WASHINGTON -- The House voted Tuesday to prevent law enforcement officers from confiscating legally owned guns during a national disaster or emergency.
Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana lawmaker who sponsored the bill, said firearms seizures after Hurricane Katrina left residents unable to defend themselves.
"Many of them were sitting in their homes without power, without water, without communication," he said. "It was literally impossible to pick up a phone and call 911."
The House voted 322-99 in support of the bill. Senators voted 84-16 earlier this month to include a similar prohibition in a homeland security funding bill.
The limitation would apply to federal law enforcement or military officers, along with local police that receive federal funds.
Here's the text of the act, and here's how everyone voted.
Frankly, you'd think that the 2nd amendment - the part of the Constitution that reads "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" - would have been enough here, but for some people I guess the rules against the government forcefully disarming the people need to be clearer.
Moonbat Democrats were, of course, outraged by this:
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., repeatedly called the bill "insane."
He and some Democrats said the bill might satisfy the gun lobby, but it would put people into more danger during already perilous disasters.
"The streets of an American city immediately after a disaster are no place to abandon common sense," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.
I don't know about the rest of you, but common sense tells me that in the midst of an emergency or a disaster the police have better things to be doing than rounding up guns from law-abiding citizens who have comitted no crimes.
Thankfully, it seems that most police officers were on board with this legislation:
The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed the measure. In a letter to Jindal, National President Chuck Canterbury said law enforcement officials concentrate on search and rescue during major disasters, and breakdowns in communications and transportation can lengthen police response times to calls.
"A law-abiding citizen who possesses a firearm lawfully represents no danger to law enforcement officers or any other first responder," Canterbury wrote.
This whole situation speaks to one of the basic differences between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives believe in individual responsibility, and generally assume that the citizens of this country are capable of conducting themselves in a responsible manner even with firearms. Liberals, on the other hand, generally don't trust citizens to be responsible for themselves and feel that they must use government powers to protect citizens from themselves.