Denver Receives 873 NOLA Evacuees, 57 Are Ex-Felons

PittsburghAfterDark

PittsburghAfterDark

CAGiversary!
Article Last Updated: 09/11/2005 01:55:07 PM

57 evacuees to Colorado have felony convictions
The Denver Post and 9News

Aurora police have found that 57 of 873 Hurricane Katrina evacuees in Colorado have felony criminal records, according to 9News.

Those offenses include assaults, theft, sex offenses and murder, said Aurora interim Police Chief Terry Jones.

"The community does not have to be concerned," Jones said. "We think people are safe because all of these evacuees have served their sentences. None of them are wanted in Louisiana, there are no warrants out for anyone's arrest, and no one has broken any laws at Lowry."

Robert Thompson of the Mile High Chapter of the American Red Cross said he hopes the records of the 57 evacuees don't have an impact on donations.

"It's the reality," he said. "These are people from all walks of life who are here, and there are people with pasts in the way of criminal activity and there are many who are not."

The Transportation Security Administration suspended some of its security regulations on evacuation flights, spokeswoman Carrie Harmon said.

"In this national emergency, we've had to make accommodations for the evacuees trying to get out who, through no fault of their own, do not have IDs," she said.

As a precaution, Harmon said, federal air marshals were on every flight. When power went out for two days at the New Orleans airport, the evacuees were screened with hand wands, Harmon said. During screenings, the TSA confiscated more than 82 firearms, 400 knives and 250 other prohibited items, such as razors and box cutters, she added. (NOTE: That's one hell of an arsenal for 873 people!)

When evacuees arrived in Denver without identification, Aurora police began collecting names and Social Security numbers to conduct background checks.

The Colorado Bureau of Investigation also is fingerprinting hurricane survivors who volunteer. The CBI hopes the fingerprints will stop the evacuees from becoming victims of identity-theft by people who may find their wallets in the hurricane debris, said spokesman Lance Clem.

Deborah Sherman of 9News and Felisa Cardona of The Denver Post contributed to this report.
Link

Makes you all kinds of warm and fuzzy welcoming these people into your midsts doesn't it!
 
Being from Denver and having my wife's office about 1/2 mile from the evacuees.

I say 'meh'.

the reality is with this kind of operation you have to take all kinds of "questionable" people be they felons or , say, republicans.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Makes you all kinds of warm and fuzzy welcoming these people into your midsts doesn't it![/QUOTE]

Boy, you really brought back the first half of the 20th century back with that reference to "these people."

Was a whole lot better when they knew their place, wasn't it? Didn't have to worry about them moving into your neighborhood or dating your daughter. And if they want some decent treatment, turn the fire hose on 'em, or lynch 'em to set an example.

Jesus, PAD.
 
If you're suggesting that ex-felons who have served their time should have been left to fend for themselves in NO, can we go back in time and send G. Gordon Liddy and the rest of Nixon's cronies down there to Jefferson Parish?
 
Hmm. I'm glad to see that PAD has no faith in our criminal justice system, as evidenced by his fear of EX-felons. If they are released, if they have served their time, then our corrections system releases them under the presumption that they are PREPARED to reenter society.

If you can't deal with that, then I recommend you come up with a preferrable alternative. Why don't you start by not bitching about how much tax dollars the government wastes, since you're going to increase the budget exponentially if you don't think that felons should be released after their sentence is up.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Hmm. I'm glad to see that PAD has no faith in our criminal justice system, as evidenced by his fear of EX-felons. If they are released, if they have served their time, then our corrections system releases them under the presumption that they are PREPARED to reenter society.

If you can't deal with that, then I recommend you come up with a preferrable alternative. Why don't you start by not bitching about how much tax dollars the government wastes, since you're going to increase the budget exponentially if you don't think that felons should be released after their sentence is up.[/QUOTE]

See, that's the difference. I bitch about the state of ex prisoners, but I also suggest that the main focus should be rehabilitation, since punishment isn't going to do much once the persons released, and then an innocent civilian will have to deal with the result. PAD doesn't seem to care about making it so prisoners are less likely to go back to their old ways.

Though I don't think there is any presumption that they are prepared to reenter society, it's just that their time is up. Obviously being parolled or given an early release would assume that they're prepared though. Some countries have laws where the courts can be petitioned to keep an especially dangerous criminal in jail, but, as far as I know, we don't.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']During screenings, the TSA confiscated more than 82 firearms, 400 knives and 250 other prohibited items, such as razors and box cutters, she added. (NOTE: That's one hell of an arsenal for 873 people!)[/QUOTE]

I bet these people never planned to take a ride on an airplane in their lives, and consequently weren't aware of the rules.

In rural parts of America these various weapons are used for hunting (well, all except for the type of firearms that were probably confiscated - but then again I always took you for a fan of the second amendment)
 
[quote name='camoor']I bet these people never planned to take a ride on an airplane in their lives, and consequently weren't aware of the rules.

In rural parts of America these various weapons are used for hunting (well, all except for the type of firearms that were probably confiscated - but then again I always took you for a fan of the second amendment)[/QUOTE]

Wow, you learn something every day, even from a liberal, er... uhm... progressive.

I had no idea that New Orleans was rural and the residents there were dependent on personal weapons for hunting!

WOW!
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Wow, you learn something every day, even from a liberal, er... uhm... progressive.

I had no idea that New Orleans was rural and the residents there were dependent on personal weapons for hunting!

WOW![/QUOTE]

I doubt that residents were showing up with racoon-skin hats and hunting rifles.

However that highlights the problems with guns in this country - I mean I believe guns for hunting and protection are fine, but why do you need to carry concealed, highly powered weapons on your body?

Are you for more stringent gun control, forgive me for assuming you weren't but it would certainly be a surprise to me!
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Though I don't think there is any presumption that they are prepared to reenter society, it's just that their time is up. Obviously being parolled or given an early release would assume that they're prepared though. Some countries have laws where the courts can be petitioned to keep an especially dangerous criminal in jail, but, as far as I know, we don't.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense; people generally support deterrence policies; that is, is the punishment is harsh enough, nobody will commit the crime. It's been shown time and time again that it does not work that way. It's not that they are "prepared" to enter society, but that people seem to think that punishment, in and of itself, is sufficient to prevent a ex-con from recidivating. We don't care if they do well (as evidenced by complete indifference to Bush's proposal during SOTU 2003 that tax breaks be given to companies that hire ex-cons, and its subsequent never-been-brought-up-since) at all, and we don't seem to show a great deal of outrage at felon disenfranchisement, we don't seem to care about restrictions against sex offenders, ad nauseum. Society does think that, if punished harshly enough, then nobody will commit another crime (though 60%+ recidivism rates for all offenders certainly suggests otherwise).

I don't disagree with you about rehabilitation at all. But I do know the reality of how US citizens perceive corrections.
 
[quote name='camoor']I doubt that residents were showing up with racoon-skin hats and hunting rifles.

However that highlights the problems with guns in this country - I mean I believe guns for hunting and protection are fine, but why do you need to carry concealed, highly powered weapons on your body?

Are you for more stringent gun control, forgive me for assuming you weren't but it would certainly be a surprise to me![/QUOTE]

In all seriousness I could care less if these people were packing in New Orleans. I think only an insane person would have been unarmed in a situation like that. I get crap from friends and family all the time questioning why I "need" a firearm. I don't shoot for fun, hunt, shoot targets, skeet or trap. However I do own weapons that have one express purpose; killing people.

My shotgun is a Remington 870 Magnum Marine, sporting value, none. My rifle is an AR-15, sporting value, none. My pistol is a Beretta 92D, sporting value, minimal. People ask why I own them? New Orleans. It can happen.

It's very hard if not impossible to conceal a high powered weapon on your person. You're dealing with supersonic rounds at that point. Most handguns are subsonic. A high powered weapon needs a decent barrel length and thickness to ensure proper round ballistics and propellent discharge.

There really is no one in their right mind that isn't aware you can't take a firearm on an airplane. As far as gun controls for ex-felons? I thought it was always restricted, may be a state issue though. I know you can't buy a weapon legally here if you're an ex-felon.

Hey, I don't fault these people for being armed. Just trying to get on the plane with their weapons.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']

There really is no one in their right mind that isn't aware you can't take a firearm on an airplane. As far as gun controls for ex-felons? I thought it was always restricted, may be a state issue though. I know you can't buy a weapon legally here if you're an ex-felon.

Hey, I don't fault these people for being armed. Just trying to get on the plane with their weapons.[/QUOTE]


The question is if they had their firearm for protection in NO, what were they going to do with it before they got to the airport? I'm sure that they wouldn't have a chance to take it home and put it away. Should they have just dropped it on the ground for anyone to pick up/use?

Taking it to the airport and turning it in was probably the only option many had. I don't see a huge cause for concern.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Nonsense; people generally support deterrence policies; that is, is the punishment is harsh enough, nobody will commit the crime. It's been shown time and time again that it does not work that way. It's not that they are "prepared" to enter society, but that people seem to think that punishment, in and of itself, is sufficient to prevent a ex-con from recidivating. We don't care if they do well (as evidenced by complete indifference to Bush's proposal during SOTU 2003 that tax breaks be given to companies that hire ex-cons, and its subsequent never-been-brought-up-since) at all, and we don't seem to show a great deal of outrage at felon disenfranchisement, we don't seem to care about restrictions against sex offenders, ad nauseum. Society does think that, if punished harshly enough, then nobody will commit another crime (though 60%+ recidivism rates for all offenders certainly suggests otherwise).

I don't disagree with you about rehabilitation at all. But I do know the reality of how US citizens perceive corrections.[/QUOTE]

I never said that people didn't percieve punishment as deterrence, but deterrence is not rehabilitation, which is what I was talking about.
 
In all seriousness I could care less if these people were packing in New Orleans. I think only an insane person would have been unarmed in a situation like that. I get crap from friends and family all the time questioning why I "need" a firearm. I don't shoot for fun, hunt, shoot targets, skeet or trap. However I do own weapons that have one express purpose; killing people.

My shotgun is a Remington 870 Magnum Marine, sporting value, none. My rifle is an AR-15, sporting value, none. My pistol is a Beretta 92D, sporting value, minimal. People ask why I own them? New Orleans. It can happen.
Click to expand...

So you have it for protection, why do you need 3? Someone breaks into your home, do you decide your weapon on his/her size? Do you empty one and go back for another? The argument of protection loses something when you have multiple guns (and not a one per family member situation).
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']So you have it for protection, why do you need 3? Someone breaks into your home, do you decide your weapon on his/her size? Do you empty one and go back for another? The argument of protection loses something when you have multiple guns (and not a one per family member situation).[/QUOTE]

It all depends on distance.

AR-15 to defend at a distance of 50M or above, shotgun to defend close in territory; indoors, front or back doors, handgun to defend within 5M as a weapon of last resort.

Obviously the AR-15 needs to be merely displayed in urban unrest as it is the meanest looking one in the bunch with 30 round magazines. Sling one of those up and only the most insane will think of you as an easy mark.

The easy mark would immediately fall to you since you have proudly stated you know nothing about guns, have no interest in guns and will never educate yourself on how to properly defend yourself, your home or your family. When you're robbed of your ability to survive and ultimately killed you can look to the ceiling or sky with your dying breath and pass peaceably on knowing you did nothing to harm your fellow man.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']It all depends on distance.

AR-15 to defend at a distance of 50M or above, shotgun to defend close in territory; indoors, front or back doors, handgun to defend within 5M as a weapon of last resort.[/quote]

This has to be sarcastic. There's no need to defend yourself at 50m, and there's no time to change weapons quickly when your life is in real danger.


The easy mark would immediately fall to you since you have proudly stated you know nothing about guns, have no interest in guns and will never educate yourself on how to properly defend yourself, your home or your family. When you're robbed of your ability to survive and ultimately killed you can look to the ceiling or sky with your dying breath and pass peaceably on knowing you did nothing to harm your fellow man.
Click to expand...

There is no gun culture here. Yesterday in western MA I saw my first ever gun club, and, a few towns over, my second ever gun shop (outside of walmart and stuff, which probably sells them). The other gun store I saw years ago, and isn't anywhere near here. You don't hide from guns here, the only way to learn about them is to actively seek them out. I've never even seen anything around here advertising for the NRA, be it in magazines, papers, signs, pamphlets etc.

But, either way, at least I know I won't shoot someone I care about accidentally. And I go from losing my tv to getting shot just cause the robber saw my gun and they were a better shot.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']This has to be sarcastic. There's no need to defend yourself at 50m, and there's no time to change weapons quickly when your life is in real danger.[/QUOTE]

If I were able to swap out a SABOT round for an HE round in less than 3 seconds to destroy a bunker as opposed to an armored target it's not a joke.

Swapping weapons does not take long. When you have 10 acres of property dropping people at 50M or more is a useful skill. I could actually do it at 200M+ and still give a warning shot or two; having a 10x starlight scope on it makes it easy to do in any weather or day/night situation. Most people will have enough sense to turn the other way when they hear a supersonic crack of a 5.56MM round and see chunks of soil flying up to their knees.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']If I were able to swap out a SABOT round for an HE round in less than 3 seconds to destroy a bunker as opposed to an armored target it's not a joke.

Swapping weapons does not take long. When you have 10 acres of property dropping people at 50M or more is a useful skill. I could actually do it at 200M+ and still give a warning shot or two; having a 10x starlight scope on it makes it easy to do in any weather or day/night situation. Most people will have enough sense to turn the other way when they hear a supersonic crack of a 5.56MM round and see chunks of soil flying up to their knees.[/QUOTE]

You sound like those survivalist nuts who thinks he's going to have to defend his property from invasion by government forces.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You sound like those survivalist nuts who thinks he's going to have to defend his property from invasion by government forces.[/QUOTE]

Armed militia protects its New Orleans neighborhood

Band of neighbors survived Hurricane Katrina, then fought off looters.

By Bob Dart
WASHINGTON BUREAU
Saturday, September 10, 2005

NEW ORLEANS -- The Algiers Point militia put away its weapons Friday as Army soldiers patrolled the historic neighborhood across the Mississippi River from the French Quarter.

But the band of neighbors who survived Hurricane Katrina and then fought off looters has not disarmed.

"Pit Bull Will Attack. We Are Here and Have Gun and Will Shoot," said the sign on Alexandra Boza's front porch. Actually, said the woman behind the sign, "I have two pistols."

"I'm a part of the militia," Boza said. "We were taking the law into our own hands, but I didn't kill anyone."

She did quietly open her front door and fire a warning shot one night when she heard a loud group of young men approaching her house.

About a week later, she said, she finally saw a New Orleans police officer on her street and told him she had guns.

"He told me, 'Honey, I don't blame you,' " she said.

The several dozen people who did not evacuate from Algiers Point said that for days after the storm, they did not see any police officers or soldiers but did see gangs of intruders.

So they set up what might be the ultimate neighborhood watch.

At night, the balcony of a beautifully restored Victorian house built in 1871 served as a lookout point.

"I had the right flank," Vinnie Pervel said. Sitting in a white rocking chair on the balcony, his neighbor, Gareth Stubbs, protected the left flank.

They were armed with an arsenal gathered from the neighborhood: a shotgun, pistols, a flare gun and a Vietnam-era AK-47.

They were backed up by Gregg Harris, who lives in the house with Pervel, and Pervel's 74-year-old mother, Jennie, who lives across Pelican Street from her son and is known in Algiers Point as "Miss P."

Many nights, Miss P. had a .38-caliber pistol in one hand and rosary beads in the other.

"Mom was a trouper," Pervel said.

The threat was real.

On the day after Katrina blew through, Pervel was carjacked a couple of blocks from his house. A past president of the Algiers Point Association homeowners group, Pervel was going to houses that had been evacuated and turning off the gas to prevent fires.

A guy with a mallet "hit me in the back of the head," Pervel said. "He said, 'We want your keys.' I said, 'Here, take them.' "

Inside the white Ford van were a portable generator, tools and other hurricane supplies. A hurt and frustrated Pervel threw pliers at the van as it drove off and broke a back window.

Another afternoon, a gunfight broke out on the streets as armed neighbors and armed intruders exchanged fire.

"About 25 rounds were fired," Harris said.

Blood was later found on the street from a wounded intruder.

Not far away, Oakwood Center mall was seriously damaged in a fire caused by vandals.

"We were really afraid of fires. These old houses are so close together that if one was set afire, the whole street would all go up," Harris said. "We lived in terror for a week."

Their house is filled with antique furniture, and there's a well-kept garden and patio in back.

"We've been restoring this house for 20 years," Harris said.

There are gas lamps on the columned porch that stayed on during the storm and its aftermath. The militia rigged car headlights and a car battery on porches of nearby houses. Then they put empty cans beneath trees that had fallen across both ends of the block.

When someone approached in the darkness, "you could hear the cans rattle.

Then we would hit the switch at the battery and light up the street," Pervel said. "We would yell, 'We're going to count three, and if you don't identify yourself, we're going to start shooting.' "

They could hear people fleeing and never fired a shot.

During the days, the hurricane holdouts patrolled the streets protecting their houses and the ones of evacuees.

"I was packing," Robert Johns said. "A .22 magnum with hollow points and an 8 mm Mauser from World War II with armor-piercing shells."

Despite their efforts, some deserted houses in the neighborhood were broken into and looted, Pervel said.

Now the Algiers Point militia has defiantly declared it will not heed any orders for mandatory evacuation. The relatively elevated neighborhood area is across the Mississippi River from the city's worst flooded areas and has running water, gas and phone service.

"They say they're going to drag us kicking and screaming from our houses. For what? To take us to concentration camps where we'll be raped and killed," Ramona Parker said. "This is supposed to be America. We're honest citizens. We're not troublemakers. We pay our taxes."

"It would be cruel for the city to make us evacuate after what we've been through," Pervel said.

The roof was damaged on her house, and the rains left "water up to my ankles," Boza said. So she moved into her mother's home nearby.

She said she still has 42 bullets to expend before she'll be forcibly evacuated.

"Then I hope the men they send to pull me out are 6 feet 2 inches and really cute," she said. "I'll be struggling and flirting at the same time."
Link

It's okay that you don't get it. There are those that do. Fortunately they'll survive, you'll die or be left with nothing. Social Darwinism will play itself out.

That's okay that you call me a survialist nut. I have means to protect myself, my friends and family. Meanwhile when you're at wits end during civil unrest and being threatened and attacked and the cops don't come you can call the ACLU and tell them the police wouldn't protect you and yours.

You may be dead or left for dead but hey, you'll have your principles intact.
 
Ya know, they're nutcases who just happen to get in a situation where they can defend themselves:

Now the Algiers Point militia has defiantly declared it will not heed any orders for mandatory evacuation. The relatively elevated neighborhood area is across the Mississippi River from the city's worst flooded areas and has running water, gas and phone service.

"They say they're going to drag us kicking and screaming from our houses. For what? To take us to concentration camps where we'll be raped and killed," Ramona Parker said. "This is supposed to be America. We're honest citizens. We're not troublemakers. We pay our taxes."
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Ya know, they're nutcases who just happen to get in a situation where they can defend themselves:[/QUOTE]

While the comment cited was clearly out-of-touch with reality, there are several eloquent defences of the second amendment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

IMO the problem is that guns are now so cheap and ubiquitious that in the hands of madmen or organized crime they can be a great deal more destructive then the constitutional writers ever imagined.

Drivebys didn't happen back in the late 1700s, I mean have you ever tried to quickly load the powder in your musket as the horse buggy bounced along down the road?

Add to that the fact that if the government machine becomes a dictatorship in these modern times, it will eventually stomp opposition no matter how many guns with "starlight scopes" you may have, given the current state of military technology.
 
I usually disagree with PAD on almost everything he has ever said. But if you look past his thinly-veiled racism, you may realize that he does bring up an interesting topic.

Its one thing to help people who are stuck in the Houston Astrodome or some Salvation Army center.

The thing is: alot of people are letting these poor people stay in their homes. Although they may have the most honorable intentions, you really can't tell who is a felon or not. A lot of people are naive and they just allow any stranger from New Orleans stay in their homes.

I personally would donate money to the Katrina victims but I would never allow anyone of those victims to stay with me unless I knew them. I would think thats common sense but it seems that not everyone has common sense...
 
[quote name='Xevious']I usually disagree with PAD on almost everything he has ever said. But if you look past his thinly-veiled racism, you may realize that he does bring up an interesting topic.

Its one thing to help people who are stuck in the Houston Astrodome or some Salvation Army center.

The thing is: alot of people are letting these poor people stay in their homes. Although they may have the most honorable intentions, you really can't tell who is a felon or not. A lot of people are naive and they just allow any stranger from New Orleans stay in their homes.

I personally would donate money to the Katrina victims but I would never allow anyone of those victims to stay with me unless I knew them. I would think thats common sense but it seems that not everyone has common sense...[/QUOTE]

They are allowing free background checks to whoever wants one. They don't tell you the persons exact history, but the police look at it and make a recommendation.
 
It ever comes to the fact that the army is turned loose on the population I can tell you where I'll be.

"Hello Colonel? Captain **INSERT MY NAME HERE** calling. Yeah, I see that we're rounding up troublemakers and finally taking this country back. What? You need an Abrams platoon commander with combat experience in urban areas? Why you don't say! Yes, of course I can still pass military fit tests. Hellicopter coming to take me to Fort Knox? Outstanding! Any bag limit on liberal protestors? No? Please donate all comat and hardship pay to the NRA for me won't you? This one's on me."

Oh a man can only dream......
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']It ever comes to the fact that the army is turned loose on the population I can tell you where I'll be.

"Hello Colonel? Captain **INSERT MY NAME HERE** calling. Yeah, I see that we're rounding up troublemakers and finally taking this country back. What? You need an Abrams platoon commander with combat experience in urban areas? Why you don't say! Yes, of course I can still pass military fit tests. Hellicopter coming to take me to Fort Knox? Outstanding! Any bag limit on liberal protestors? No? Please donate all comat and hardship pay to the NRA for me won't you? This one's on me."

Oh a man can only dream......[/QUOTE]

Wow....it's really fascinating to see a true fascist fantasy played out right in front of my eyes.

Any swaskitas involved, PAD, or brownshirts? Or would that be too obvious?
 
m1028_pic1.jpg


I would love to see how many Cindy Sheehans 1,150 tungsten balls could silence.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I would love to see how many Cindy Sheehans 1,150 tungsten balls could silence.[/QUOTE]

Boy, I really hope you're just gigging us for a reaction.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://www.g2mil.com/Fall2005.htm

A rather striking editorial from the website PAD took the above pic from.[/QUOTE]

I tip my hat to your research, and await PAD's response to the opinions expressed by his chosen web site.....

I particularly like this part:

"Proof that the Iraq war is just a racket is overwhelming and this fact is accepted by most everyone around the world, except in the United States where the corporate media creates reality. No one on television will dare utter the truth that Iraq was better off with Saddam in charge, or that Iraq was invaded because of its oil reserves. No one will suggest that no member of the Bush administration was fired or has apologized for "mistakes" in Iraq because they did what they were ordered. In contrast, all the key players have been rewarded with medals and promotions for the successful conquest and plunder.

This is why racketeers insist that US troops must remain in Iraq for years to "finish the job." Americans were once told the "job" was to rid Iraq of WMDs, then the job became capturing Saddam Hussein, then the job was to establish democracy. Those jobs have been accomplished, so it is now obvious that the job of the US military was always to colonize Iraq and establish permanent military bases, a job which may take decades. While thoughtful analysts argue that withdrawing most US troops would weaken the insurgency and save money, they ignore the reality that withdrawing US troops has never been a goal."
 
[quote name='dennis_t']I tip my hat to your research, and await PAD's response to the opinions expressed by his chosen web site.....[/QUOTE]

Actually I think it's neat that PAD at least broadens his horizons past Fox news. At least he's ten times more informed then the inafamous SK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top