Evacuation Law

[Warren Faidley]

And professor Gates cannot be arrested in his own home for having a big mouth or complaining loudly.

But in reality concerning the new Texas law:

Not that these actions have not, de facto, been in effect elsewhere for awhile now. Myself, and two other chasers were "arrested" in 1998 in N. Car. and dragged into a makeshift court IN THE EYE of hurricane Bonnie. After Ivan in Pensacola I was sternly warned and so was Jim Leonard, several times," to get the hell off the streets immediately or be taken to jail" by local cops. Terry Nixon was told he had 5 minutes to get out of Cameron County, LA during hurricane Danny in 1985; when the officer was radioded to respond to an emergency. "If you are here when I get back, you are in the pokey."

Good point and very true, but there was no written law at time aimed specifically towards mandatory evacuations, or those of us who like to cover the streets during a hurricane. If one of you had been arrested and thrown in jail, they would have had a hard time charging you with something that would have stuck in court.

Like most new laws, it's very vague and I'm sure the first time it's imposed all hell will break loose if they try to physically force people out. What is the penalty? Just time in jail? The Civil Liberties Union will blow a fuse and good for them this time. This reminds me of the Forest Service's attitude towards fires. They use to allow open media access. But because the media often printed or televised buildings burning (even though it was not the firefighters fault) the Forest Service hated the bad publicity and feared civil actions, so they locked down the firelines like the scene was Area 51. In fact, California eventually had to establish a "media access law." This is one reason I stopped covering wildfires in the Nazi-like controlled regions.

Again, I really do not see the forced evacuations as an issue for chasers....... yet..... but it is something to keep an eye on.

W.

 

[Jim Edds]

I recall on the night after 2003 Isabel on the Outer Banks, a CBS News crew that broke curfew. Cops stopped them and wanted to cart them off to a cell - crendentials and all. Needles to say, they were not allowed to proceed any further.

As far as all the gear on top of the chaser vehicle - I've seen other chasers caught up in downed power/phone lines. At night you can't see the low overhanging lines because the power is out. You get stuck in the lines and you're own your own - they may be live maybe not and the power company is not coming out to help you. Hurricane chasing is not like Tornado chasing. A lot of different things can go wrong in a Hurricane. Trust me

 

[Chris Allington]

Like Warren said, I wonder if this could morph into enforcement of travel on high risk days….I hope not. You would think would be hard to interrupt the commerce and activity in the plains on a day where although severe weather is likely, but not as certain a hurricane about to make landfall….I could see this being expanded to include anybody within 5 miles of a tornado, or other dangerous weather phenomenon. I think assistance to people unable to evacuate should be the focus instead of forced evacuation. It is a shame that stubborn people get killed in situations like this, but I don't like where the trend is headed. Living live is inherently dangerous (unless you live an a padded room) and there is a point where protecting ourselves from ourselves makes it uncomfortable.

I will venture to GUESS that a study was performed to compare the search/rescue costs if some stayed vs. the cost to secure an assumed "vacant area" (not counting looters-although likely fewer). Remember, many jurisdictions budgets are in the red and cost control ranks way up there with basic security, ect.

I would highly doubt they could apply the same things to severe weather events on the plains. For one, it would contradict the shelter in place style of warning used for tornadoes, and I would guess this hurricane law applies more to the days leading up to the event, rather than while the storm is on-going in the area.

 

[Jim wyman]

Interesting... Reminds me of a TV story I saw about park police out west charging people who get stuck on the mountain or in cliffs to be rescued. This was due to the fact that people out of state were coming to the parks to rock climb, cliff jump, or hand gliding off moutains and having to get rescued.

I would agree. Too much government dictating to people what to do and how to do it. If someone wants to stay in their home and they get killed, that is there choice, no one elses.

On the topic of mandtory evacuation for homeless and infirmed... Look how long it took them to get buses into NO AFTER Katrina......brilliant idea! NOT!

 

[Mark Sudduth]

Now watch, Texas won't have another hurricane at all for the next 25 years. Wouldn't that just be the cat's meow?

 

[Marcus Opitz]

I would highly doubt they could apply the same things to severe weather events on the plains. For one, it would contradict the shelter in place style of warning used for tornadoes, and I would guess this hurricane law applies more to the days leading up to the event, rather than while the storm is on-going in the area.

True,
My point is that vague interpretation of laws that mean well but are incorrectly (or correctly depending on your point of view) applied by certain jurisdictions for certain reasons...(local law enforcement, ect.)

 

[Jim Edds]

Might this new law be fallout from the Bolivar Peninsula tragedy during Ike? I know they had to suspend helicopter rescues of that area during the daylight hours before Ike came ashore. One case I read in the local Galveston paper, a lady on Bolivar who moved down from up north, said in her last phone call to a friend she "survived Rita" and felt she and her dog would be fine for Ike. She realized when the storm surge was coming up that she'd made a terrible mistake. She didn't make it - they found her a few days later.

I was surprised how many folks stayed on Bolivar and even Galveston for that matter. I can tell you Pensacola Beach is deserted during a hurricane. They know better. Ok, there will be a chaser or two out there but the sane folks will be gone!

I think the fact that so many died on Bolivar will be a lesson learned for the next one. I'll bet they have better compliance with another storm like Ike - at least on the barrier Islands. But like Mark said, it might be 25 years before they get another one like Ike. I suppose if someone doesn't want to evacuate they just don't answer the knock on the door. Police aren't going to kick in the door.

 

[Joe Dorn]

Interesting... Reminds me of a TV story I saw about park police out west charging people who get stuck on the mountain or in cliffs to be rescued. This was due to the fact that people out of state were coming to the parks to rock climb, cliff jump, or hand gliding off moutains and having to get rescued.

I would agree. Too much government dictating to people what to do and how to do it. If someone wants to stay in their home and they get killed, that is there choice, no one elses.

On the topic of mandtory evacuation for homeless and infirmed... Look how long it took them to get buses into NO AFTER Katrina......brilliant idea! NOT!

Katrina was New Orleans, Rita was Texas... Texas used Rita as a learning experience and now has THE BEST evacuation plans, period!

If people follow the Texas's evacuation plans, the only need for buses after landfall will be to return people to their homes.

If people stay in their homes facing probable death then thats not the 'guvment's' business but if the 'guvment' don't send a thousand helicopters and five thousand responders to rescue the dumb butts then its the 'guvment's' fault. Hello!

FWIW, I understand the the critical areas for evacuation maps have been redrawn with the emphasis on surge zones and less on wind damage areas.

 

[Warren Faidley]

I think the fact that so many died on Bolivar will be a lesson learned for the next one. I'll bet they have better compliance with another storm like Ike - at least on the barrier Islands. But like Mark said, it might be 25 years before they get another one like Ike. I suppose if someone doesn't want to evacuate they just don't answer the knock on the door. Police aren't going to kick in the door.

There is a certain "Darwinism" at work here. If you live in a place like Crystal Beach, TX, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know if you stay under certain conditions, you might die. When I drove through that area the day before Ike struck, it was a very uncomfortable drive to the ferry, which crosses to Galveston. There was water already rising over the highway. You could sense something was wrong. I knew if I missed the ferry, I might not make it back to I-10. The radio broadcasts were very specific. But once more, like we have seen on high-risk days, people will be out walking their dog (a la Golden Spur trailer park in Andover on 4-26-91), oblivious to anything, and they die. If the Texas State Government really wanted to save lives, they would simply NOT allow people to rebuild homes in the most hazardous of storm surge areas. Turn the regions into beautiful State Parks or recreational areas where camping activities can be regulated and cancelled/evacuated under Park rules.

W.

 

[Jim Edds]

If the Texas State Government really wanted to save lives, they would simply NOT allow people to rebuild homes in the most hazardous of storm surge areas. Turn the regions into beautiful State Parks or recreational areas where camping activities can be regulated and cancelled/evacuated under Park rules.

W.

I hear ya but even in Pensacola after Ivan they rebuilt on Pensacola Beach and then some. I mean they are building motels right smack on the shoreline. So go figure why they do that knowing full well the storm surge is going to wreck it all over again one day. My guess is those barrier Islands don't get hit enough to prevent rebuilding. Ivan was the worst one to hit Pensacola since 1926. So if you don't get hit that often, then maybe it's worth rolling the dice? Pensacola Beach is really built up but have you seen Fort Walton and Destin? Sheesh! Looks like Miami Beach !

 

[David Wolfson]

Budding and bloomed lawyers can weigh in, but I think the issues mostly revolve around the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' interpretation of due process and eminent domain. With respect to shore property there's a case that's rather well known to planners -- Nollan v. California Coastal Commission. Basically the USSC ruled in 1987 that government had better have a darn good reason for placing new requirements on shore property development, and in any case owes the property owner just compensation for the "taking".

 

[Robert Rohloff]

One needs to look past the evacuation order, numerous other laws have been put into place to deal with disaster situations. President Bush suspended the posse comitatus which prevented deployment of federal troops on U.S. soil. The U.S. Army went active with the 3rd ID stationed in Georgia in October 2008. This will be a rapid response division to head to troubled cities. This includes A1Abrams tanks, Apachie attack helicopters ect. Martial law allows many things that normally could not occur to happen, such as shooting looters. What ever action is needed to regain control could be used.
==
Contrary to many media reports at the time, martial law was not declared in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, because no such term exists in Louisiana state law. However, a State of Emergency was declared, which does give unique powers to the state government similar to those of martial law. On the evening of August 31, 2005, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin nominally declared "martial law" and said that officers didn't have to observe civil rights and Miranda rights in stopping the looters. [12] Federal troops were a common sight in New Orleans after Katrina. At one point, as many as 15,000 federal troops and National Guardsmen patrolled the city. Additionally it has been reported that armed contractors from Blackwater USA assisted in policing the city.[13]
See also "What Is Martial Law? And is New Orleans under it?" by the Slate Explainer.

The martial law concept in the U.S. is closely tied with the right of habeas corpus, which is in essence the right to a hearing on lawful imprisonment, or more broadly, the supervision of law enforcement by the judiciary. The ability to suspend habeas corpus is often equated with martial law. Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public Safety may require it."
In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval. On October 1, 2002 United States Northern Command was established to provide command and control of Department of Defense homeland defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities. [8].

There were numerous gun battles in NO after Katrina, organized criminal groups moved in or were in place to loot and randsack the city. A true fiqure of the number of shooting victims who died might never be known.

 

[Robert Rohloff]

Thousands of Troops Are Deployed on U.S. Streets Ready to Carry Out "Crowd Control"

Members of Congress were told they could face martial law if they didn't pass the bailout bill. This will not be the last time.

By Naomi Wolf

08/10/08 "AlterNet" -- Background: the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1. Their stated mission is the form of crowd control they practiced in Iraq, subduing "unruly individuals," and the management of a national emergency. I am in Seattle and heard from the brother of one of the soldiers that they are engaged in exercises now. Amy Goodman reported that an Army spokesperson confirmed that they will have access to lethal and non lethal crowd control technologies and tanks.​

George Bush struck down Posse Comitatus, thus making it legal for military to patrol the U.S. He has also legally established that in the "War on Terror," the U.S. is at war around the globe and thus the whole world is a battlefield. Thus the U.S. is also a battlefield.
He also led change to the 1807 Insurrection Act to give him far broader powers in the event of a loosely defined "insurrection" or many other "conditions" he has the power to identify. The Constitution allows the suspension of habeas corpus -- habeas corpus prevents us from being seized by the state and held without trial -- in the event of an "insurrection." With his own army force now, his power to call a group of protesters or angry voters "insurgents" staging an "insurrection" is strengthened.
U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman of California said to Congress, captured on C-Span and viewable on YouTube, that individual members of the House were threatened with martial law within a week if they did not pass the bailout bill:

"The only way they can pass this bill is by creating and sustaining a panic atmosphere. … Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day and a couple of thousand on the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no."​

If this is true and Rep. Sherman is not delusional, I ask you to consider that if they are willing to threaten martial law now, it is foolish to assume they will never use that threat again. It is also foolish to trust in an orderly election process to resolve this threat. And why deploy the First Brigade? One thing the deployment accomplishes is to put teeth into such a threat.
I interviewed Vietnam veteran, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel and patriot David Antoon for clarification:
"If the President directed the First Brigade to arrest Congress, what could stop him?"
"Nothing. Their only recourse is to cut off funding. The Congress would be at the mercy of military leaders to go to them and ask them not to obey illegal orders."
"But these orders are now legal?'"
"Correct."
"If the President directs the First Brigade to arrest a bunch of voters, what would stop him?"
"Nothing. It would end up in courts but the action would have been taken."
"If the President directs the First Brigade to kill civilians, what would stop him?"
"Nothing."
"What would prevent him from sending the First Brigade to arrest the editor of the Washington Post?"
"Nothing. He could do what he did in Iraq -- send a tank down a street in Washington and fire a shell into the Washington Post as they did into Al Jazeera, and claim they were firing at something else."
"What happens to members of the First Brigade who refuse to take up arms against U.S. citizens?"
"They'd probably be treated as deserters as in Iraq: arrested, detained and facing five years in prison. In Iraq a study by Ann Wright shows that deserters -- reservists who refused to go back to Iraq -- got longer sentences than war criminals."
"Does Congress have any military of their own?"
"No. Congress has no direct control of any military units. The Governors have the National Guard but they report to the President in an emergency that he declares."
"Who can arrest the President?"
"The Attorney General can arrest the President after he leaves or after impeachment."
[Note: Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi has asserted it is possible for District Attorneys around the country to charge President Bush with murder if they represent districts where one or more military members who have been killed in Iraq formerly resided.]
"Given the danger do you advocate impeachment?"
"Yes. President Bush struck down Posse Comitatus -- which has prevented, with a penalty of two years in prison, U.S. leaders since after the Civil War from sending military forces into our streets -- with a 'signing statement.' He should be impeached immediately in a bipartisan process to prevent the use of military forces and mercenary forces against U.S. citizens"
"Should Americans call on senior leaders in the Military to break publicly with this action and call on their own men and women to disobey these orders?"
"Every senior military officer's loyalty should ultimately be to the Constitution. Every officer should publicly break with any illegal order, even from the President."
"But if these are now legal. If they say, 'Don't obey the Commander in Chief,' what happens to the military?"
"Perhaps they would be arrested and prosecuted as those who refuse to participate in the current illegal war. That's what would be considered a coup."
"But it's a coup already."
"Yes

 

[Robert Rohloff]

Rich, instead of being insulting why do you not make a reply to the two articles? You overlook the fact that the 3rd ID now is deployed in the U.S. for response in the continental U.S. After what occurred in New Orleans I would expect a pre-deployment of the unit in or around a possible major land falling hurricane.

The point is that with new laws that have been passed chasing as we have known it may be changed. A forced evacuation is quite possible and chasers not abiding by it could easily wind up in jail. When people talk about certain rights and protections as cited at the start of this tread they need to know many of those rights and protections can be suspended, since 1995 Oklahoma City bombing numerous changes have been made to Federal law giving the government broad powers in the time of emergency or attack.
With 32 years in law enforcement I can assure you the changes are real and can be used. Make all the jokes you want but do not cry when you are secured for your safety in a zone of evacuation.

 

[Jason Foster]

For me, since it's on a chaser forum, is what does this mean for me as a chaser. Well, in some ways maybe it'll restrict the increasing number of people who think they can intercept a hurricane with no training or experience, or think tornado (plains) chasing qualifies them as a hurricane chaser when in fact it does not.

Also, I think that the truly good and experienced chasers won't be bothered too much with these situations because they will have the necessary contacts, whether it be at the Federal, state or local level to be given prior approval for access to the area. I'm not worried. For the few times I've been turned away by a LEO, I didnt' worry, because if I was close enough to have a LEO turn me away, I was close enough to get what I came for.

And sometimes there are just those LEO who still understand and respect chasers...and when they stop you, ask you what your doing (in a very stern and aggressive voice), you tell the truth, and their response is, "Oh, OK, then fine, go, go, go!". Gotta love it when that happens (increasingly rare though).