Anyone that has followed the antics of Bill O’Reilly for any appreciable amount of time knows that at best he is a Neo Con, not a true Conservative. I won’t bother going into all the various positions he has held over time that convinces me of that.
What real Conservative would advocate taking away, by government force no less, any persons ability to properly and effectively defend themselves and what is theirs than during times of extreme upheaval?
I’ll give the man kudos for his work on crimes against children, but other than that? He is yet another example of broken clock politics…
As we have often reported, in the wake of the illegal gun confiscations in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, NRA focused its attention on legislation to amend existing emergency-powers statutes to guarantee that local authorities never again attempt the confiscation of lawfully owned firearms during states of emergency.
As you know, following Hurricane Katrina, many New Orleans residents legally armed themselves to protect their lives and property from civil disorder. With no way to call for help, and police unable to respond, lawful citizens were able to defend themselves and their neighbors against looters, arsonists and other criminals.
However, just when these people needed their guns for self-protection the most, New Orleans’s Police Superintendent ordered the confiscation of firearms, allegedly under a state emergency-powers law. Fortunately, an NRA lawsuit brought an end to the seizures, and subsequent NRA-backed legislation ensured the gun confiscation travesty would not repeat itself.
Unfortunately, many states have “emergency powers” laws that give the government permission to suspend or limit gun sales, and to prohibit or restrict citizens from transporting or carrying firearms. In some states, authorities are authorized to seize guns outright from citizens who’ve committed no crime, and who would then be defenseless against disorder.
Within the past few weeks, a state of emergency was declared in King, North Carolina following a relatively heavy snowstorm. As a result of the emergency declaration, local residents were banned from carrying firearms in their vehicles.
Entering into the fray this week was Bill O’Reilly, host of The O’Reilly Factor, on Fox News.
In a February 18, interview that discussed, in part, the confiscation of legally-owned guns during a declared state of emergency (as was the case in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina), O’Reilly affirmed his support of such confiscations.
When it was explained to O’Reilly that whether or not there’s a state of emergency, it’s still unconstitutional to confiscate lawfully-owned guns from honest citizens wanting to defend themselves, the Fox talking head retorts, “That’s a pretty extreme position.”
Perhaps in your opinion, Bill. But for most law-abiding Americans, the notion that the government can suspend the Constitution and leave citizens without the most effective means of self-defense just because of a snowstorm or hurricane — well, that would qualify as an extreme position.
Of course, no one condones the mindless violence of those who would loot a helpless city, or shoot at rescue workers. But one reason for the citizens to retain a legal right to arms, is precisely because the government has no legal duty to protect them. Legislative bodies can, and should, act to protect the self-defense rights of citizens at the times when those rights are most important.
NRA-ILA was instrumental in passing H.R. 5013–the “Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act,”–federal legislation to protect gun owners’ rights during emergencies. And we continue to fight for state legislation to do the same. NRA-ILA has successfully passed Emergency Powers legislation in 28 states since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and we will not rest until we reform all emergency powers laws to prohibit these types of arbitrary attacks on Second Amendment rights.
And yes, regular readers know that I think pretty much the same thing about the NRA…
Tags: Bill O'Reilly, faux conservatives, Gun Control, H.R. 5013, News, NRA ILA, Politics
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 
February 21, 2010 at 05:13
I thought I had heard O’Really say some truly stupid stuff before but that one took the cake, but then I only watch when he’s going to have Miller on or Laura Ingram is substituting for him because he’s usually too much of a pompous windbag for me 🙂
LikeLike
February 21, 2010 at 15:11
And that’s my Merry! Insulting all the decent pompous wind bags on earth!
LMAO!
LikeLike
February 22, 2010 at 13:20
Yup, I’m mucho disappointed with O’Reilly too. He’s just too willing to “compromise” the law if he “thinks” it’s wrong. He disagreed with the Weihl lawyer lady the night before about the ruling re. the 17yr old girl performing “art” even though she was reading from “the LAW” too. Either someone believes in the rule of law or not. Don’t like it, work to change the law. But don’t criticize a judge that actually rules IAW the law vs being an activist and making law from the bench. In the Oathkeepers segment, O’Reilly mentioned that the Constitution allows the President to suspend Habeaus Corpus seemingly as justification for suspension of fundamental rights during emergencies. WRONG! First, the authorization for suspension of the Writ of Habeaus Corpus is found in Article I, Sec. 9. Art. I deals with Legislative powers. Second, it specifically states “…shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of REBELLION OR INVASION [emphasis mine] the public safety MAY [emphasis mine] require it.” So, the President has no such power. And, if public safety is the overriding government consideration, I would argue that the peaceable, law-abiding public would be LESS SAFE if denied their God-given, fundamental human right to self-defense. He even admitted that there were gangs of looters and criminals running around armed at that time. So, public safety is increased by disarming the peaceable, law-abiding citizens such as the OLD LADY that was IN HER HOME with a small revolver and was criminally assaulted by illegitimate government thugs and disarmed!? That’s nuts if you ask me. No government on the face of the Earth has the LEGITIMATE authority to disarm the people. “… all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the ….” Since all men (including women!) have the Right to Life then they logically have the Right to defend that Life. O’Reilly is an elitist and he’s grown increasingly arrogant as his ratings have increased. We can get his attention if we can effectively bring his ratings down significantly. He’s definitely NOT “looking out” for the people! Nor is he supporting the US Constitution except when he “thinks” it’s right. You cannot pick and choose when or what parts you support. You either support it all or you risk loss of all protections found therein. Sorry for being so verbose.
LikeLike
February 22, 2010 at 17:32
Now, why am I thinking Paladin is holding back?
LikeLike
September 1, 2011 at 03:25
25mbits…
Bill O’Reilly a whackjob fake conservative… « Conservative Libertarian Outpost…
LikeLike