"National Response Plan" implemented Dec. 2004

[Terry]

I'm not sure if this has been posted already or not, but here is the link to the National Response Plan (US disaster plan) implemented in December of 2004.

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrar ... seplan.pdf

It was designed to "to align Federal coordination structures, capabilities, and resources into a unified, all discipline, and all-hazards approach to domestic incident management. . . .The end result is vastly improved coordination among Federal, State, local, and tribal organizations to help save lives and protect America's communities by increasing the speed, effectiveness, and efficiency of incident management."

Very interesting, especially the section on "Proactive Federal Response to Catastrophic Events."

[Mac]

Emergency preparedness/disaster management happens to be my field of research, so I know a thing or two about it. I can't tell you how many disaster drills I've participated in--but I can tell you that not a single one of these drills factored in murdering thugs roaming the streets unchecked. Yes, we assume that a certain amount of chaos will reign in the aftermath of such a catastrophic event, but history has shown that most people shine brightest and are most loving and helpful to their fellow man during such times. The situation in New Orleans surpassed everybody's expectations. Yes, we were all aware--as were local and state officials as well as the federal government--of the potential for damage and destruction in New Orleans. But nobody imagined the primitive chaose that would accompany this destruction.

The cardinal rule of disaster response is this: Do NOT create more victims. When one 1 rescuer gets injured, you actually lose 4 rescuers. You lose the one that was injured, and the 3 who have now been taken off their assigned tasks to render assistance to the one who is injured. That is why assessment of the situation comes first. Yes, that causes delays in response. But these delays are necessary, both to protect the rescuers and to ensure the victims receive assistance in an organized fashion.

Regarding the prevailing attitude of some that the Department of Homeland Security/federal government/President of the U.S. is to blame for the chaos. Stop it. They didn't create the hurricane. They didn't fail to get people out of harm's way.

If you recall, President Bush declared MS and LA disaster areas about 24 hours before the storm made landfall. He mobilized FEMA at that time and arranged for National Guard troops to stand by. He called Mayor Nagin and pleaded with him to get his people out. And then he sat there and waited for the governors of MS and LA to request his assistance, including that martial law be imposed. But the governors--for whatever reason--didn't make that call right away. Instead, they tried to manage the problems themselves at a state level. Well guess what? We have a little thing called the Constitution of the U.S., and that document and its ammendments limit the power of the federal government to intervene in state affairs.

Don't get me wrong. There are definitely many things that could have, and probably should have, gone smoother. But the U.S. has never in its history dealt with a disaster of this magnitude. And, as far as I'm concerned, officials have done a pretty good job pulling rabbits out of their butts with the limited resources they've had to work with.

Nobody learns to ride a bike without taking a few spills in the process.

[MysticOne]

VERY WELL SAID!!! (And this most certainly needed saying).

Emergency preparedness/disaster management happens to be my field of research, so I know a thing or two about it. I can't tell you how many disaster drills I've participated in--but I can tell you that not a single one of these drills factored in murdering thugs roaming the streets unchecked. Yes, we assume that a certain amount of chaos will reign in the aftermath of such a catastrophic event, but history has shown that most people shine brightest and are most loving and helpful to their fellow man during such times. The situation in New Orleans surpassed everybody's expectations. Yes, we were all aware--as were local and state officials as well as the federal government--of the potential for damage and destruction in New Orleans. But nobody imagined the primitive chaose that would accompany this destruction.

The cardinal rule of disaster response is this: Do NOT create more victims. When one 1 rescuer gets injured, you actually lose 4 rescuers. You lose the one that was injured, and the 3 who have now been taken off their assigned tasks to render assistance to the one who is injured. That is why assessment of the situation comes first. Yes, that causes delays in response. But these delays are necessary, both to protect the rescuers and to ensure the victims receive assistance in an organized fashion.

Regarding the prevailing attitude of some that the Department of Homeland Security/federal government/President of the U.S. is to blame for the chaos. Stop it. They didn't create the hurricane. They didn't fail to get people out of harm's way.

If you recall, President Bush declared MS and LA disaster areas about 24 hours before the storm made landfall. He mobilized FEMA at that time and arranged for National Guard troops to stand by. He called Mayor Nagin and pleaded with him to get his people out. And then he sat there and waited for the governors of MS and LA to request his assistance, including that martial law be imposed. But the governors--for whatever reason--didn't make that call right away. Instead, they tried to manage the problems themselves at a state level. Well guess what? We have a little thing called the Constitution of the U.S., and that document and its ammendments limit the power of the federal government to intervene in state affairs.

Don't get me wrong. There are definitely many things that could have, and probably should have, gone smoother. But the U.S. has never in its history dealt with a disaster of this magnitude. And, as far as I'm concerned, officials have done a pretty good job pulling rabbits out of their butts with the limited resources they've had to work with.

Nobody learns to ride a bike without taking a few spills in the process.

[Terry]

I am one that totally believes that there is blame from bottom up and top down --- the people that could leave and didn't and all the way up to the President. (and Mother Nature should be sued!)

However, it is interesting and revealing to read the various local, state, and federal "plans" and see how they were or were not implemented correctly.

Aside from implementation, people involved in decision making at all levels have to be prepared to punt to save lives. The Plan must be expected to turn into unplanned events with contingency plans and people who can think well on their feet and have authority to act.

Personally, I'd like to see a retired general put in charge of Homeland Security and/or FEMA rather than a bureacrat or political appointee. (No matter who is president.)

[MysticOne]

......Personally, I'd like to see a retired general put in charge of Homeland Security and/or FEMA rather than a bureacrat or political appointee. (No matter who is president.)

I second that idea

[Mac]

I am one that totally believes that there is blame from bottom up and top down --- the people that could leave and didn't and all the way up to the President. (and Mother Nature should be sued!)

However, it is interesting and revealing to read the various local, state, and federal "plans" and see how they were or were not implemented correctly.

Aside from implementation, people involved in decision making at all levels have to be prepared to punt to save lives. The Plan must be expected to turn into unplanned events with contingency plans and people who can think well on their feet and have authority to act.

Personally, I'd like to see a retired general put in charge of Homeland Security and/or FEMA rather than a bureacrat or political appointee. (No matter who is president.)

Understood. And I agree with your sentiment. But there remains one problem--The U.S. Constitution.

You see, disasters like Katrina, Andrew, Camille, et al--they happen once a decade. But the Constitution exists to protect us during all the other times when we aren't in the midst of a national disaster. Yes, this document does tend to get in the way of efficiency some times. But do you really think you would want to live in a country where the President of the United States were allowed to declare martial law and deploy troops on American soil in the absence of a state's formal request for such assistance. I don't think so. That's how tyrranical governments are born.

There's a chain of command for these types of things. The mayor contacts the governor and asks for help. The governor then determines whether they are able to provide the needed assistance with their own National Guard or whether they need federal assistance. If they determine federal assistance is needed, there is a formal process for requesting that assistance--and that process does not include making pleas in front of the television cameras.

Yeah, it's a pain in the neck. It's bureaucracy at its finest. But it's also what keeps us all living in the greatest free nation in the world day after day.

In the end, I believe we will all find out that the breakdown in communications in this matter was primarily at the state level. Local and state officials were in over their heads from the jump, but they got so flustered and panicked that they fell apart rather than following protocol for putting policy into motion for requesting the needed assistance. The assistance was there--waiting in the wings. But states have to ask for it in order to receive it.

[acidus]

Emergency preparedness/disaster management happens to be my field of research, so I know a thing or two about it.......

Great post Mac.

[Windy]

Emergency preparedness/disaster management happens to be my field of research, so I know a thing or two about it. I can't tell you how many disaster drills I've participated in--but I can tell you that not a single one of these drills factored in murdering thugs roaming the streets unchecked. Yes, we assume that a certain amount of chaos will reign in the aftermath of such a catastrophic event, but history has shown that most people shine brightest and are most loving and helpful to their fellow man during such times. The situation in New Orleans surpassed everybody's expectations. Yes, we were all aware--as were local and state officials as well as the federal government--of the potential for damage and destruction in New Orleans. But nobody imagined the primitive chaose that would accompany this destruction.

Seriously? I find that kinda fascinating -- I'm actually fairly shocked that this isn't something that disaster planners wargame. I mean, I believe you, but it blows my mind that whoever is responsible for training you as an disaster responder didn't train you to anticipate this. There is 10,000 years of solid history behind anarchy breaking out in a sacked/wholly destroyed city. It's something that's to be expected. The military certainly does, and they plan for it. Even *I* knew this would happen if the worst case scenario came to be (and was privately emailing people I knew in NOLA that if they stuck around for the storm they might get caught up in it), and I'm just an average Joe.

[Mac]

Emergency preparedness/disaster management happens to be my field of research, so I know a thing or two about it. I can't tell you how many disaster drills I've participated in--but I can tell you that not a single one of these drills factored in murdering thugs roaming the streets unchecked. Yes, we assume that a certain amount of chaos will reign in the aftermath of such a catastrophic event, but history has shown that most people shine brightest and are most loving and helpful to their fellow man during such times. The situation in New Orleans surpassed everybody's expectations. Yes, we were all aware--as were local and state officials as well as the federal government--of the potential for damage and destruction in New Orleans. But nobody imagined the primitive chaose that would accompany this destruction.

Seriously? I find that kinda fascinating -- I'm actually fairly shocked that this isn't something that disaster planners wargame. I mean, I believe you, but it blows my mind that whoever is responsible for training you as an disaster responder didn't train you to anticipate this. There is 10,000 years of solid history behind anarchy breaking out in a sacked/wholly destroyed city. It's something that's to be expected. The military certainly does, and they plan for it. Even *I* knew this would happen if the worst case scenario came to be (and was privately emailing people I knew in NOLA that if they stuck around for the storm they might get caught up in it), and I'm just an average Joe.

Like I said, we do plan for some degree of chaos to ensue following a natural disaster--looting, fighting, general mayhem. But what we don't plan for is the level of lawlessness that followed Katrina, where armed thugs took control of the city--targeting police, rescue workers. Raping children. Apparently murdering for the sake of murdering alone. We don't plan for that because we've never seen that before in American history.

Think about it. Can you name me a single time in American history where armed murderers and rapists have taken literally control of a city following a natural disaster? We generally find the inverse to be true. Although mayhem and looting have occurred following natural disasters, communities generally become more close-knit and helpful to their fellow man during such times of crisis.

I wish that people (and I'm not directing this at you) would try to understand that ALL disaster relief operations occur in phases.

Phase 1: Planning

This includes the long-range preparedness measures, such as drafting emergency plans for evacuation and recovery. Obviously, this was done in the case of N.O.--on a local, state, and federal level.

Phase 2: Execution of Plan

This is the actual implementation of the planning process, where evacuations are carried out and resources are gathered for the recovery process. This occurs primarily on a local/state level, with close communication and support from federal agencies and disaster relief organizations, such as the Red Cross. And this is where the process seems to have broken down in N.O.

From the reports I've heard, both President Bush and Max Mayfield pleaded with Mayor Nagin to get his people out of N.O. But Nagin hesitated, claiming he lacked the legal authority to force mandatory evacs. Following Ivan--the last time N.O. urged evacs--city officials came under fire. Evacuations are a costly business. So Nagin wanted to be sure he was acting lawfully in forcing evacs. By the time he finally did, it was too late.

I would suggest to you that Nagin's failure to order evacs in a timely manner is the ultimate cause of all this calamity we are seeing. Had he taken decisive action when he could have--and should have--we would have far fewer casualties and rescues to contend with. And I would likewise suggest to you that, despite his concern over the legalities of evacs, he had a moral duty to order them. Allow me to illustrate why:

As an average citizen who happens upon an accident scene, you have the right to decide for yourself whether you want to render aid. You are allowed to assess the situation, measure the danger to yourself, and then decide whether you want to render aid. As a health care provider, I don't have that choice. I am legally bound to render aid to my level of training. And if I don't, I can be held legally accountable for my failure to respond.

Just as I am a health care provider, Mayor Nagin is a city official. He has received specialized training in dealing with disaster preparedness/response, and it was his moral duty to get his people out of harm's way--despite his concerns over potential legal ramifications down the road.

There were obviously other problems with the execution of the plan. Apparently, nobody thought ahead to figure out where to send the evacuees. Sending 500,000 people to Baton Rouge doesn't make a lot of sense. First of all, had the hurricane shifted to the west, Baton Rouge could have been in as much trouble as N.O. I think there needs to be better communication between local/state officials between jurisdictions. For example, the state of LA and N.O. city officials could make arrangements in advance with various regional cities such as Memphis, Nashville, Houston, Dallas, etc., to send evacuees to their cities in times of crises.

They could temporarily house them in their sports facilities and convention centers. Further, they could coordinate these evacuations ahead of time and educate the public. For example, if your last name begins with A through C, your designated disaster shelter is the Atrodome. If your last name begins with D through F, you are supposed to head to Vanderbilt University in Nashville. Letters G through I go to Memphis, etc. Evacuees wouldn't have to waste time trying to book a hotel room, or figuring out where they are going to go. They would only have to worry about getting there. This type of process would also make it far easier for local/state officials to plan busing of evacuees as well. And it would seem like it would help with the congestion issues on the roads, since you would be dispersing evacuees in different directions.

Phase 3: Staging

This is the step in the process where assets are mobilized in preparation for an impending disaster. This occurs at a local, state, and federal level. In my opinion, Bush did a good job with this. He declared LA and MS disaster areas about 24 hours before landfall even occurred, enabling FEMA to begin mobilizing. I do not yet know what local and state officials did in their staging processes. I just haven't heard anything reliable yet.

I do know that much staging was done on a national level. The National Center for Emergency Preparedness is located at Vanderbilt, and I sent an email to the director on Friday night to discuss response measures, when it became apparent to me that Katrina was going to be bad. I also communicated with American Red Cross Disaster Services, and they were in full gear prior to landfall as well. Assets were moved as close to the Gulf Coast as was safely possible in preparation for Katrina's arrival.

Phase 4: Assessment

Once Katrina made landfall, and before emergency assistance could be rendered, it was imperative to perform an assessment of the damage and situation. Unfortunately, this process was complicated by a couple of factors. First of all, Katrina's damage path was extremely broad, and encompassed one hell of a large area. So it stretched resources and made it difficult to determine where resources were needed most. Secondly, the situation changed. At first, it appeared N.O. had dodged a bullet, suffering only minor to moderate wind damage. Then the levees failed. This necessitaed a rapid reassessment of the situation and a reallocation of available resources. Nobody is at fault for that. It's just one of those things that happens that you have to be able to adjust to.

Phase 5: Restore Order/Render Aid

Normally, the process of restoring order and rendering aid in the aftermath of a hurricane occurs concurrently. But this wasn't possible in the aftermath of Katrina because of the degree of lawlessness. Criminals were directly targeting rescuers, for crying out loud. You can't send rescuers into that kind of environment. First, you must restore order.

This was the second major meltdown on a local/state level. It should have been very obvious to local and state officials that they were in over their heads very early on. N.O. police officers were abandoning their posts in droves. The LA National Guard was unable to gain access to the affected areas, thereby rendering them incapable of restoring order. The governor of LA should have promptly requested federal intervention. It was waiting in wings, and all she had to do was officially request it. But, for whatever reason, she didn't. And rescue efforts were delayed because of her failure to request federal assistance.

I just don't think that peple understand that our U.S. Constitution prohibits the federal government from intervening in state matters in the absence of a formal request for assistance. These federal laws exist to protect citizens from the possiblity of a government becoming tyrannical. Sure, it creates bureaucracy that's a pain in the butt during times of crisis. But it protects all American citizens the other 99.9% of the time. So it is a necessary evil.

Anyway, for anybody who did not understand all of the logistical steps in emergency preparedness/disaster response, I hope this helps.

[Windy]

Like I said, we do plan for some degree of chaos to ensue following a natural disaster--looting, fighting, general mayhem. But what we don't plan for is the level of lawlessness that followed Katrina, where armed thugs took control of the city--targeting police, rescue workers. Raping children. Apparently murdering for the sake of murdering alone. We don't plan for that because we've never seen that before in American history.

Think about it. Can you name me a single time in American history where armed murderers and rapists have taken literally control of a city following a natural disaster?

Well, with all due respect, that's just incorrect. It's happened plenty of times, just not very recently. The draft riots of 1863 come to mind. Actually, I believe it was that way after the Great Chicago Fire, too, now that I think about it. Just Googled it (nowhere near a library right now, but this quote from the Chicago Fire seems fitting:

"The city is infested with a horde of thieves, burglars, and cut-throats, bent on plunder, and who will not hesitate to burn, pillage, and even murder, as opportunity may seem to offer to them to do so with safety," -Chicago Evening Journal

Kept Googling other things, and came up with these:

From the San Francisco quake 0f 1906 (via NPR:

Then human venality made things worse. Looters were out in full force, picking damaged businesses clean. Federal troops given license to shoot and kill the thieves fired on many people who were simply trying to save their own property. And members of the security force also joined in the looting.

From the Galveston, TX hurricane of 1900:

The criminal element began looting the dead, and the cold blooded commercial element began looting the living. The criminals were stealing everything they could with safety lay hands on, and the mercenary commercial pirates began a harvest of extortion. The price of bacon was pushed up to 50 cents a pound, bread 60 cents a loaf, and owners of small schooners and other sailing craft formed a trust, and charged $8 a passenger for transportation just across the bay from the island to the mainland.


Every part of the city was patrolled by 6 PM, but one evening a squad was besieged at St. Mary's Hospital. The squad was surrounded by a horde of armed thieves. Several hundred shots were exchanged. Sergeant Camp killed four looters with his rifle, and about ten or twelve were killed by the squad. The solders then began picketing the city doing fourteen hours' duty without rest.

By the third day after the storm, 75 men who had been caught robbing the dead, had been shot and killed. One of these had in his pocket twenty-three human fingers with costly rings on them. The fingers had been cut from the victims of of the storm found on the beach, or floating in the waters of Galveston Bay.

So, yeah, I'd say there is plenty of precedent even in this country, which, again, is why I'm very surprised they don't train you to expect anarchy. Anarchy is the norm in a power-vaccume, and it's hard to project power well immediately after this kind of catastrophe. Again, this stuff is common knowledge among historians and is absoloutely expected and planned for by our military when we do operations elsewhere. Blows my mind that they don't train you about this stuff.

[Mac]

Like I said, we do plan for some degree of chaos to ensue following a natural disaster--looting, fighting, general mayhem. But what we don't plan for is the level of lawlessness that followed Katrina, where armed thugs took control of the city--targeting police, rescue workers. Raping children. Apparently murdering for the sake of murdering alone. We don't plan for that because we've never seen that before in American history.

Think about it. Can you name me a single time in American history where armed murderers and rapists have taken literally control of a city following a natural disaster?

Well, with all due respect, that's just incorrect. It's happened plenty of times, just not very recently. The draft riots of 1863 come to mind. Actually, I believe it was that way after the Great Chicago Fire, too, now that I think about it. Just Googled it (nowhere near a library right now, but this quote from the Chicago Fire seems fitting:

"The city is infested with a horde of thieves, burglars, and cut-throats, bent on plunder, and who will not hesitate to burn, pillage, and even murder, as opportunity may seem to offer to them to do so with safety," -Chicago Evening Journal

Kept Googling other things, and came up with these:

From the San Francisco quake 0f 1906 (via NPR:

Then human venality made things worse. Looters were out in full force, picking damaged businesses clean. Federal troops given license to shoot and kill the thieves fired on many people who were simply trying to save their own property. And members of the security force also joined in the looting.

From the Galveston, TX hurricane of 1900:

The criminal element began looting the dead, and the cold blooded commercial element began looting the living. The criminals were stealing everything they could with safety lay hands on, and the mercenary commercial pirates began a harvest of extortion. The price of bacon was pushed up to 50 cents a pound, bread 60 cents a loaf, and owners of small schooners and other sailing craft formed a trust, and charged $8 a passenger for transportation just across the bay from the island to the mainland.


Every part of the city was patrolled by 6 PM, but one evening a squad was besieged at St. Mary's Hospital. The squad was surrounded by a horde of armed thieves. Several hundred shots were exchanged. Sergeant Camp killed four looters with his rifle, and about ten or twelve were killed by the squad. The solders then began picketing the city doing fourteen hours' duty without rest.

By the third day after the storm, 75 men who had been caught robbing the dead, had been shot and killed. One of these had in his pocket twenty-three human fingers with costly rings on them. The fingers had been cut from the victims of of the storm found on the beach, or floating in the waters of Galveston Bay.

So, yeah, I'd say there is plenty of precedent even in this country, which, again, is why I'm very surprised they don't train you to expect anarchy. Anarchy is the norm in a power-vaccume, and it's hard to project power well immediately after this kind of catastrophe. Again, this stuff is common knowledge among historians and is absoloutely expected and planned for by our military when we do operations elsewhere. Blows my mind that they don't train you about this stuff.

And all of those things you mentioned pertained primarily to looting, which, as I mentioned, is something we expect and plan for. In the past, the response to looting has been swift and deliberate--shoot to kill. But in the politically correct 21st century America we live in now, we must first consult the ACLU before we shoot looters, murderers, and rapists--just to be sure we're not violating their civil liberties.

I'll reassert my challenge--show me an example of a past natural disaster where murderers and rapists took control of a city.

Edited to Add: In my prior response, I attempted to point out that restoring of order and rendering aid are 2 separate processes. Before aid could be effectively rendered in N.O., order had to first be restored. Restoration of order is a police/military action. Yes, the military receives training in that regard. I am a medical responder. Our focus is on rescue and redering aid. Consequently, we do not train in matters relating to restoring civil obedience. We leave that to the police/military.

[kevin]

I understand disasters are very unpredictable, but I have to say...

They should have planned for the gangs taking over. For one reason above even the power vacuum : narcotics.

I really don't think I need to elaborate. Their supply structure was cut off.

[Terry]

Sadly, the best "Plan" of all is likely Carl Rove's plan "to ease the politcal damage."

See Washington Post's article on this at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/natio ... 5bush.html

couple of paragraphs:

It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

The effort is being directed by Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, and his communications director, Dan Bartlett. It began late last week after Congressional Republicans called White House officials to register alarm about what they saw as a feeble response by Mr. Bush to the hurricane, according to Republican Congressional aides.

[Mac]

Sadly, the best "Plan" of all is likely Carl Rove's plan "to ease the politcal damage."

See Washington Post's article on this at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/natio ... 5bush.html

couple of paragraphs:

It orchestrated visits by cabinet members to the region, leading up to an extraordinary return visit by Mr. Bush planned for Monday, directed administration officials not to respond to attacks from Democrats on the relief efforts, and sought to move the blame for the slow response to Louisiana state officials, according to Republicans familiar with the White House plan.

The effort is being directed by Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, and his communications director, Dan Bartlett. It began late last week after Congressional Republicans called White House officials to register alarm about what they saw as a feeble response by Mr. Bush to the hurricane, according to Republican Congressional aides.

Another "blame Bush" post. How creative.

[MysticOne]

Sadly, the best "Plan" of all is likely Carl Rove's plan "to ease the politcal damage."

See Washington Post's article on this at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/05/natio ... 5bush.html

couple of paragraphs:

Another "blame Bush" post. How creative.

Would you expect anything else from the Washington Post????? That is their one and only agenda!

[Terry]

lol - Not blaming Bush in that post -- just indicating how good Carl Rove is. He is the best there is at PR. And in his efforts to do his job at PR, I do believe he is also helping the response efforts. That is a good thing.

[Windy]

And all of those things you mentioned pertained primarily to looting, which, as I mentioned, is something we expect and plan for.

Did you even read my post? What part of

"The city is infested with a horde of thieves, burglars, and cut-throats, bent on plunder, and who will not hesitate to burn, pillage, and even murder, as opportunity may seem to offer to them to do so with safety," -Chicago Evening Journal

sounds like "just looters"?

In the past, the response to looting has been swift and deliberate--shoot to kill. But in the politically correct 21st century America we live in now, we must first consult the ACLU before we shoot looters, murderers, and rapists--just to be sure we're not violating their civil liberties.

You're correct about the more civil-liberties-minded approach we have today as compared to the late 1800's, but the ACLU crack wasn't needed. (As in, it's non factual, rhetorical, and a blatant attempt at starting a political conflageration here.)

It is true that "shoot to kill" is much more effective at controlling this kind of situation than "attempt to arrest first" is.

I'll reassert my challenge--show me an example of a past natural disaster where murderers and rapists took control of a city.

I did. You chose not to read it. What do you call it when the cops have to hole themselves up and defensively engage in a firefight with criminals?

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Anarchy isn't normal in a destroyed city? If that's what you're trying to say, I can pull out several hundred examples of it over the past thousand years. Anarchy isn't to be expected in a power vaccume? Then why does the miiltary plan for it, and why is there such a track record of anarchy (followed by warlording or junta) occuring in power-vaccumes?

This is common sense stuff, here. You take away the ability of the cops to respond or you take away the will of the cops to respond or you just plain take away the cops and guess what happens? The people are left to fight it out among each other for control.

[Mac]

And all of those things you mentioned pertained primarily to looting, which, as I mentioned, is something we expect and plan for.

Did you even read my post? What part of

"The city is infested with a horde of thieves, burglars, and cut-throats, bent on plunder, and who will not hesitate to burn, pillage, and even murder, as opportunity may seem to offer to them to do so with safety," -Chicago Evening Journal

sounds like "just looters"?

In the past, the response to looting has been swift and deliberate--shoot to kill. But in the politically correct 21st century America we live in now, we must first consult the ACLU before we shoot looters, murderers, and rapists--just to be sure we're not violating their civil liberties.

You're correct about the more civil-liberties-minded approach we have today as compared to the late 1800's, but the ACLU crack wasn't needed. (As in, it's non factual, rhetorical, and a blatant attempt at starting a political conflageration here.)

It is true that "shoot to kill" is much more effective at controlling this kind of situation than "attempt to arrest first" is.

I'll reassert my challenge--show me an example of a past natural disaster where murderers and rapists took control of a city.

I did. You chose not to read it. What do you call it when the cops have to hole themselves up and defensively engage in a firefight with criminals?

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Anarchy isn't normal in a destroyed city? If that's what you're trying to say, I can pull out several hundred examples of it over the past thousand years. Anarchy isn't to be expected in a power vaccume? Then why does the miiltary plan for it, and why is there such a track record of anarchy (followed by warlording or junta) occuring in power-vaccumes?

This is common sense stuff, here. You take away the ability of the cops to respond or you take away the will of the cops to respond or you just plain take away the cops and guess what happens? The people are left to fight it out among each other for control.

Okay. If it was planned for, then why wasn't the governor able to control it?

[Windy]

Okay. If it was planned for, then why wasn't the governor able to control it?

How should I know? I was only commenting that it shocked me that you, who have so much experience in disaster response, was never trained to expect or deal with anarchy. I don't know why things broke down the way that they did in this particular instance. I was merely pointing out that something is seriously broken if nobody at any level in government anticipated or was prepared to deal with massive disorder in a power vaccume. Do you really think it'd be any less disorganized if someone nuked Los Angeles?

[MBismyPlayground]

MAC, I understand your post and all the logistics of it. I especially like this umm comment as it is so true.
"If they determine federal assistance is needed, there is a formal process for requesting that assistance--and that process does not include making pleas in front of the television cameras. "
Since you are obviously experienced and have credentials with FEMA I want to ask you a few questions as my curiosity along with several emotions have come into play.

I want to assume that these mayors and govenors have been given classes ect on Emergency management, but I don't want to assume, so are they??? Also, from some of the doc.s I have read, each state, city, county,parish also has their own team for emergency management as well. Correct? Do you know who and how often these people are trained and who trains them?? Also, since some of these people seem to be on volunteer status, how much responsibility falls on them if they do not do their job or follow thru on the plan that has been set down??

I know I am asking alot of questions that may seem to be moot, or water under the bridge but I want to understand the big picture, not the sketch that we have seen so far.

Also, and this is only your opinion, and I won't hold you to it..

What are the reasons why a govenor would not allow the federal gov to take over, especially in a situation such as this??? Other then of course loss of control.