced removal of New Orleans residents today, per CNN. If you ask me, this, among other things that have happened, has come a couple of days too late. I was watching a "live rescue" attempt last night on MSNBC. Turns out, after all the effort of the USCG crew, he decided to stay...all that time wasted, effort expended, risk taken...now they have to go back there and force him. This could get interesting. We've seen forced evacuations before (just recently, in fact), but I know I've never seen one done in several feet of water. A person who wanted to be trouble could cause major problems to air/boat crews trying to forcibly remove them...it's not like they can just drag them down the street...This could be interesting. This is necessary, but it's going to be rough on the rescue crews... 431554[/snapback] I agree. We must also think that any pre-hurricane plan would have had to deal with this issue. The day of reckoning for dealing with these issues is here for NOLA and the local authorites. As much as I can blame them, I can see why they wanted to stick their head in the sand... In a way... Maybe that is why I haven't been as vocal towards pinning blame at that level. What a cluster eff this has become! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 We must also think that any pre-hurricane plan would have had to deal with this issue. It did. "Future plans include..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 You know, you just know, this is going to result in people complaining about the government using heavy-handed tactics to harass the downtrodden citizens of NO. I expect the race and class cards to come into play. We were already hearing that last week when the National Guard finally got in and restored order. Guess they weren't being polite enough for some of the people they were rescuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted September 7, 2005 Author Share Posted September 7, 2005 It did. "Future plans include..." 431595[/snapback] This page left intentionally blank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin has approved the forced removal of New Orleans residents today, per CNN. Nice job Ray. But maybe you should have thought of that a week ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 I'm not sure I understand the logic behind forcing people to do something they don't want to do. If that's their way of thinking, then !@#$ em and let's put our energy toward people who want the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 I'm not sure I understand the logic behind forcing people to do something they don't want to do. If that's their way of thinking, then !@#$ em and let's put our energy toward people who want the help. 431801[/snapback] Because they can disrupt recovery efforts. Even if you don't make the effort to support them in-place, they can still make nuisances of themselves...just look at how the looters ultimately disrupted the rescue work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Because they can disrupt recovery efforts. 431835[/snapback] Then we should be able to shoot them, no? I mean, seriously. Just !@#$ing shoot them. ...just look at how the looters ultimately disrupted the rescue work.Yeah, they were a real drain on the police department's efforts. If there weren't any looters, the police wouldn't have had to waste so much time and energy fighting them for a size 8 1/2 Converse All-Stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Then we should be able to shoot them, no? I mean, seriously. Just !@#$ing shoot them. Hog-tyin' 'em and throwing them in the back of a boat is kinder. And shooting them still takes resources away from recovery. Yeah, they were a real drain on the police department's efforts. If there weren't any looters, the police wouldn't have had to waste so much time and energy fighting them for a size 8 1/2 Converse All-Stars. 431860[/snapback] Well...no, they weren't, in large part because !@#$ing Nagin told his police force "Looters? Who gives a sh--..." It's not the force's fault they didn't stop the looters, they were told to worry about other things first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted September 7, 2005 Author Share Posted September 7, 2005 I'm not sure I understand the logic behind forcing people to do something they don't want to do. If that's their way of thinking, then !@#$ em and let's put our energy toward people who want the help. 431801[/snapback] My understanding is that they are at the point of diminishing returns with respect to search and rescue for people who "demonstrably" want rescue (sitting on rooftops, waving flags, etc). Now they are at the point where they are, for the most part, actively searching for people, with the exceptions being those that may have had a change of heart. I think the forced evacuation order should have been pretty well timed with both that shift plus the successful evacuation of the Super Dome. It was one thing to try to remove someone from an area that wasn't flooded who had some supplies and stick them in the squalor of the Super Dome/Convention Center, especially when you had people begging for help in getting rescued. Now it's time to get everyone out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Except the military is now saying they will not participate in forced evacs. It isn't their job and they aren't doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Except the military is now saying they will not participate in forced evacs. It isn't their job and they aren't doing it. 432039[/snapback] Including the National Guard? I can see the DoD saying that, and agree...but the LA Guard is another story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Including the National Guard? I can see the DoD saying that, and agree...but the LA Guard is another story... 432048[/snapback] I thick it's just DoD. Remember though there is Arkansas guard helping out as well. I assume they fall under DoD control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Except the military is now saying they will not participate in forced evacs. It isn't their job and they aren't doing it. 432039[/snapback] Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they have to do whatever the Commander-in-Chief tells them to do? And does the CinC have an opinion as to whether it's the military's job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they have to do whatever the Commander-in-Chief tells them to do? And does the CinC have an opinion as to whether it's the military's job? 432060[/snapback] The military is not allowed to perform law enforcement on US soil without a change in law. This falls under law enforement and therefore the CINC cannot give that order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 The military is not allowed to perform law enforcement on US soil without a change in law. This falls under law enforement and therefore the CINC cannot give that order. 432066[/snapback] Thanks, that makes more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Thanks, that makes more sense. 432070[/snapback] Than what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 The military is not allowed to perform law enforcement on US soil without a change in law. This falls under law enforement and therefore the CINC cannot give that order. 432066[/snapback] There are exceptions to that, I believe. Our own resident expert on posse comitatus (BiB, who deals with it almost daily) said earlier that in a declared emergency posse comitatus can be suspended. Hardly matters...the order for forced evacuations didn't come from the President. I don't even think it came from the LA governor...I've only heard it uttered by idiot-boy Nagin. Whatever the circumstances, he sure as hell can't command DoD to ignore posse comitatus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Than what? 432072[/snapback] Than your first statement ("it's not their job and they're not doing it.") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts