Gun rights amid natural disasters? You bet.By ALAN GOTTLIEB
Considerable ink is being used to question why the Second Amendment Foundation recently successfully challenged a regulation that prohibited firearms possession in federal emergency trailer parks, where victims of Hurricane Katrina were relocated.
Perhaps the most astonishing of these diatribes was an editorial appearing in the New York Daily News, which pontificated, "Even during natural disasters, the country's gun lovers fight for their right to bear arms."
This might come as a shock to the Daily News, but during and after natural disasters, or man-made ones, the people still retain possession of their civil rights, not to mention the natural rights of self-defense and survival. Also among those civil rights retained by people in the wake of a disaster is the right of a free press.
Although the Federal Emergency Management Agency had allegedly enforced this regulation for years, neither SAF nor our friends at the National Rifle Association were aware of it. Considering the warrantless searches for, and seizures of, firearms from law-abiding citizens in and around New Orleans after the hurricane -- and the fact that SAF and the NRA joined forces in a landmark lawsuit to stop it -- once we learned of this FEMA regulation, it was a natural and legitimate step to challenge it, and the NRA did likewise.
Fortunately, FEMA attorneys and their public relations staff responded to the challenge professionally and with great concern for the rights of disaster victims. When they reviewed and revised the regulations, FEMA attorneys came up with what we believe is a sensible rule that addresses both civil rights and public safety concerns. They did not drag their feet through bureaucratic red tape, and they should be congratulated for it.
The new rule is straightforward: "Use of firearms, air rifles, archery sets, or weapons of any kind are [sic] prohibited in the park." This guideline does not eliminate the means of defending one's self if necessary, nor does it condone careless or negligent behavior with firearms or other weapons.
Rights define our liberty, and we do not have the luxury of being able to pick and choose which ones we want to protect. Neither do our press critics. Suppose there had been a "news blackout" in the wake of Katrina, or Hurricanes Rita and Wilma. Would we expect the press to just remain silent and not pound the desk and stomp the floor? I think not, and rightfully so.
Just as the people have a right to know, they also have property rights and a right of personal protection. What would gun prohibitionists have the evacuees do -- leave their firearms in the disaster zone, perhaps to be stolen by looters and pillagers? That's hardly responsible.
If civil rights do not apply in an area of temporary housing set up by the federal government, where do they apply? If one right -- in this case, the right to bear arms -- can be so casually disregarded, which other right is next?
True, we don't allow firearms in federal buildings, schools and the like. But those places are not temporary residences for those displaced by some natural calamity. People do not live, or keep what little property of value they might have, in those facilities. Philosophically, we disagree with bans in government buildings -- certainly a discussion for another day.
Citizens do not check their civil rights at the gate of a temporary community where they may have to live for weeks, and perhaps months. To demand otherwise goes against everything America should stand for.
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/13035727.htm.
