Armed Looters in Fur Coats Victimized Hospital Workers

[GalvestonDuck]

Excuse me people but this sounds like a false rumor. FUR COATS in the heat and humidity of New Orleans. Give me a break.

Ditto that...and in all that water?

[inotherwords]

I've heard a number of reports that have stated their number one priority is to get the people still alive out of the city, and that dealing with looters and with the dead are not on their list right now. But when these criminals start endangering the innocent people still left, I think they'll start cracking down.

I do think if they start shooting looters they'll be having a lot of people accusing them racism in no time flat and distorting the issue at hand. It's a formula for a huge ax to grind, and they probably want to avoid that.

They can't exactly arrest people, because there's no place to put them or extra personnel to watch over them. I saw a bunch of prisoners from one evacuated jail being held on an overpass. It probably would have been easy for them all to overpower the guards, but there was no place for them to go, they were surrounded by water.

[Wacahootaman]

Looting is just the beginning. Once you have anarchy, it becomes a slippery slope.

Murder and rape are next.

[Miss Mary]

It is a disgusting scene being played out in NO. There was video of people roaming around a Walmart taking whatever they wanted knowing they are on camera not caring at all. These people are disgusting. There was another clip of a female cop trying to apprehend a male on the street and he didn't give up. He got away. Thank god he didn't have a weapon. Where was her gun. These are not the people who are stealing food because they are hungry these are the msifits of society who don't have any regard for anyone but themselves. It makjes me want to hurl. These should have been the people floating in the water. Maybe that is harsh but it is what it is.

I saw that video and I was shocked too. They looked right into the camera! I also saw the brave female cop trying to apprehend a thief. That took guts. The scene down there looks as if the world has just gone mad.



Mary

[nativeflacracker]

Why is anyone surprised by the actions these people are taking? They are garbage! They are taking advantage of a bad situation plain and simple. They will say they had nothing before this happened and they are an oppressed people so it's owed to them. I say just corral them with their stolen material items and force them into deep water until they drown! They are taking the focus away from the search and rescue which is disgusting. I heard one reporter (while watching the looting) say "Where are their parents?" Gee, that's their parents right next to them leading the way! This lawlessness is taught from one generation to the next..don't you people get it?

[Miss Mary]

I'll tell you what though, their shocking behavior is a teaching example for your children to see (if not too young). We had this discussion last night with our 15 yr old daughter - I said I would only permit us to take water, bare necessities in a situation like this. And I'd probably search my pockets for money, to leave any amount in return (but a looter would come along and take my money I'm sure). She agreed, she could never steal like that.

Sad at what level these people will stoop.

Mary

[bvigal]

It's a fact of disasters that the lawless will use the opportunity to advance themselves. It always happens. The greater the devastation which demands resources for rescues, the larger the problem will be.

If you talk to survivors of Hurricane Andrew they will tell you stories of armed 'bandits' roaming the streets of homestead, visiting each house, even those with the owners "camped out" and taking whatever they liked. Only those homeowners with a gun were able to stop their remaining possessions from being grabbed. Everyone else was helpless.

All emergency management training/planning includes the fact of looting, it is never a surprise. It is also a fact that resources are limited and efforts must be staged according to priority - saving the most lives as quickly as possible. The National Guard was staged before the disaster. See on tv the chinook helicopters operating from the SuperDome parking lot, plucking people from roofs?

The primary rule of search and rescue is, do not put your crews in jeopardy. And do not risk creating the need for an additional rescue, or risk precious rescue personnel becoming unavailable assets. In some places water is still rising. It would irresponsible to put people at risk just to keep the law. Police are assisting in rescue activities. Starting a shooting war with armed criminals may not be prudent. The criminals will not be airlifted, and that is what they deserve. The longer they wade around in that horrific water to grab more loot, the greater the likelihood they will pay for their actions with some form of disease or injury.

Though we look at the looters on camera, and wish the 82nd (or someone like them) would parachute in and begin shooting, that is simply not practical. If they come, their disbursement and tasks will be carefully managed to coordinate with other agencies, and to provide the maximum benefit to the community. At some point, rescue operations will give way to more deployment to maintain order.

While it's easy for the tv cameras to shoot individual scenes and then paint a picture which appears local authorities are idiots or helpless, I can assure you that's not true. They may be overwhelmed, and their emergency plan may not be progressing the way it was written (they never do!), much more is going on behind the scenes we don't know about. Tasking of resources is no doubt working, interrupted by the usual unexpected snafus. Let's give these people our patient confidence, rather than couch quarterbacking. After all, they deserve it.

[blueeyes_austin]

No one is denying that looting is a fact of life in these situations. What many of us were POed about late Monday and early Tuesday was that the local police force did not take aggressive measures from the outset against the looters. That would at least have held down the problem in the CBD and the Quarter (although it wouldn't do a lot of good in East New Orleans).

No, we were told, these are poor people, no food, etc., etc., etc. How could we POSSIBLY favor shooting them for possessions?

But that was never the point. Aggressive force in the beginning would have helped slow the spiral into anarchy.

[inotherwords]

No, we were told, these are poor people, no food, etc., etc., etc. How could we POSSIBLY favor shooting them for possessions?

No. What "we" were told by authorities (repeatedly) is that they were focusing 100% on rescuing people and not expending resources on looters or recovering bodies. That was their choice based on the resources they had available.

I did not hear any authorities saying what you claim here, and I was watching local news feeds.

There's a big difference between hungry people obtaining food or toilet paper, etc., and the harder-core looters going after jewelry, furs, drugs, etc. If you can't see that then you're missing a compassion gene somewhere.

Thank you bvigal for a rational post on the subject.

[blueeyes_austin]

I'm referring to many of the posters here.

And I'll say this...if you don't see how allowing looting of a drug store and a supermarket leads to anarchy then you are missing a realism gene.

[bvigal]

No one is denying that looting is a fact of life in these situations. What many of us were POed about late Monday and early Tuesday was that the local police force did not take aggressive measures from the outset against the looters. That would at least have held down the problem in the CBD and the Quarter (although it wouldn't do a lot of good in East New Orleans).

No, we were told, these are poor people, no food, etc., etc., etc. How could we POSSIBLY favor shooting them for possessions?

But that was never the point. Aggressive force in the beginning would have helped slow the spiral into anarchy.

Yes, your point is well taken, and I agree with you!! Aggressiveness would help stop some looting.

However, I just have one question. Let's pretend you are in charge of the decision-making, and you order law enforcement to use force. After the cop shoots the robber, what does he do - leave the bleeding or dead victim where he lay, or call in precious resources to transport him to limited medical resources which are already overtaxed trying to help innocent victims? It's your call, what would you do?

[inotherwords]

I'm referring to many of the posters here.

And I'll say this...if you don't see how allowing looting of a drug store and a supermarket leads to anarchy then you are missing a realism gene.

One of our posters here, Sean, is stranded in NO and was described by reporters eating grapes he "looted" from a grocery store. You think he should have been shot? You think Sean is going to start with an entry level drug like grapes and escalate to diamond-studded watches and Louis Vuitton handbags?

I think you're the one who needs a reality check.

[JenBayles]

From the Houston Chronicle this morning: A reporter questioned a looter emerging from a store with arms full of loot. Question: Do you own this store? Are you trying to save inventory?" Answer: "This is everyone's store now. We been oppressed for so long it's our chance to get back at society."

Where's my shotgun?

[blueeyes_austin]

No one is denying that looting is a fact of life in these situations. What many of us were POed about late Monday and early Tuesday was that the local police force did not take aggressive measures from the outset against the looters. That would at least have held down the problem in the CBD and the Quarter (although it wouldn't do a lot of good in East New Orleans).

No, we were told, these are poor people, no food, etc., etc., etc. How could we POSSIBLY favor shooting them for possessions?

But that was never the point. Aggressive force in the beginning would have helped slow the spiral into anarchy.

Yes, your point is well taken, and I agree with you!! Aggressiveness would help stop some looting.

However, I just have one question. Let's pretend you are in charge of the decision-making, and you order law enforcement to use force. After the cop shoots the robber, what does he do - leave the bleeding or dead victim where he lay, or call in precious resources to transport him to limited medical resources which are already overtaxed trying to help innocent victims? It's your call, what would you do?

Leave 'em.

[Roxy]

From the Houston Chronicle this morning: A reporter questioned a looter emerging from a store with arms full of loot. Question: Do you own this store? Are you trying to save inventory?" Answer: "This is everyone's store now. We been oppressed for so long it's our chance to get back at society."

Where's my shotgun?

Oh I am so angry at reading that I think my head will explode.

My Fiance and I were discussing this earlier and we came to the conclusion we are damn happy to have guns in this home, God forbid we ever need them though.

[inotherwords]

A simplistic solution to a complex problem often makes the situation worse.

This is Monday morning quarterbacking at its finest.

[aumoore]

Armed Peta vs. gangsta. I think I am going to copyright the movie rights to that one!

Rich you are looting my idea

[JenBayles]

Me too Roxy. It sure got my blood boiling at 5:00 this morning.

[gtalum]

At this point it's too late to worry about the looting, in New Orleans at least. An aggressive stance should have been taken immediately after the storm, but now it would likely start a shooting war with a lot of innocent casualties.

Let's worry instead about getting the survivors out of the city alive.

[beenthru6]

They showed footage inside a store this morning of two female police officers looting right along with the rest of the crowd. I hope that is an isolated thing among the police force of NO, but I am beginning to wonder how rampant the "if it is there I can take it" attitude is among those who are supposed to be trying to stop the criminal element and the attitude of anarchy in the city.