History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.
"What do others think about the "forced evacuation" issue, or the insistence that residents can't leave with their pets? It seems pretty outrageous to me, although I do acknowledge that may be much easier for the authorities to deal with criminal bands of looters if they can insist that no one should be in the city in the first place."
Of course, it is easier, but on the other side, the worst things are over and it will be getting better from now on. They should have evacuated it in the first place, or just let the people stay inside. But start using force now is too late and only a display of desperation.
> If 99% leave, that opens up the chance for the remaining 1% to loot or engage in arson and vandalism to their heart's content.
This chance they already have and up to now, the officials couldn't do much. Now, they have the force to handle it, so there is no need for the 99% to leave.
> Still, if you don't want to leave and you've committed no harm against others, it's hard to see how force can be justified to force one to leave.
Yes, it is unjustified and it is even more so, when you think about the speed of the official "helpers" and some of their behaviour (bullying around and such).
On the other side, they only want to protect people. And there is always the danger of houses crashing down due to stability and statical problems.
I've been told that in some areas, the authorities use a simpler system. They go door to door to ask people to leave and those who say they won't are left some indelible ink markers to put their names and addresses on their bodies, to make identification easier.
That's the better system. What else would distinguish the USA from socialist nations like Cuba or China?
What do others think about the "forced evacuation" issue, or the insistence that residents can't leave with their pets? It seems pretty outrageous to me, although I do acknowledge that may be much easier for the authorities to deal with criminal bands of looters if they can insist that no one should be in the city in the first place. If 99% leave, that opens up the chance for the remaining 1% to loot or engage in arson and vandalism to their heart's content. Still, if you don't want to leave and you've committed no harm against others, it's hard to see how force can be justified to force one to leave.
I've been told that in some areas, the authorities use a simpler system. They go door to door to ask people to leave and those who say they won't are left some indelible ink markers to put their names and addresses on their bodies, to make identification easier.
...after the horse has left. The exceptions are pretty glaring, as you point out: what this basically is, I think, is a license to use force against non-evacuee holdouts.