Skip to comments.
U-S military tells Iraqis to turn in all guns or face arrest
Associated Press ^
| 05-15-03
Posted on 05/15/2003 10:53:17 AM PDT by Brian S
Baghdad, Iraq-AP -- The U-S military is now telling Iraqis they cannot own or sell guns. Any Iraqi who does faces arrest, according to a new radio spot running in the country.
Lieutenant General David McKiernan, who is commanding U-S forces on the ground, says a new set of laws in Iraq are aimed at rebuilding law and order.
One problem U-S forces have is the tens of thousands of weapons Saddam Hussein's government gave out in its final days in power. Many ended up in the hands of looters or criminals.
McKiernan has issued a statement saying coalition forces will hunt down those people -- whom he calls a threat to everyone in Iraq. He is urging any Iraqi who owns a firearm to turn it in to coalition forces.
TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: arms; bang; iraq; iraqifreedom; looting; order
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-76 next last
1
posted on
05/15/2003 10:53:17 AM PDT
by
Brian S
To: Brian S
bad idea. unenforceable and will be taken the wrong way by the locals. I'd love to see what the Army has determined as the likelihood of this having any sort of "success."
2
posted on
05/15/2003 10:55:44 AM PDT
by
KantianBurke
(The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
To: Brian S; newgeezer
2nd ammendment ping.
3
posted on
05/15/2003 10:56:33 AM PDT
by
biblewonk
(Spose to be a Chrissssstian)
To: KantianBurke
I'd love to see what the Army has determined as the likelihood of this having any sort of "success." My guess is that this step gives the army some leverage against any irregulars or armed looters they encounter. Someone who stashes an AK under their bed probably won't have to worry.
4
posted on
05/15/2003 10:56:53 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: Brian S
Agreed. Awful idea. The guns should only be taken from the bad guys.
The Iraqi people have a right to self-defense from criminal attack.
No state can legitimately remove that right from an otherwise peacable citizen.
This policy will foment resentment.
5
posted on
05/15/2003 10:58:47 AM PDT
by
sargon
To: dirtboy
Won't looters and criminals be the least likely to obey such an order? And why should the law abiding citizens in Iraq, who clearly have a need to possess weapons for self defensive purposes, be rendered defenseless?
6
posted on
05/15/2003 11:00:20 AM PDT
by
KantianBurke
(The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
To: KantianBurke
If this is true they have just started gulf war III. The lack of resistance earlier was because the people wanted to be free of Sadaam, they won't tolerate our BS like this.
To: Brian S
Bring the boys back home.
8
posted on
05/15/2003 11:04:02 AM PDT
by
JohnGalt
(They're All Lying)
To: Brian S
Consider this to be a "trial ballon" for when the gun banners get their way in the US (with the help of George bush.) The army gets to practice confiscating guns from civilians and the politicians get the troops used to the idea that taking peoples possessions is a lawful order. This is going to get real ugly sooner or later (and I don't mean just the way Henry Waxman and Diane Feinswine look)
9
posted on
05/15/2003 11:06:50 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: KantianBurke
Won't looters and criminals be the least likely to obey such an order? They are the most likely to be carry a weapon in the streets where the troops are trying to keep order. We'll have to see how this plays out.
10
posted on
05/15/2003 11:12:32 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: Brian S
Lieutenant General David McKiernan Fire him.
11
posted on
05/15/2003 11:13:48 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: from occupied ga
Consider this to be a "trial ballon" for when the gun banners get their way in the USConsider this to be nothing of the sort.
12
posted on
05/15/2003 11:14:02 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: from occupied ga
Agreed. They would do this just as summarily and quickly right here.
13
posted on
05/15/2003 11:15:48 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: KantianBurke
bad idea. unenforceable and will be taken the wrong way by the locals. I'd love to see what the Army has determined as the likelihood of this having any sort of "success." I predict 100% success if they limit it to "anyone who is not a policeman and waving a gun in public will be shot without prior warning."
(Pretty much what you would expect in any first world country).
14
posted on
05/15/2003 11:16:07 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(Californians are as dumm as a sack of rocks)
To: RightWhale
Fire him.On what grounds, denying Iraqis their 2nd Amendment Rights? I hate to break this to you, but most of the guns and military weapons in the hands of Iraqis are probably in the hands of former Baath Party members, and it makes sense to try and disarm that bunch, or else they'll just pick up where they left off when we leave. I don't think some schmoo with an AK under the bed without a connection to the Baathists has to worry about this.
15
posted on
05/15/2003 11:16:10 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: dirtboy
Consider this to be nothing of the sort.You have some personal guarantee from Bush that it isn't?
16
posted on
05/15/2003 11:16:30 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: biblewonk
All guns, or just long guns? I wonder how many handguns there are in Iraq. The story speaks of military weapons. So, I wonder about the details.
17
posted on
05/15/2003 11:16:51 AM PDT
by
newgeezer
(Japan says it didn't invade US after Pearl Harbor because our citizens are armed.)
To: dirtboy
Fire his boss, too.
18
posted on
05/15/2003 11:17:06 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: from occupied ga
You have some personal guarantee from Bush that it isn't?You have some kind of factual information that it is? You're making the claim strictly as your unsubstantiated opinion, whereas our soldiers are enforcing this regulation under martial law as an occupying force - a situation we don't have here.
19
posted on
05/15/2003 11:25:39 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: RightWhale
I find the timing when the media is starting the drumroll for expanding the semiauto ban to be suspicious
20
posted on
05/15/2003 11:25:59 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: RightWhale
Fire his boss, too.On what grounds? I suppose you want to file your own war crimes charges against Tommy Franks in Belgium for the crime of disarming what is left of Saddam's party structure?
21
posted on
05/15/2003 11:26:22 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: dirtboy
what is left of Saddam's party structure Nothing left. Dissolved last week.
22
posted on
05/15/2003 11:29:06 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: dirtboy
Some of the other news threads pertaining to Iraq has most US solidiers bunkering down every night. If US troops leave the vicinity at dusk, I'm guessing that's when the criminals with the "illegal" arms will move around.
23
posted on
05/15/2003 11:29:30 AM PDT
by
KantianBurke
(The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
To: dirtboy
You're making the claim strictly as your unsubstantiated opinion,Yep - My opinon is that bureaucrats and politicians here can't be trusted. You're expecting us to trust them and all will be well - gimme a break. You don't really believe this do you?
whereas our soldiers are enforcing this regulation under martial law as an occupying force - a situation we don't have here.
A situation that can change in a heartbeat here thanks to the horribly misnamed "patriot" act. (anti - patriot tyranny act is more like it) and its 50 clones at the state level that suspund all of your rights at the whim of some bureaucrat.
24
posted on
05/15/2003 11:30:22 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: RightWhale
Nothing left. Dissolved last week. Ordering it is one thing. De-fanging it is another. You think the Baathists said, "Aw, shucks, we're illegal now, let's just roll over and be good Iraqis?"
25
posted on
05/15/2003 11:30:32 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: Brian S
What an idiotic idea. Gun confiscation in Iraq works the same as gun confiscation in the U.S. The good guys turn theirs in and the bad guys get to keep theirs. The guys a general and he can't figure that out. No offense General, from a retired Warrant Officer, but where did you get the mush for brains?
26
posted on
05/15/2003 11:30:50 AM PDT
by
ladtx
("...the very obsession of your public service must be Duty, Honor, Country." D. MacArthur)
To: from occupied ga
Seems the gun banners are right on top of this one. Got a bad feeling.
27
posted on
05/15/2003 11:30:57 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: dirtboy
we're illegal now, let's just roll over Yes.
28
posted on
05/15/2003 11:32:23 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: from occupied ga
Yep - My opinon is that bureaucrats and politicians here can't be trusted. You're expecting us to trust them and all will be well - gimme a breakI don't trust them at all. You, however, think that because the army is trying to control a conquered country, that its actions are a test for here. That is a stretch, at the least.
A situation that can change in a heartbeat here thanks to the horribly misnamed "patriot" act. (anti - patriot tyranny act is more like it) and its 50 clones at the state level that suspund all of your rights at the whim of some bureaucrat.
Please show the exact provisions in the Patriot Act that allow for such (hint - I have my own problems with such act. But I try to base my criticisms on the actual text of the act, not speculation).
29
posted on
05/15/2003 11:32:45 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: RightWhale
Yes.I've got some prime swampland to sell you, then. I'll even throw in some 30-round magazines manufactured in 1996.
30
posted on
05/15/2003 11:33:50 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: dirtboy
its actions are a test for here. That is a stretch, at the least. Agreed. It is a stretch. My misgivings come from the fact that Iraq is liberated not conquered, and the cooperation of the citizens is voluntary. They must be prepared to govern themselves very soon, and this order destroys the urge to cooperate.
31
posted on
05/15/2003 11:36:50 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: RightWhale
My misgivings come from the fact that Iraq is liberated not conquered, and the cooperation of the citizens is voluntary. They must be prepared to govern themselves very soon, and this order destroys the urge to cooperate.What I am hoping is that the troops use this edict in a discriminatory manner - against any former Baathists - while ignoring the other 90 percent of the population. If they do go house to house against everyone, then I do agree, it will be problematic.
32
posted on
05/15/2003 11:40:20 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: dirtboy
That's good. We share the same misgivings. But the Ba'ath Party is dissolved. Obviously many were card-carrying members, but most are ordinary people trying to get by in life and are already adapting to the new order. No need to poke a hornet's nest.
33
posted on
05/15/2003 11:43:21 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: Brian S
How do you say "Molon Labe" in Arabic?
To: dirtboy
Trust 'em if you want. Your funeral.
I believe there is a part of the act that allows the atty gnl to declare any organization a terrorist organization and its members subject to arrest without any probable cause. In GA the state equivalent allows the governor to declare a state of emergency for various reason and confiscate firearms (just exactly when you'd need 'em)
35
posted on
05/15/2003 11:46:20 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: samuel_adams_us
"If this is true they have just started gulf war III. The lack of resistance earlier was because the people wanted to be free of Sadaam, they won't tolerate our BS like this."
I strongly encourage all Iraqis who feel so led to wage all out war against us.
After all, that makes it much easier for us to be able to kill all of their trouble makers.
Even with anti-aircraft missiles, AAA, a 300 fighter-strong airforce, several thousand tanks, 400,000 regular Army, and 600,000 Iraqi Amry reserves, the entire combined might of any Arab nation can last in battle against the U.S. for only as long as we deem to permit them to breath.
The notion that suddenly Arab civilians and irregulars are going to magicly overwhelm U.S. Army forces simply because we are Enforcing martial law is along the same lines as the "journalists" who claimed that Bush was wrong to land on the Lincoln and that our forces were bogged down in a "quagmire".
Guns, by the way, are for free people. After your Army has been pulverized and your country has been conquered, then you are no longer a free people. Instead, you are a loser. You lost your country and you lost your rights, with the exceptions that we may grant you.
Thus, losing a war is never a good idea. The corallary to that thought is that playing Mr. Macho Man by "standing up" to America is likewise a very bad idea.
Now, due to the fact that Americans are decent people, we'll return your rights to you as we approve of the gradual steps that Iraqis take toward bringing back their own government rule.
But until then, Iraq is under martial law for all practical intents and purposes, and thus the Iraqis will either comply with our directives or die.
They certainly won't be beating us in any new battles.
36
posted on
05/15/2003 11:47:28 AM PDT
by
Southack
(Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: RightWhale
Obviously many were card-carrying members, but most are ordinary people trying to get by in life and are already adapting to the new order. Unfortunately, their position and power in society was tied to their membership in the power structure, and I think many are itching to restore that power structure by force once we are gone. I think the army needs to disarm certain segments of the population as a result. We'll just have to see how this goes down. It'll be interesting, one way or the other.
37
posted on
05/15/2003 11:47:42 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: dirtboy
This is a tough one. Maybe they should try one of those buy-back programs...and offer them, say, a fifty pound bag of rice.
To: from occupied ga
Trust 'em if you want. Your funeral. Please show me where I said I trust them, dude. You have pre-programmed responses to debates, I see.
I believe there is a part of the act that allows the atty gnl to declare any organization a terrorist organization and its members subject to arrest without any probable cause.
You THINK? How about you provide a cite?
FWIW, I'm against the repeal of sunset provisions for the Patriot Act. I think Justice should show how the individual provisions were used and, if some actually are beneficial and have a limited impact on rights, they should be extended on a case-by-case basis. The rest should be allowed to die.
39
posted on
05/15/2003 11:52:09 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: Fred Mertz
This is a tough one. Maybe they should try one of those buy-back programs...and offer them, say, a fifty pound bag of rice.Or a deck of cards...
40
posted on
05/15/2003 11:52:54 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: from occupied ga
the state equivalent allows the governor to declare a state of emergency It's always been that way. Maybe not in black and white on some book in the legal library, but it's always been there. But America such an action would be a pipe-dream. Been tried. Lexington, Mass.
41
posted on
05/15/2003 11:54:03 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Post no Bills)
To: Brian S
Well, I guess it's true, we are exporting Liberty and Freedom to the Iraqi people, how could I have been so wrong? Blackbird.
To: dirtboy
Please show me where I said I trust them, dude. You have pre-programmed responses to debates, I seeYou didn't say to trust 'em, your response implied it.
cite
Haven't got the time or the inclination to search the damn thing again. How about you just believe me on the GA equivalent. Or alternatively you can just trust the bureaucarts that there wouldn't be any such provisions in the law.
43
posted on
05/15/2003 11:56:15 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: BlackbirdSST
Well, I guess it's true, we are exporting Liberty and Freedom to the Iraqi people, how could I have been so wrong? Guns without the rule of law equals anarchy and mob rule, not liberty. Check out Somalia if you think otherwise.
Right now, there are probably lots of remaining arms caches and former Baathists just sitting on weapons, waiting for us to leave so they can force their way back into power. Once we restore the rule of law and neutralize what is left of Baathist power, then we can look at a Constitutional republic including the equivalent of 2nd A rights. Until then, our troops are legally an occupying power, Iraq is under martial law and this action makes sense if applied in an intelligent, controlled manner.
44
posted on
05/15/2003 11:57:26 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: RightWhale
The gun confiscation provisions were spelled out. In GA you can carry in your car without a permit (and I do). Under emergency, police would be legally allowed to seize any weapons they found. The last thing we need is more power to any government - state or federal.
45
posted on
05/15/2003 11:59:07 AM PDT
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: from occupied ga
You didn't say to trust 'em, your response implied it.Help me here. Please show me where my statement I don't trust them at all in reply #29 somehow implies trust. I obviously don't have your superior language skills.
46
posted on
05/15/2003 11:59:20 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: from occupied ga
Under emergency, police would be legally allowed to seize any weapons they found.Such provisions are typically reserved for riot situations.
47
posted on
05/15/2003 11:59:59 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Tagline currently experiencing technical difficulties, please stand by)
To: Brian S
How can we say we are bringing freedom when we won't allow a proper Bill of God Given Natural Rights? MUST remove ALL Leftists, Klintonistas, and Yellow Bellied "Moderates" from all departments, pronto! They are giving Bush a major black eye!
48
posted on
05/15/2003 12:01:26 PM PDT
by
GOP_1900AD
(Un-PC even to "Conservatives!" - Right makes right)
To: KantianBurke
Haven't you learned anything from anti-gun advocates? It is the responsibility of the police to defend you!
49
posted on
05/15/2003 12:02:08 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
To: dirtboy
50
posted on
05/15/2003 12:04:09 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
(the gift is to see the truth)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-76 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson