French police (courtesy stuff.co.nz)

French police are taking full advantage of the post-Paris terrorist attack “state of emergency.” Thanks to some legal legerdemain, there’s a blanket ban on the right to assemble, warrantless searches and home detention. “Police have carried out 2,575 searches and 354 people have been confined at home, allowed to leave only to report to police headquarters multiple times daily,” 14news.com reports. Le Government de France is unapologetic . . .

The French government said the state of emergency had worked to restore order after the chaos of the attacks, citing the discovery of 403 weapons – including 39 of military grade – and 202 drug seizures.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls acknowledged “two or three unacceptable cases.”

“We have said that. That’s democracy, that’s transparence,” he told RTL radio on Friday.

Under Article 36 of the French Constitution, the French government may transfer powers to military authorities during or after an attack or armed insurrection. Under Article 16,  the presidency can grant itself “exceptional measures” during a “serious and immediate” threat France’s institutions or territory. english.rfi.fr tells us that . . .

The state of emergency, as defined by a law passed in 1955, allows severe restrictions of civil liberties and could involve curfews, restricted movements, house arrests, closing public establishments, expanded powers for police to make arrests and to control the press and broadcast media, all of which are liberties the constitution is meant to guarantee.

The reason I mention all this: French citizens don’t have a Constitutionally protected, inviolate (at least in theory) Second Amendment-style right to keep and bear arms. Disarmed, they are at the mercy of their own government. Should their elected leaders elect to extend the state of emergency – say if there’s another terrorist attack or two or simply because it “works” – the emergency measures could soon look permanent.

I’d also like to point out that gun rights advocates who maintain that all our civil rights depend on the Second Amendment are correct. Let’s hope we don’t have to put that notion to the ultimate test.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

  1. Hey, they’ve admitted they overstepped in 1 or 2 cases. What more do you want? Freedom? With all its attendent horrors?

    • It might as well be called “climate control” in the same way we have “gun control”. Out here on left coast you need to have permission to do anything because of “ecological impact”. Any kind of “control” becomes government control….. Go figure France is all about “doing something” about climate change….. Just like “doing something” about gun violence.

      • Unfortunately they know about as much about the climate as they do guns. Less if that’s possible. I’ve yet to run in to anyone worried about ‘climate change’ that knows anything about it. California drove out the cement industry because they made too much carbon, so now they import all of their cement from Mexico and China. Brilliant! To make cars produce less CO2 they’re making them run at higher cylinder temperatures so they produce more nitrogen oxides (i.e. smog). Brilliant! Shouldn’t be a surprise though. Knowing nothing about banking didn’t stop them from imposing thousands of regulations on banks. Knowing nothing about health care or insurance didn’t keep them from taking over the health industry. It’s the blind being led by the stupid.

  3. The French government said the state of emergency had worked to restore order after the chaos of the attacks, citing the discovery of 403 weapons – including 39 of military grade – and 202 drug seizures

    Kick in everyone’s door and you will find some criminals to justify the disregard of 4th amendment rights

    • I get it-but I’m over 60. Ya’ can’t expect the youngun’s to get your obtuse humor. Heck my son thinks the Onion is funny. BTW this “save the planet” BS may be far worse than any gun bans(or Vietnam anarchists)-giving away our country so a few islands survive…

  6. Has anyone else noticed how much cops are starting to look like storm troopers? If they’d just ditch the camo and operator black for white they’d be dead ringers.

    • I’d rather wear the armor and facemask then get shot and killed by some jihadist or gangbanger or get a broken nose from a rock thrown by some Occupy Wall Street hipster.

      “Oh no, the camo clothes make the cops look bad!”

      “Oh no, the black color make the guns look bad!”

      Same logic, same ridiculousness.

      • Just an observation. Not passing judgement. Not a big fan of the camo though. You should be able to distinguish between civilian police and soldiers. And what’s up with the ski masks? And while we’re at it, what weapon is that the soldier/officer is holding? Looks like some sort of 5.56 pistol but it could also pass as a blaster.

        • My favorite is the combination of ski-masks, and military-inspired uniforms with velcro’ed unit emblems. Instant plausible deniability for all involved, and you’re left with no one but a faceless Bureau. All you know is “the police” beat the crap out of protestors or shot someone, and you’re left hoping the Bureau can figure out who it was after the fact, and pursue proper action even though there is essentially no witness that can assign blame to an individual. At best, ‘the group’ is reprimanded, and no one is ever held accountable.

          As far as the wails of “the jihadists will know who we are and retaliate;” would that your fellow citizens had the same protection you selfish ass. Police have NEVER been targeted by these people; they show up at work after the attack and might get shot trying to end the killing. But the press have been targeted outside their jobs; they don’t demand face masks. The only reason that stuff is ever worn anywhere is to better protect that individual officer from legal liability if he gets too big for his britches. Just like the only reason the Jihadists wear similar balaclavas is so they can rape and murder without any individual consequences. And most importantly of all, so no one can see the looks on these guys faces & gauge their state of mind (brave, scared, panicked, cruel, or psychotic)

          There used to be a phrase about professions or activities that make a person unable to look their fellow man in the face…

        • ‘At best, ‘the group’ is reprimanded, and no one is ever held accountable.’

          One month’s paid vacation for everybody!!!

        • When I was in military, we did a counter-narco deployment to Central and South America. All the teams had no insignia, no names, and wore masks.

          Can’t seek retribution if you don’t know who’s doing it.

        • It’s true, criminals wear masks because they know what they are doing is wrong. A smart man once said the righteous need never cover their face, while the evil man must.

      • No one is saying that the police shouldn’t have armor, but they do not need to look like military special operations.

  7. So…..the Nazis did evacuate France in late 1944. Yes? Dad did not see any wearing uniforms in 1945, but they could have been hiding in plain sight, waiting for the Americans to leave in 1946.
    Sieg Heil, oops, Viva La France!

    • A not-insignificant number of French people cooperated with the Nazis, some quite enthusiastically. Every society has its vermin.

      • “A not-insignificant number of French people cooperated with the Nazis, some quite enthusiastically.”
        Judging by recent opinion polls, 1/3rd of the country still do……

        “Every society has its vermin.”
        They do. They’re called leaders, presidents, ministers etc….

      • I really did not say that the Nazis were always necessarily German. France was much more sympathetic to the Nazis than most people realize and many still are.
        Vichy French still rule France.

  8. “Disarmed, they are at the mercy of their own government.”

    In truth, we are at the mercy of ours as well. If the local/federal police decide to raid my home, what difference does it really make if I’m armed or not?…well, other than the presence of a gun would further justify whatever brutality they decide to exact.

    • If the raids were wide spread and indiscriminate (a la Katrina) people would push back. Peacefully at first, but armed resistance is the Sword of Damocles hanging over the head of the any government apparatchik….. Ive said it before and I’ll say it over and over: 750,000 cops & 2 million troops vs 320 million people with 330 million guns. No contest.

      • “armed resistance is the Sword of Damocles”
        Literally. Dionysius hung the sword over his uppity vassal’s head with a single horse hair to illustrate the ever present threat of violent rebellion to the king, specifically (vs. invasion, since I believe this particular king was sitting pretty, strategically)

  9. Hey, they found 400 “weapons” (a very vague classification that could include kitchen knives and cricket bats for all we know). Just ignore the 75% or so of searches that apparently found nothing.

    Hopefully this is all just a big show for the dignitaries in Paris for the climate change conference, but history has shown that once a government gets more power, it tends to not give it up willingly.

    • Silly you, the policeman is eating a ham sandwich with bacon… The terrorist is shooting indiscriminately into unarmed civilians… The distinction is less on LA and NYC

    • The terrorists try to kill you for defying Islam, the police for defying the state. Both wear masks for the same reason; they are ashamed of what they are seen doing, and frightened of what might come after if they were known to the public. Why else put a spit-soaked rag over your face all day in a clean, urban environment?

  11. Robert is correct. The Bundy Standoff would not have been successful if they tied yellow ribbons around the trees and left the guns in the safe.. National security is always an effective means for a government to suspend rights and violate laws. Now that the executive and judicial branches are creating laws and the IRS is targeting groups with political philosophies they want to erradicate it seems like an excellent time to amass all the guns and ammo possible before we completely go “off the Constitution” and have no defined government other than might makes right veiled as safety and security.

  12. A Progressive wet dream. Their admiration of iron fisted police states is what’s motivating them to take Constitutional rights away from innocent Americans without due process or redress.

    The terrorists have truly won. They’re destroying western civilization simply by giving the governments the excuse they so desire to oppress their citizens.

      • Exactly. It seems that the CIA has been very busy for a long time. If only our government would be that universally committed to protecting individual natural rights, as is its mandate, then we would have a truly free nation. Statism is the real enemy of the free individual. It always has been.

  13. My favorite is how they used the state of emergency to suppress protests during the climate conference. Because that’s totally terrorism-related, right?

    Anyway, France is kinda like that. While they do have a strong republican traditions, they also have a strong statist traditions. So the government is representative, but it has a lot of power once elected, and president in particular has a lot more powers to go over the head of the legislature if need be.

    Then again, their borders aren’t exactly closed, so presumably those who live there want to live there. It’s their choice.

    • That lack of respect for any individual rights (both now, and historically) is why France has always been such a basket case, morally; lurching from one abusive crime-of-state to the next, whether it be religious persecution, violent populist uprising, violent domestic political witch hunt, violent imperial military campaigns, world domination, or fascist extremism and police state, most recently. Despite all their experimentation, and despite the fact that the truths about proper human governance were derived there (Locke, Rousseau), they still haven’t internalized the notion that the purpose of national government is to protect the interests of the individual: all of them. Not a group, not “the group.” Through a system that respects and protects the individual rights necessary for humans to live freely (the highest plane of existence yet achievable).

  14. Once a country has been ruled by kings and princes for hundreds of years, it never really gets autocracy out of its system.

    • Ditto for dunces and charlatans for 150,….

      In general, once a population has been ruled for generations, they rarely seem to get being thankful for being allowed to be servile slaves out of their system.

  15. I feel like the patriots of this nation should feel at least some shame for allowing the nation that helped us get on our feet go so astray. We truly did the French a disservice post-war, where we could have intervened and encouraged a government of civil liberties & responsibility, instead of allowing them to fall to a paranoid mess, quivering in fear of the Soviet aggressor. They might have had the resolve to retain their freedom in the face of mere barbarians.

    • Leave France to the French.

      We should be much more ashamed of what we have allowed to happen back home. Jefferson’s quip about a revolution every generation to prevent the scum from getting too much of a run on us, was never heeded. With the result that we are now stuck waiting for them to 1) die off AFTER they have sucked every ounce of blood available from us, or 2) get properly “revolutionized” by foreign invaders ( As in, Catholic church in Latin America in full, progressive mode, collapsing; to be replaced at the street, then town, then…… by Jihadi Islam, which will then work it’s way north.) Simply because Jihadi Islam, despite rough edges, actually does to some extent work. Which nothing post Cathoilc down south does. And nothing here have nor will for over a century in either direction.

      • If we’d helped them stay on the path, both that act and the French people would help reinforce our own free way of life. The notion that freedom need be an island unto itself is a bit suicidal (see: Switzerland if they ever gain some new strategic meaning to an ambitious neighbor)

  16. ““Police have carried out 2,575 searches…”

    They either have a much bigger terrorist problem than they claim, or a scarier government problem.

    Though I suppose the two are not entirely exclusive.

  17. Hmm, a blanket ban on public gatherings, timed to coincide with the much protestable climate change summit.
    And one of the linked articles says that at least 25 of the house arrestees are climate protesters.
    What about the other 329? Are they muslim (profiling by police oh my)? Climate protesters? Other people the government doesn’t like?

  18. Hey France, remember that thing you used to say? Something-ay, Egalite, Fraternite?

    What was that first one? How did it go again?

  21. French Prime Minister already announced he wanted to include the state of emergency in the French constitution to make it “somehow” more permanent. This is pure authoritarian regime…

Comments are closed.