Current Nebraska law grants broad powers to the governor, allowing him or her to ban the sale or transport of firearms during declared emergencies. Police and other government agents confiscated thousands of guns in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana, though some troops refused to confiscate guns. A current scandal in Canada involves the Royal Canadian Mounted Police breaking down doors to confiscate firearms in High River, Alberta after they had cordoned off the town during a flood. To prevent future confiscations . . .
Second Amendment supporters, including the NRA, pushed for legislative guarantees that such abuses would not occur again. Over two thirds of the states have passed such measures, and legislation is pending in Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Colorado, Washington, and Georgia.
The current Bill in Nebraska is LB390 and it removes firearms from the list of items that the governor may regulate during an emergency. The original bill would have banned the confiscation of guns by local authorities as well, but opponents of the original bill were able to remove that provision by using ridicule instead of logic. From the starherald.com:
The original bill would have banned any state or local official from confiscating legally held firearms and ammunition. Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha ridiculed the proposal in a hearing last year, suggesting facetiously that Nebraska should also prohibit the government from confiscating knives, hammers and steel-toed boots.
“How about lawn trimmers?” Chambers asked. “How about sickles that you use to cut grass with? That’s what I use, by the way, and it would make a very effective weapon.”
It’s difficult to see Chambers point. The fact that guns actually have been confiscated during emergencies in this country seems to have been lost on him. In any case, the provision was removed from the bill.
The NRA has requested that members support the watered down bill.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch
“Without infringement” means…without infringement.
And the odds of a government obeying such a law in a state of declared emergency? Our elected officials are not generally known for their willingness to abide by limitations on their power.
I’ve had to listen to Ernie Chambers for years on the local new, he is an ass hat who likes to play the race card whenever possible. Shocked he didn’t find a way to this time.
It is really sad that we have such statists and leftists who cannot read and understand the Second Amendment guarantees, that we need additional legislation to secure those guarantees. But, obviously, there are too many governors, mayors, and others (how are those all Democrats?) who want to confiscate our legal arms or restrict our access to them. In order to purchase a gun, we have to have a background check, provide clear and acceptable state approved ID (such as an official ID or driver’;s license) and have waiting times in many areas, yet the same Democrats which started these limitations do not want the same restrictions on voting, where we would have to present a driver’s license, where we would have to have a background check, and would have to wait a few days before we could vote (no registration at the polls when voting). Hypocrisy and Democrats are a different spelling for the same word.
“How about sickles that you use to cut grass with? That’s what I use, by the way, and it would make a very effective weapon.”
I would kindly refer Senator Chambers to the following video:
Some folks call it a Kaiser Blade, but I call it a Sling Blade.
I always wondered that. It MIGHT be effective against zombies if you were on the wall, but a machete would make a better weapon against the living than a sickle.
“The original bill would have banned the confiscation of guns by local authorities as well …”
Actually, the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution precludes government from confiscating anyone’s property without due process so this bill/law should be unnecessary.
Hint: due process means government conducts an open court proceeding to confiscate property; due process is NOT some Deputy deciding that a good person who has not harmed an innocent person nor has any obvious intention to harm any innocent person should not have a firearm.
The 4th Amendment has got to be almost unreadable now with all the brown streaks blotting it out.
The Fourth doesn’t exist anymore. The UnPatriot Act was the final nail in the coffin. All the government has to do is say the magic “t” word, inside the sub-basement of a high-security building, and you have no rights. At all.
Very true. “When in the course of human events….”
“The rifle is a weapon. Let there be no mistake about that. It is a tool of power, and thus dependent completely upon the moral stature of its user. It is equally useful in securing meat for the table, destroying group enemies on the battlefield, and resisting tyranny. In fact, it is the only means of resisting tyranny, since a citizenry armed with rifles simply cannot be tyrannized.”
if only government followed it’s own rules…
Those are for us to follow.
“How about sickles that you use to cut grass with? That’s what I use, by the way, and it would make a very effective weapon.”
I’ll bet he loves his sickle and his hammer.
Here’s how you take care of that issue – put it into your state Constitution:
CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
“Section 11. Right to keep and bear arms. The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person nor prevent passage of legislation providing minimum sentences for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, nor prevent the passage of legislation providing penalties for the possession of firearms by a convicted felon, nor prevent the passage of any legislation punishing the use of a firearm. No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition. Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony”.
Let me repeat that: “NO LAW SHALL IMPOSE LICENSURE, REGISTRATION OR SPECIAL TAXATION ON THE OWNERSHIP OR POSSESSION OF FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION. NOR SHALL ANY LAW PERMIT THE CONFISCATION OF FIREARMS, EXCEPT THOSE ACTUALLY USED IN THE COMMISSION OF A FELONY.”
We are working on the permit to carry part – we are going to be pushing for Constitutional Carry in the next few years.
In Colorado, the trial to repeal the magazine ban and the FFL requirement to sell, transfer or lend a firearm is going on now.
Hopefully, we can kick these laws to the curb like we did with the 3 senators.
Would like to see the $10 poll tax removed for each gun purchased or transferred in addition to the FFL fee.
The original bill would have banned any state or local official from confiscating legally held firearms and ammunition. Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha ridiculed the proposal in a hearing last year, suggesting facetiously that Nebraska should also prohibit the government from confiscating knives, hammers and steel-toed boots.
“How about lawn trimmers?” Chambers asked. “How about sickles that you use to cut grass with? That’s what I use, by the way, and it would make a very effective weapon.”
Sure, Chambers. Why not? I mean, if that’s what works for you. I’m being serious, too, not facetious. Why not prevent the confiscation of any common item, too, while we’re at it? 😉